Yes, those were angels, spirit creatures.
However they were 1. placed in a state of tartus (spelling) and then the hybrids were destroyed.
Gods plan.
- Thread starter Anti-Flag
- Start date
Yes, those were angels, spirit creatures.
However they were 1. placed in a state of tartus (spelling) and then the hybrids were destroyed.
What happened before the flood is similar to what's happening again now.
The hybrids were not all destroyed.
They were not created in the first place exactly as the religious scholars have purposed.
Adam and his true lineage were the part that was of God...not the other way around.
1000 year lifespans, prophetic revelation..."God's whom the word of god came to"...
It was the serpent's lineage through Cain that the spirits of the fallen came down into...
They were the evil spirits in the unbelieving "daughters of men".
The sons of God were the children of Adam and Eve that married the unbelieving line of Cain.
So...yes, the giants were singled out and killed, but the hybrids were not all completely destroyed.
They weren't the only source, they were just genetic throwbacks to one parent species.
A portion of that DNA still exists in man today.
We are a carefully controlled mixture that was allowed to survive....a hybrid.
It is this that will enable that hierarchy to claim rights to man which are currently being restrained by God.
This will be a part of the troubles unleashed upon the world during the Great Tribulation.
Last edited:
The mixing had already happened before they crossed over the flood.
Look at Ham. He displayed many of the attributes of Cain, disrespect for God and his father Noah.
His son was named Canaan and was cursed for his actions.
If you follow what the misguided religious scholars would have you believe, you would be referring to the giants as the hybrids that were all destroyed.
They weren't the "hybrids". The giants were around long before the hybrids.
They were one of the two original parent species, and were the hosts for the fallen spirits.
The first hybrids were those called " men of old, men of renown"...a mixture of the sons of God through Seth, and the giants through the daughters of Cain.
The supermen spoken of right after the flood like Gilgamesh, Achilles, and Hercules come closer to fitting this description of a first hybrid.
The kingdoms of giants that resurfaced after the flood were a perfect example of a hybrid reverting back to one of it's two parent species.
They were actually a failure in the hybridization process.
Have you ever planted a hybrid plant?
They won't reproduce in their hybrid state, most of the time they are sterile.
But...if they ever do reproduce, it will be a throwback to one of the two original parent species not another copy of the hybrid.
That's what happened.
In some cases after the flood, prophets appeared....men of God.
The scriptures said they called them "gods" whom the word came to and they were. Jesus said so Himself.
Then in other cases there appeared races like the Anakim which were like the giants from before the flood.
The new hybrid occasionally reverted back to one of the original parent species.
The giants were from the line of Cain through his father the original serpent, not Adam and his children the sons of God.
The religious scholars always taught it backwards....because they are from the carnal side.
When these two "extremes" reappeared from time to time, they usually hunted one another down.
The carnal hunted the spiritual and the spiritual the carnal.
Stephen said this in Acts 7:51-53 to the same religious leaders that put Jesus to death;
"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers [did], so [do] ye.
Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept [it]."
God allowed this all to happen. To see what side we will choose.
We are the hybrids. All Humanity is.
We are just a shorter lived, smaller, watered down mix of the two.
One side influences us through the flesh, the god of the earth.
The other side through our soul, the God of heaven.
The whole human race was left as a rare successfully reproducing hybrid.
That left us all looking the same....on the outside.
Now the difference is on the inside.
This is one reason why Jesus said; "the kingdom of heaven is in you".
Last edited:
kerux
Registered Senior Member
Predestination to chosen but special people only
There were biblical references of people who had no choice but to fulfill God's commandment, just like Jeremiah and Paul. Though Paul was once a persecutor, he did that because of ignorance;nevertheless after he heard the Lord's admonition, he chose to switch to Christianity, thereby leaving the Jewish religion.
Although Christ chose Judas Iscariot but this Judas chose the other way around. Even if he had heard warnings from the Lord Jesus Christ but still he fulfilled the prophecy saying that "one would betray" the Lord. This doesn't fall to predestination. Although God's plan for humanity was only for the God, and he willed beforehand that all of us be saved;however, he set options before our eyes. But he in advance gave a hint that we choose "life" not death so that we may live.
