Of Devils and Fallen Angels

Many Christians believe that the “devils” and “fallen angels” are the same beings. They all follow Satan and seem to have a desire to harass humans in a number of ways. However, is there any evidence that suggest that these creatures are the same? I have not found any. So, I thought it might be fun to explore this topic a little more.

What do we know about angels?

The Bible tells us that angels have many roles, including messengers (Luke 1:11-13, Matthew 1:20-21), soldiers (2 Kings 6:17, 19:35), and worshiping God (Revelation 7:11). However, about one-third of the angels “kept not their first estate” (Jude 1:6) and were cast to the earth with Satan (Rev. 12:9).

We know that angels are “greater in power and might” than human beings (2 Peter 2:11). We know that fallen angels “sinned” and brought about the judgment of the entire earth by the flood save for Noah and his family (2 Peter 2:4). How did they sin? By corrupting humanity through sexual congress and producing offspring that tainted the human race detailed in Genesis 6.

Angels are often sent by God for a variety of missions, and the fallen angels are capable of sinning. Angels, both Godly and fallen, are capable of looking and acting like humans (Genesis 6:1-4, 18:1-8; Hebrews 13:2). I cannot explain how angels come about the ability to obtain flesh, but how else could we “entertain angels unaware”? (Heb 13:2).

What do we know about devils?

According to Scripture, people offered sacrifices to them as if they were gods (Leviticus 17:7, Deuteronomy 32:17, Psalms 106:37, 1 Corinthians 10:20). In the New Testament, devils are able to possess humans (Matt. 4:24, Matt. 8:26, Mark 1:22), sometimes in very large numbers (Mark 16:9, Luke 8:30). They seem to be attracted to dead things (Luke 8:27) and water (Luke 8:33). Devils also have incredible power (Luke 8:29) and can perform miracles (Rev. 16:14). Furthermore, Judas Iscariot aka. The “son of perdition” (John 17:12) whom I believe to be the Antichrist (also called “son of perdition” in 2 Thessalonians 2:3) was called “a devil” in John 6:70.

Devils are also called “unclean spirits” (Luke 9:42, Matt. 10:1, Acts 8:7) and seem to be related to “familiar spirits” that are connected to “wizards” in the Old Testament (Leviticus 19:31, 2 Kings 21:6, Isaiah 8:19). These beings have supernatural abilities to perform miracles/”magic” and dozens, if not hundreds, can pack themselves into one human body.

They also seem to do the bidding of THE Devil – Satan.

Are they the same?

I do not believe so, because their characteristics are vastly different. Sure, they are both more powerful than the average human being, but where angels can look like humans, devils seem to be able to possess people. Fallen angels seem to be able to produce offspring (Genesis 6), while there is no reference to devils doing the same.

If anything, one could make the argument that devils might be the offspring of fallen angels. If Judas Iscariot is the Antichrist, then “a devil” would be the “seed of Satan” mentioned in Genesis 3:15. It would also make sense why these beings were worshiped as gods and used as “familiar spirits” to give power to wizards. The sorcerers and magicians of Pharaoh were able to duplicate the power of God, though on a much lesser scale, in Exodus 7:10-12. These “magicians” had actual power to perform miracles, much like the devils in Rev. 16:14. They could have very well either been devils or been given power by devils.

Regardless, it seems as though fallen angels and devils have different sets of abilities, though both work in unison to disrupt God’s desire for all humanity to love and worship him.

Citing Strong’s Concordance, the original languages provide further clarification. “Devils” in Hebrew” translate as “saiyer” (a goat-like creature we probably know as a satyr) and “shed” (demon – the word used in conjunction with devil worship). The Greek uses daimonion (demons who are “cast out” or “worshiped”) and daimon (demons who possess).

Contrast that with “angels” in the Hebrew mal’ak (angels) and ‘elohyim (like gods). The Greek is aggelos (angels). In Genesis 6, the phrase “sons of God” transliterates to ben’elohyim in Hebrew.

Notice the vast difference is phrasing for these beings in the original languages. It seems pretty clear that devils and angels are not the same beings according to the Hebrew and Greek, as well as English. The fact that devils seem to be related to beast-like creatures like the satyr also puts a wrench in the idea that these beings are the same, and even seems to indicate some sort of inbreeding of devils and animals!

I allow that fallen angels and devils MIGHT BE the same beings. I remain unconvinced based on their traits described in the Bible. I am unconvinced based on the descriptions of their abilities in the Book. I am unconvinced based on the differences in the original languages.