The future is what God says or wills to do. His thoughts are different from ours. He tells beforehand what shall happen in the future. But it doesn't mean that he knows beforehand what you shall be in the future. Once saved, a christian must work out for his own salvation. In the path toward all goodness, he must not deviate from it. There were instances that some believers fell (they deviate like Ananias and Sapphira).
There were biblical references of people who had no choice but to fulfill God's commandment, just like Jeremiah and Paul. Though Paul was once a persecutor, he did that because of ignorance;nevertheless after he heard the Lord's admonition, he chose to switch to Christianity, thereby leaving the Jewish religion.
Although Christ chose Judas Iscariot but this Judas chose the other way around. Even if he had heard warnings from the Lord Jesus Christ but still he fulfilled the prophecy saying that "one would betray" the Lord. This doesn't fall to predestination. Although God's plan for humanity was only for the God, and he willed beforehand that all of us be saved;however, he set options before our eyes. But he in advance gave a hint that we choose "life" not death so that we may live.
The future is what God says or wills to do. His thoughts are different from ours. He tells beforehand what shall happen in the future. But it doesn't mean that he knows beforehand what you shall be in the future. Once saved, a christian must work out for his own salvation. In the path toward all goodness, he must not deviate from it. There were instances that some believers fell (they deviate like Ananias and Sapphira).
To be honest with you, I think it's a shame for the religion. Don't get me wrong, I consider christian beliefs as unfounded nonsense anyway but that should not ever stop the convictions of the believer. But what we see nowadays is the pick-and-mix christian, the man that says he believes in this god but in the very next sentence dismisses this gods holy book as a work of fiction - picking out tiny little bits here and there that suit whatever the days discussion is about.
If we were sitting down having a discussion say about curiosity or something, then the story of Adam and Eve would be taken literally as an example of how bad it can be but then the next day they're the same people saying Adam and Eve is fiction.
Either the stories are true of they're not true. If the latter, we've got nothing to talk about but if the former, I find it unacceptable for the theist to pick and mix as he does. Is the A&E story true? Most christians nowadays will say no - nobody believes in talking snakes or the origin of man anymore. If they do take it as true then they cannot dismiss the very statements by their very own god that A&E gained knowledge of good and evil after eating the fruit, not beforehand. That was its very purpose; it would simply be ridiculous to assert that the purpose of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil wasn't there to provide knowledge of good and evil. It might as well have just been called an oak tree. Why was the snake even there? What did it matter if A&E ate the fruit or not? It's not a tree that has any purpose anymore, it's just another tree like all the rest.
No, we can be certain that the tree of KOGAE was there to give knowledge of good and evil - hence it's name and gods assurance that it had done it's job.
Now, I will go with you in that we might sometimes be asked to 'believe' first and 'understand' later - it is a principle that we often adopt. For instance, when you tell your young child not to stick her fingers in the plug socket she most certainly wont 'understand' why she shouldn't do it but we hope she believes in us when we tell her not to.
Of course, if there just so happens to be the most evil entity in the entire universe that is standing by ready to persuade her otherwise - and we know about it and that it will succeed - it is our responsibility to ensure it doesn't happen, to ensure that this evil doesn't get its way, to ensure the safety of those we love.
Your child doesn't have belief in your command when you tell her not to stick her fingers in the plug socket. You already know it's going to happen and know she doesn't believe what you're saying. It is your responsibiliy as an all-loving parent. It's not her fault, she's "stupid", (naive, uneducated, inexperienced - whichever is preferable).
If you told your children to make sure they looked left and right before crossing the road and knew that they wouldn't listen to you and would end up *squish* pate. Wouldn't you, as an all-loving parent, be there to prevent the squishing? Would you leave your loved one to get squished? I contend that you wouldn't. Absolutely regardless to their lack of ability to follow instructions, that's not what any loving entity would actually do.
That's my argument.
I disagree. Let's consider what we're really talking about when we consider Cain evil or wicked, (and hence offspring of a wicked one). What really happened? What do we know?
Well, biblically speaking, we know that Cain decided to make an offering to god. He decided to give god a gift, a present - something that god had not asked for. So Cain gives god this gift. Then Abel comes along and also gives god a gift. Unfortunately for Cain, god prefers Abels gift - and actually goes out of his way to insult and rebuke Cain for being nice enough to offer gifts. It is certainly unfortunate that Cain was a farmer as opposed to a man that kept livestock.
Why did a dead animal mean more than a banana? Well, we can see this all throughout the OT. In Leviticus alone, god mentions his love for burning meat some 30+ times. But these were gifts. One god liked, the other he didnt - and Cain god the brunt of it. No, that doesn't excuse the murder but the murder only occurred because god did not accept the gift in the manner that all other loving parents would. No, you didn't want socks, you still smile and say you love them. It's something loving parents do. What do you think happens when you give one of your children love and praise and the other dislike and rebuke?
Was Cain "evil" or "Wicked" or just emotionally distraught?
It's an interesting thing then. You see, you state that the sin is 'unbelief' but in our own circumstance when faced with but a holy book in hand that - given your own above claims - is obviously a matter of extreme confusion, (you believe it's sexual, Saquist doesn't even believe its true), who is honestly to be blamed for unbelief? What is it they're not believing, it seems that this holy book causes so much confusion that one doesn't know exactly what it is one is supposed to be believing. If I say I don't believe you, have I sinned or do I just not see in that text what you do? Who is responsible for that? Me or the author?
Doesn't make sense given standard christian beliefs. I don't figure out where I'm going wrong or what areas need more work until I'm no longer mortally existent at which stage I burn forever - not because I'm evil, but because I was incapable of working things out accurately. What benefit does that serve?
There is great debate on this and it's not something I think we really should get into in depth - it requires far too much source linking to sources that merely show the level of confusion that the bible provides.
If it provides such confusion - which is pretty indisputable, why would I be expected to accept any of it? If I say "I'm sorry, I don't believe any of your explanation", that's an issue against you and your interpretations, not a god. So when faced with judgement and a god says "you didn't believe my words", it's not his words that weren't believed, it's yours - mans. I get burned forever, but what did I ever learn?
I'm just trying to tie up some loose ends in this one area.
I think it is. There are volumes left between the lines explained in other passages.
I usually don't agree with most Christians much more than I agree with most atheists.
You can throw all he so-called expert opinions in the trash can were they belong.
That's my advice anyway for what it's worth.
This is symbolism, an analogy.
The tree of life is a person. That's God.
So is the tree of knowledge. That was the serpent, the Devil.
It wasn't literal fruit in either case.
I would agree it "did it's job" though.
-In some cases it is needed to let us make our own mistakes in order to learn. Without the squishing hopefully.
-Imagine the two little boys growing up outside of Eden.
When they asked their parents why they had to leave it never to return...
What would a loving parent tell a little child?
"Your mother had an affair with a beast possessed by the enemy of God"?... "and it was the father of little Cain"?...No, I don't think so.
Without actually lying, they would hide the truth in some metaphor to their little children who wouldn't understand for many years anyway....
"Mommy ate the fruit from a tree that God had said not to"...
That is what a loving parent would do.
And there you go.
When the boys came of age and went to offer their own first sacrifice...
Abel understood what the metaphor had been hiding.
The "dead animal" was Abel's way of symbolizing his revelation of the Messiah coming as the sacrifice for sin.
His revelation was prophetic and that displayed the attributes of a son of god he was growing up to be.
That is what God accepted, not a burnt offering.
The "banana" or fruits of the field symbolized Cain still had no idea of what really happened in the garden.
They had hid it from him, trying to raise him up right alongside Abel even though he was fathered by the enemy.
Abel saw by revelation it was animal blood that had polluted the pure blood of God, and Cain was the fruit of that union.
Explaining this to Cain didn't go to well for Abel though...
Cain couldn't receive revelation from God like his brother Abel.
Cain wasn't a "child" of the same God that Abel was...
He wasn't born of Adam who was of God.
He received his inspiration from the god that was his father, who was the Devil.
His solution? Murder the righteous one.
The religious leaders of Jesus day seemed to have this same problem.
Didn't Jesus say they were of their father the Devil?
He wasn't being symbolic in this case.
They murdered the righteous one.
The religious leaders today seem to have the same problem.
That would explain a lot of their confusion.
You can expect the pattern to repeat.
Even though Cain wasn't "of God" he was still given a chance to accept it and "do as his brother" and all would be well.
I think the whole world has the same chance at one time or another.
People are going to make mistakes.
We're only human right? My understanding of things is progressive.
Things I understand today I might have seen differently a few years ago.
If I relate things about God to someone that turns out to be an error, I doubt they would be held to blame for my mistakes...