I do not believe that they are the same, and I hope you at least begin to question an idea taught in many good churches by good pastors. It is a matter worth investigating, but I would warn the reader not to obsess over the subject. Demonology can allow even the staunchest believer to open themselves up to demonic attack if they forget that Jesus Christ is our savior and should be the primary focus of our spiritual investigation.

Remember that whatever these beings are, they fear Christ. They know they are destined to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, though they still try to resist. Like the unsaved, they are full of rebellion and rejection of the Savior. In the end, they lose. Fallen angels, devils, Satan, Antichrist – all will bow the knee to the God of all creation.

In the end, we win.

Advertisements

The Mathematical Case for the Flood

If evolutionists are correct and modern man evolved 500,000 years ago (some would go back as far as 2,000,000 BC), at a population growth rate of 0.01%, there would have been approximately 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (that is 2 with 43 zeroes) people on the Earth by the time Christ was born.

Keep in mind that evolutionists would have us believe that there were only 5,000,000,000 on the Earth at 8,000 BC, and with a growth rate of 0.05% (five times HIGHER than the figure I just posted), the population grew to 200,000,000 by 1 AD. In order to reach 200 MILLION over the course of 500,000 years, the growth rate would have had to be 3.8%.

We finally hit 1,000,000,000 around 1800 AD, and are sitting pretty at over 6,000,000,000 right now. The population growth rate over the last 100 years is just over 1.5%. The high was 2% in the 1960s, and has settled down at 1.11% in 2017.

The math does not add up. With a population growth rate half as high as we have now, it only took 8,000 years to increase by 195 MILLION people. Being generous and pretending that people were reproducing FIVE TIMES less often over the previous 492,000 years, there is no WAY that you can account for the lack of population without a major global catastrophe.

Evolutionists would again have you believe that 10,000 years ago (8,000 BC) was the beginning of the current pause of the Quaternary Ice Age. In other words, most of humanity was wiped out around 8,000 BC.

This coincides, interestingly enough, with The Bible. Christians believe that Adam was created in 4,000 BC, and we know that most dating measures are inaccurate enough to account for the difference.

Gap theorists (which I am) believe that the Earth is older than 6,000 years, but was destroyed by a flood and restored in 6,000 BC. This just happens to coincide with Ice Age theory as well.

Regardless, we can ALL agree that there was a global catastrophic event that would have brought human population to a relatively small number between 6000-8000 year ago.

I would posit that a 0.05% growth rate is still too low. Yes, mortality rates were much higher than they are now, but so were birth rates. We live in an industrialized world where children are no longer a necessity, and we still have a 1.11% population growth rate. In non-industrial Africa, the rate is 2.5% in 2017. Is it logical to assume that the growth rate was actually higher than 0.05% prior to 1 AD?

That would again throw the math off. UNLESS, there was ANOTHER global catastrophe that happened, let’s say, around 2300 BC.

If the Biblical account of Noah’s flood is true, then 8 people survived. With a mere population growth of 0.7%, we could make it to the estimated 200 MILLION by the time of Christ’s birth. I believe this is much more plausible than the ridiculously low rate of 0.05%.

I believe in the Flood. I believe that the data backs up the Flood. The Bible, once again, proves reliable.

Why I Believe The Gap (Theory)

Many churches these days are working diligently to argue against the “gap theory” by declaring it “anti-Scriptural” or a “heresy.” Some are even putting anti-gap declarations into church constitutions and by-laws. As someone who believes the gap is true, I am put into an awkward place by many church leaders. I am told that my view is against the Bible. I have been called, by proxy, a heretic by my pastors. This is my public declaration and defense of what I will call The Gap, because I do not believe it is a theory.

There are multiple debates over phenomena in the Bible. Is it a literal or figurative book? Are the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 fallen angels or sons of Seth? Were the Earth and universe created in six literal days or is there a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2?

These debates rage on, and I do admit my enjoyment in studying and trying to understand the mysteries of the Scriptures. I would never go so far as to call others “heretics” for arguing over topics that are not entirely clear. After all Luke 8:10 says, “And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.”

In other words, not all of us have knowledge or understanding of God’s mysteries. It is okay that we disagree on some subjects. It does not make us heretics to debate the sons of Gods or The Gap. It helps us have a greater understanding of God and his creation to study these topics. That being said, here are my arguments on The Gap. You will notice that I will use logic, reason, and Scripture. My view is not a heresy, but is entirely consistent with God’s word.

What is The Gap? The Gap posits that God created the heavens and Earth “in the beginning” as stated in Genesis 1:1. However, the Earth that was created at that time was judged and destroyed by a flood. The creation of the Earth as we now know it began with Genesis 1:2 some unknown time later.

EVIDENCE

1. The Bible says in Genesis 1:2, “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

Jeremiah 4:23 states, “I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.” This passage in Jeremiah discusses that there was “no man” (v. 25), and “all the cities thereof were broken down” (v. 26). This is a passage about the Tribulation, but it is a “type” of Genesis 1:2. It uses the same phrasing, “without form and void,” to describe a great judgment where God destroyed an entire civilization out of his “fierce anger” (v. 26). When applied to The Gap, there could have been another civilization who angered God and ended up being “desolate” like the one in Jeremiah 4 (v. 27). If you read Jeremiah 4 from the perspective of an exact telling of what happened during The Gap, I think you will appreciate the awesome spectacle that would have taken place.

Perhaps this civilization was Atlantis? Just consider it for fun.

2. 2 Peter 3:5-7 tells us, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”

Verse 5 says the heavens and earth OF OLD. Verse 7 says the heavens and earth WHICH ARE NOW. This is a destruction of both heavens – notice the plural, meaning more than just the atmosphere (the “first” heaven), but also the universe (the second heaven) – and the Earth. Noah’s flood only destroyed the Earth, not the heavens, and that is the flood depicted in verse 6.

So, verse 5 backs up The Gap as the destruction of the universe and earth OF OLD, which were remade in the rest of Genesis 1:2. This includes the heavens “which are now” and earth which was destroyed a second time in verse 6. This helps explain why “the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” in verse 2. The waters surrounding the earth were a result of this great flood that occurred during The Gap. The creation story as we know it is a SECOND creation, as God destroyed his first creation some time after Genesis 1:1 before it was restored.

3. When God said “let there be light” in Genesis 1:3, what was its source? He had yet to create the sun and stars. The answer is that HE was the light source. God’s glory filled the heavens. Therefore, there had to be a change made to the earth at some point. He removed the ice/water that was covering the earth, which would explain how his light became unblocked. Dry land “appeared” in verse 9. The plants were “brought forth” by the Earth (like they were already there, not placed there at this time) in verse 12. It was not until verse 14 that the sun and stars were finally created.

So, God’s eternal light was not shining until verse 3. Darkness was upon “the face of the deep” (v. 2). What deep? The deep waters covering the Earth. God removed the waters allowing light, the appearance of land, and plants springing up from the ground all before the sun and stars were put in the second heaven. The Gap explains the mystery of “without form and void” quite well. And speaking of the second heaven, notice that light was “good” (v. 4), dividing the Earth and seas was “good” (v. 10), grass and plants were “good” (v. 12), stars and sun were “good” (v. 18), etc. At the end of each day during the creation, God thought his works were “good” – with one exception; the day he divided the firmament.

4. The firmament is the atmosphere, the sky, or in this case, the second heaven. On day two of creation, God remade the firmament (remember, it was destroyed according to 2 Peter), but did not declare it “good” like the rest of creation. Why?

There is no mention of when the fall of Satan occurred. We know it happened. We know that Satan was on Earth when Adam and Eve were there. However, when during the creation story did this occur? If God created the heaven and earth and every creature in 6 literal days, when was the fall? I posit that this occurred during the gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. This would explain 1) why God did not find the creation of the heavens and dividing of the firmament “good” in vs. 6-8, because Satan and his angels were not in heaven nor earth. He and his angels were in the “second heaven” aka the firmament; and 2) why God may have destroyed the first heaven and earth.

Have you ever considered where devils and familiar spirits come from? They are not angels. They are not THE devil or antichrist. There is zero evidence of angels possessing anyone, especially in numbers expressed by Legion in Mark 5. They are something else. Perhaps they are remnants of what was on that first iteration of Earth. As a bonus, there is no evidence of dinosaurs existing during Biblical times. When did they live? We know they did because we have discovered their bones. The often misunderstood passages of Leviathan and Behemoth in Job are references to Satan, not dinosaurs – and I will likely tackle that topic on another day.

5. In Genesis 1:28, God tells Adam and Eve to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.” Notice that it says RE-plenish, not plenish. This means that the Earth was likely populated at one point, and needed to be replenished. The same command was given to Noah in Genesis 9:1 after humanity was destroyed by the flood. Arguers against The Gap usually attempt to go back to the Hebrew and convince us that “replenish” means “refill,” but anyone who studies language knows that there are often multiple possible definitions can be applied when translating a word. This is where the “law of first mention” becomes important. This law states that a word used throughout the Bible has the same meaning as when it is first mentioned, unless context changes. This can be used in reverse as well. So, if we use Gen. 9:1 and understand that the world was just destroyed and civilization needs “replenished”, then by proxy we can go back to Gen. 1:28 and apply this same meaning.

6. There is additional Biblical precedent for The Gap. This occurs first in Genesis 5. We know that Cain and Abel lived, and that Cain was still alive after murdering his brother, but neither are mentioned in the Adamic genealogy in Genesis 5. In other words, God destroyed the legacy of Cain just like the earth of Gen 1:1. He then “remade” Adam’s lineage through the line of Seth. There is a gap.

An even more prominent gap exists in Scripture that is rarely discussed when debating The Gap. It is conveniently forgotten when detractors attack The Gap for being a heresy. They seem to hold a strange “if it is not directly mentioned, it did not happen” mentality. The largest gap in Scripture is the one between two testaments. We can all agree that there is a 400 year period between the Old and New Testaments, but many Christians refuse to acknowledge that there can be a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

7. The Gap is consistent with science, which, for some reason, has been an attack against it. One of the primary attacks is that The Gap can be used in tandem with carbon dating as a Christian explanation for science that “contradicts” the Biblical account of creation that occurred 6,000 years ago. While I agree that carbon dating is sketchy and it is difficult to date something to 6,000,000,000 years ago, The Gap was originated almost twenty years before Darwin’s Origin of the Species and long before carbon dating was a tool.

While I understand that carbon dating might be off, it makes sense that the rocks and fossils can be absolutely ancient. We know that dinosaurs existed, but there is no Biblical evidence that they lived on THIS earth after Adam. If Noah was to take at least two of every living creature, were there dinosaurs on the ark? Probably not.

The Gap and science are entirely consistent with the idea of an ice age that destroyed the earth about 10,000 years ago and wiped out the dinosaurs (more fun on math based on human population here). The age of the planet prior to that event is unknown, but it was likely a pretty long period of time. Just because The Gap and science align, does not disprove the Bible or The Gap by using science. Both things can be true, and often are.

DISCUSSION

There you have it. My Biblically based arguments to support The Gap. I am sure that some who read this will absolutely disagree. My goal is not to convert to you a supporter, but to show that belief in The Gap is not entirely without merit and has a Biblical basis. It is not a heresy. It is not a “false doctrine.” It is a reasonable means of answering some of the questions and mysteries presented in the Bible.

I can believe in The Gap. You can believe in a “young Earth” and universe that are only 6,000 years old, where God created “adult” trees and rocks that are able to be dated tens of thousands or millions of years old, but were created that way, rather than aged for that period of time. I do not believe it a heresy to disagree with me. There are some merits to other arguments. I just ask that you understand and respect why we disagree.

If you have more questions, feel free to contact me. You can find me on Facebook, and I thank you for reading (if you’ve made it this far).

 

 

Take a Stand on Your Knees

Modern American Christians are emotionally and spiritually soft. We believe that society is persecuting us when stores greet us with “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”. We feel as though society is after us when a baker is fined and put out of business for not baking a cake for a same-sex wedding. Sure, this is a departure from past traditions, but is this religious persecution?

Is the government burning our churches down during a worship service? Are sales of Bibles illegal? Are any of us afraid to tell our co-workers about our Christianity because they might tell the authorities? Are we being stoned to death in the streets because we prayed in a public space?

There are Christians around the world who literally put their lives on the line to share their faith; and they still do it. We are afraid to ask our colleagues to church because they might stop inviting us over to watch the football game next week.

What happens when someone uses a racial slur among our friends and family? The person using the epithet is chastised, punished, probably even fired. Their reputation is devastated as they are labeled a racist for life. They need not even speak the offensive term to a person of color. The effects are the same.

A similar fate awaits those who use an anti-LGBT slur.

But what happens when someone takes the Lord’s name in vain in front of a Christian? Nothing. Society finds no offense. This is to be expected. However, should Christians not do something or say something about being offended? Are we so afraid to be sanctioned by peers BECAUSE of our faith that we, like Peter, deny Christ in public?

Race and sexual orientation, at least as a means of discrimination, has only been a thing for about 170 years. Christianity, as a means of discrimination, has been around for 2,000 years. Our savior was crucified. His closest disciples were tortured, killed, and exiled. Our religion was born from suffering in the name of love and salvation. Our history is filled with being enslaved and slaughtered. Our forefathers were fed to lions in the Colosseum. Our martyrs have been beheaded, burned at the stake, placed into iron maidens, flogged, drawn and quartered, and faced the worst punishments that human beings have ever devised.

We have as much right to be offended when Christ’s name is used as a joke or a swear as any race has when someone uses a slur.

We have as much right to be offended when society bashes our God and our beliefs as any sexual orientation has when someone refuses to bake them a cake.

No. Not as much. More.

We know that Christianity is losing its influence. We know that society respects us less and less. I think a big part of the reason is how we respond. We take offense and whine. We take to Facebook to complain or we might file an anti-discrimination lawsuit. What would happen if we actually took a stand, or a knee, in the moment?

Philippians 2:10 says, That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

Imagine the testimony we might have if when someone uses the Lord’s name in vain, we take this verse literally and take a knee and profess our faith. How the LORD would smile upon us at such a powerful display of faith.

Colin Kaepernick lost his job for taking a knee over police brutality. Would you be willing risk your career for God?

How much strength would we show if we were able to muster some fortitude in the face of adversity, rather than slinking away into the shadows? Maybe someone watching us take a stand (or knee) is a Christian who shares our apprehension, but is inspired by our displays of courage. Maybe our colleagues would begin to treat us with as much respect as they do minorities. Maybe someone would see us living our faith and come to salvation.

Christianity is not a joke. Our Savior is not a punchline. Our LORD is not to be mocked. Our God is the creator of the universe. He will punish the unjust and unsaved. He is coming to judge and destroy the world as we know it.

And we allow people we associate with to insult us and our God without mustering one ounce of character. Until we do, we will continue to lose our society. Even if we do not go as far as to literally get on our knees when someone utters the name of our Savior, the least we can do is say “I’m sorry, but I do not appreciate your using the name of my Lord in that way.”

It’s not much, but it’s more than we do now.

Sons of God: Angels or Sethites

Apparently this is quite the interesting argument in Christian circles. When reading Genesis 6, the KJV says in verses 2-4: “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”

One side believes that the “sons of God” mentioned here are angels (fallen angels, to be more specific). The other side believes them to be the “sons of Seth”, or a godly line of male descendants from Adam’s “good” son who fell for the secular line of Adam’s “bad” son, Cain.

The “Seth” proponents point to Hebrews 1:5 which says “5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?”

Let’s break this down a little. This verse is saying that God has never said the words “thou art my Son” to an angel, therefore, the “sons of God” could not have possibly been angels.

HOWEVER, the next words are “this day have I begotten thee.” This is important because Jesus Christ is the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON (John 3:16). Begotten is an incredible important word here. Christians are “sons of God” through our Faith. We are essentially adopted into the family of God when we get saved. The angels are “sons of God” through creation. ONLY Jesus Christ was born into this world as the Son of God. He is the only one who is begotten.

The NIV and MEV (among others) leave out the word begotten here; a grave error in translation. The NIV, ESV, and others also leave “begotten” out of John 3:16. Whether you believe Genesis 6 is referring to angels or sons of Seth, someone other than Christ can be a “son of God”. Leaving out “begotten” is incredibly dangerous as it removes the deity from Jesus Christ, but I digress.

When the “sons of Seth” side leaves out “begotten” when they argue Hebrews 1:5, they are making a huge error. Their use of the verse to counter Genesis 6 is faulty.

They also claim that the very idea of the “sons of God” being angels comes from the “Book of Enoch” ch. 6 and 7 where the fallen angel leader “Semjaza” devised a plan to mate with human women and his followers made a pact to go through with the plan no matter what.

The Book of Enoch is, of course, not a book of the Bible. Therefore, the very idea that the angels are “sons of God” must be extra-Biblical as well. Right? That’s like arguing that since Jesus in mentioned in the Quran, that we should dismiss his mentions in the Bible.

Well, here is MY POSITION.

The “sons of God” are angels. In Genesis 6, they are fallen angels who came to Earth and did produce hybrid offspring with human females.

Yes, I know that this is a very strange concept, but bear with me through my arguments.

  1. The book of Job (not Enoch) references angels as “sons of God”.

Job 38:4-7 has God asking Job “4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”

Did you catch that? When God was laying the foundations of the earth, the “sons of God” shouted for joy. Were the sons of Seth around when God was creating the earth? No. No human beings were. Clearly the “sons of God” are not human. However, there is more!

Job 1:6 (Job 2:1 says something quite similar) says “6Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.”

So here we are in heaven where God sits on his throne, and the “sons of God” present themselves alongside Satan. To me, this is a picture of the fallen angels walking behind their leader, Satan. Those who believe they are the “sons of Seth” have to reconcile how in the world those human souls made it to heaven and why Satan enters among them.

Here’s the big problem. The “old testament saints” did not go to heaven. They went to “Paradise” or “Abraham’s Bosom”, not the third heaven where God is seated. The sons of Seth could not have presented themselves to God in heaven, because they simply were not there.

Angels, however, were.

Furthermore, Jude 6 says “And the angels which kept not their principality but left their own habitation, He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day.” This is a clear reference to the fallen angels. They “left their own habitation [heaven]” and came to Earth. I believe that they are “reserved in everlasting chains . . .” because they had sex and produced children with humans.

Finally, 2 Peter 2:4-5 states, “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Thus, the flood came upon the “world of the ungodly” when the “angels that sinned” were cast into hell. How did these angels sin? By mating with humans.

  1. The hybrid offspring of angels and humans are the “giants” and “men of renown” in Genesis 6:4.

This is consistent with the idea that these half-angelic offspring would be supernatural supermen. If an angel and human had a child, I would imagine that child would be a giant (and we are talking GIANT – as in 9 – 12 feet tall, like Goliath). I would also imagine that it might have some supernatural abilities. Could these beings be worshiped as gods? Absolutely! In fact, I can think of no better explanation as to how the concept of the gods could so thoroughly infiltrate every civilization on the planet virtually simultaneously unless there was a common genesis (pun intended) for their existence. Furthermore, there are countless stories of the gods (angels?) creating demigods by having sex with human women.

It also makes sense of how giants could still be around after the Flood, when only Noah and his family were on the ark. I believe that either 1) one of Noah’s daughters-in-law may have carried some of the hybrid genes into the new world (see my Notes on Genesis 8-11); or 2) more fallen angels could have come and mated with humans again to produce entire races of giants like the Anakim of the giants of Gath, where Goliath and his brothers hailed from.

  1. Angels are capable of producing offspring.

This is a point of contention that usually ends with the other side simply saying “I just don’t believe it,” although there is Biblical precedent that is often overlooked.

Opponents of the “sons of God” as angels who can mate with humans often point to Matt. 22:30 which says, “in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” We see that the angels in heaven do not marry, but the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 did. Therefore, they cannot be angels. Right?

The key here is “in heaven.” As I mentioned before, the fallen angels “left their habitation” (Jude 6). They were not in heaven.

“Yeah, but angels cannot produce offspring,” you might say. However, this has a simple response.

Genesis 3:15 says, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

God is speaking to Satan here, so “thy seed” means the offspring of Satan while “her seed” is referencing Jesus Christ. Satan was an angel. Satan can produce offspring. Therefore, angels can produce offspring.

  1. The “sons of Seth” were not a part of some special, godly line of believers.

There is no evidence that states otherwise. This took place centuries before the Law of God was written for God’s children (Israelites). A believer marrying an unbeliever was not a sin at this time like it would be later, and polygamy was actually quite common even after the flood (Abraham, Joseph, David, Solomon) and was rarely punished by God. It would take a fall of epic proportions to progress from a godly line of Seth to the destruction of all life on Earth save for those in the Ark.

Furthermore, there is absolutely ZERO evidence of the “sons of God” being the line of Seth in any other mention in the Bible. The aforementioned passages in Job are clearly not the sons of Seth, and in no other place are the sons of Seth found. In fact, the “sons of Seth” are not mentioned at all other than by name (Enos, for example) in the listed genealogies.

Just look at the text of Genesis 6. We see “sons of God” not Seth. We see “daughters of men” not Cain. There is no mention of the daughters of men being ungodly or of whose line they belonged. The daughters of Seth and Cain were most likely included, and we have no idea of their religiosity.

This topic will continue to be debated, as both sides seem to be engrained in their positions (which is common in almost all debates these days). However, there is more Biblical evidence to support that the “sons of God” are angels than there is to support that they are sons of Seth, or of any human being for that matter. It seems to me that the true “extra-Biblical” stance is to ascribe the non-Scripture based interpretation of the “sons of God” to anything other than angels.

What do I know, though? I’m not a “Bible scholar” and have never been to seminary. I’m just a regular guy who reads his King James Bible and tries to understand the worlds of the natural and supernatural in the way God intended me to.

Rightly Dividing the Word: The Psalms Multiple-Timeline Effect

Psalms really is an incredible book. There are passages that move seamlessly between references to ancient Israel under the reign of David to the millennial reign of Christ, full of references to the second advent and Antichrist.
 
You can read the book literally as writings of David, his servants, and others that are talking about things happening directly to them, but there are references to events that did not occur at that time or in the time before. Prophecy is intertwined with the present.
 
The only way to understand the complexity of these passages is to literally “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15).
 
Someone who has not studied the Word of God would miss all of the subtle references. They would not be able to rightly divide the word of truth.
 
It’s also a fascinating glimpse at how I believe God perceives time. Human beings are capable of distinguishing four dimensions (The combination of any three from – length, width, height, depth, breadth; and time). God is not confined by these four dimensions as we are.
 
Anyone familiar with super-string theory understands that there are dozens (or more) dimensions operating simultaneously. I believe God is outside of, yet encompasses, all possible known and unknown dimensions. Thus, His concept of time is infinitely more complex than what we could ever understand.
 
The interweaving time periods found in the book of Psalms is but a micro-fraction of a perception of time that sees past, present, and future simultaneously. So when God, as the true author of Psalms, speaks as he does in Psalms 79 of multiple applications to multiple time periods, a person who has not studied may miss the references.
 
For instance: verse 1 says “O God, the heathen are come into thine inheritance; thy holy temple have they defiled; they have laid Jerusalem on heaps.” This had not happened during the time of David. However, this happened in 70 AD, and again during the Crusades, and will again happen during the Tribulation.
 
In fact, nothing written in the verses 1-4 occurred during the period that Asaph wrote Psalms 79, though they are written in present tense. Verses 4-5 describe the Jews during the Church Age (right now), and verses 6-7 are in reverse chronological order (7 is the Tribulation, and 6 is the Second Advent).
 
There are examples of this time period switching all throughout the Psalms. You can cross reference almost all of the prophetic verses to other prophetic passages in both Old and New Testaments. It really is remarkable.

Notes on Joshua 1-4

Moses is dead, and it is up to Joshua to lead the Israelites into the Promised Land. God tells Joshua that “The book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.” (Joshua 1:8).

Oh, Christian. How prosperous would our lives be if we observed and abided by all the words of The Bible?

Chapter 2 is the story of the two spies who entered Jericho and met Rahab, the harlot. Rahab is an interesting figure because 1) she is a female hero of the Bible, which, we are told, is a completely misogynistic book; and 2) Rahab is taught by many churches (including more than one of mine) to be in the line of Jesus Christ (Matt. 1:5). However, the Rachab in Matthew 1:5 is not mentioned as “the harlot” as Rahab is in both Old AND New Testaments. Yes, there are differences between Greek and Hebrew versions of names, but the Rahab the harlot is named such in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25; so why would she not be the same in Matt. 1:5? Because she is probably not the same person. Sorry!

If we go back to the Greek (because that’s what all Bible “scholars” like to do), Rahab is Rhaab and Rhachab is Rachab. Yet the modern perversions of God’s Word translate them both as Rahab, thus, wrongly inserting “the harlot” into the line of Christ.

Rahab tells the spies in Josh. 2:11 of stories of the Exodus from Egypt and conquering of the Amorites, “as soon as we had heard these things, our hearts did melt, neither did there remain any more courage in any man.” Ironically, the Israelites were scared to conquer a city of men who feared the power of the LORD God of Israel.

As we know, Rahab and her family would be spared during the destruction of Jericho because of her faith in helping the spies.

Another miraculous water crossing occurs in chapter 3, as the Israelites walked across a “heap” of dry land as the priests carrying the ark of the LORD stepped into the Jordan river (v. 13). Here, again, is another supernatural miracle experienced by the Israelites that makes their impending worship of idols so stupefying.