Now if you believe those mistakes and settle for some error, failing to continue to search for truth on your own...
That much would probably be on you.
I think in the long run you can count on God being fair at all times.
He gave the people of his enemy their time on this world first...
Tell me now, how fair is that?
Even Cain was given a way of escape, a way to forgiveness.
He just chose not to take it, yet God still allowed no man to take his life.
Last edited:
That's true. But that's also established.
the problem is what does this solve?
I need a reference. I'm not sure what you are speaking of.
What sign is there that it's backwards?
Stephen said this in Acts 7:51-53 to the same religious leaders that put Jesus to death;
"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers [did], so [do] ye.
Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept [it]."
God allowed this all to happen. To see what side we will choose.
We are the hybrids. All Humanity is.
We are just a shorter lived, smaller, watered down mix of the two.
One side influences us through the flesh, the god of the earth.
The other side through our soul, the God of heaven.
The whole human race was left as a rare successfully reproducing hybrid.
That left us all looking the same....on the outside.
Now the difference is on the inside.
This is one reason why Jesus said; "the kingdom of heaven is in you".[/QUOTE]
Well...if I remember the scripture it's "the Kingom of the heavens is in your midst." or presences which is refering to Jesus who is identified as the King of God's kingdom.
But I can't quite fanthom how the scriptures support the theory as I've seen no indication that the sin was sexual or that there was any sexual intercourse with Eve and Satan
I also asked, "why did God effect the Flood." I ask again. Why does God effect the flood if there was no hope of quelling the wickedness if the cause of the violence was the hybrids and Noah and his family were hybrids?
That very well maybe true via Genesis 3:15 refering to a seed. Perhaps they thought they were that seed as Eve perhaps they were aswell. But we don't now.
That is what God accepted, not a burnt offering.
The "banana" or fruits of the field symbolized Cain still had no idea of what really happened in the garden.
You see, that's what we can't verify. We do have mulitple scriptures that exemplify that it is not the offering it's self but the person making the offering (Cain and Abel) that God accepts or rejects. We also can't be sure the type of offering had no bearing on the matter because we have no idea if they were given any standards from God about what was acceptable sacrifice.
Later Paul said...
“By faith Abel offered God a sacrifice of greater worth than Cain, through which faith he had witness borne to him that he was righteous."
Obviously then Cain wasn't righteous and he did kill his brother afterwards.
Before he did that God told Cain to "turn to doing good and there will be exaltation" so cain was having problems with good and bad before he even killed Abel. If he isn't capable of doing good why even appeal to them? Note that God was never written to reprove the "men of fame". In the end the record says he destroyed them.
Abel saw by revelation it was animal blood that had polluted the pure blood of God, and Cain was the fruit of that union.
Explaining this to Cain didn't go to well for Abel though...
Cain couldn't receive revelation from God like his brother Abel.
Cain wasn't a "child" of the same God that Abel was...
He wasn't born of Adam who was of God.
He received his inspiration from the god that was his father, who was the Devil.
His solution? Murder the righteous one.
The religious leaders of Jesus day seemed to have this same problem.
Didn't Jesus say they were of their father the Devil?
He wasn't being symbolic in this case.
They murdered the righteous one.
The religious leaders today seem to have the same problem.
That would explain a lot of their confusion.
You can expect the pattern to repeat.
Even though Cain wasn't "of God" he was still given a chance to accept it and "do as his brother" and all would be well.
I think the whole world has the same chance at one time or another.
People are going to make mistakes.
We're only human right? My understanding of things is progressive.
Things I understand today I might have seen differently a few years ago.
If I relate things about God to someone that turns out to be an error, I doubt they would be held to blame for my mistakes...
Now if you believe those mistakes and settle for some error, failing to continue to search for truth on your own...
That much would probably be on you.
I think in the long run you can count on God being fair at all times.
He gave the people of his enemy their time on this world first...
Tell me now, how fair is that?
Even Cain was given a way of escape, a way to forgiveness.
He just chose not to take it, yet God still allowed no man to take his life.[/QUOTE]
JOHN 10:34-36
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
I JOHN 3:12
"Not as Cain, [who] was of that wicked one".... Adam was not "the wicked one" was he?
JOHN 1:12-13
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
ROMANS 8:18-19
For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time [are] not worthy [to be compared] with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
Last edited: