₦airaland Forum

frosbel has been banned, Jesoul kindly look into this matter when chanced, no hurry !

aletheia: ^

Back to your normal method of circular arguments.

First of all you refuse to respond to the topic, and then you initiate back and forth arguments ignoring all evidence and scripture contrary to your theories , I then respond to your question about the transfiguration you ignore my answer and go off on a tangent.

I am done discussing with you.

“Flee also youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.” 2 Tim. 2:22.

Young people have many different lusts. Examples of this can be despising your mother and father or a lack of respect for the elderly. The Bible teaches us something very different. Timothy, God’s coworker, was to exhort the elderly as a son admonishes a father. We must also not be hasty or condescending because then you have been unrighteous in your dealings with other people. It is written: “Flee youthful lusts; but pursue righteousness…” Be righteous in your dealings and the way you treat other people, whether old or young. This is just one of many examples.

Pursue faith

In the letter to James, it is written that doubt is double mindedness. You want one thing while at the same time wanting something else. You want to believe, but you also want a portion of what this world has to offer as well. You are divided! You’re not whole-hearted. Then you are unstable in all your ways just like a wave of the sea. (James 1:5-8 ).

Pursue peace

When a person is young it is easy to be assertive and to have strong opinions instead of pursuing peace. There are many youthful lusts in this area as well.

Youthful lusts are of course also present when it concerns the opposite sex. But what is it that we must we flee in this context? We must flee our own egotism and selfishness! If you only think of yourself when entering into a relationship, the end result will be terrible. Take for example the lust of the eyes: you look at this person and that person and flirt a little here and flirt a little there. Pursue love. That’s not love! We can read about love in 1 Corinthians 13. Is the love between a man and a woman another kind of love? Is it suddenly all right to follow my own selfish inclinations? No, a relationship between a man and a woman is also love—a love that can give and sacrifice—a love that understands responsibility and duty.

Everything God created was beautiful. “He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts.” Ecc. 3:11. You have been given grace over your life to the extent that you can read in God’s Word what you must do so that every aspect of your life can be beautiful.

The attraction between a man and a woman must pertain to all that is beautiful: It must consist of love and life within the framework of a beautiful marriage, if marriage is a part of God’s plan for you. Your relationship should be built on this foundation, rather than in an atmosphere of egotism where you simply use people and discard them afterwards. That is a truly pathetic attitude.

Flee youthful lusts!

Find tasks to fulfill; get involved! Whatever you sow, you will also reap. (Gal. 6:7) The good that you do now while you are young will benefit you greatly later in life.

Excerpt from a message by Arild Tombre in Hessenhöfe, Germany, 1999

© Copyright Skjulte Skatters Forlag

Pastor Kun: So what are you still arguing about if you have admitted they appeared as men? And they were physical in nature enough for the Sodomites to want to 'mate' with them. Also what of the angel Jacob had physical wrestling with? Was he just an apparition as well Bros abeg na you dey twist scripture, the bible provides evidence angels can manifest as human beings, it also provides evidence that humans were made in the likeness and image of the elohim(angels inclusive) meaning similar structure and dna we have also read about men also attempting to mate with these angels in another part of genesis. so what exactly is your point? why are you so vehimently in denial even though it is glaring the bible does not support your assumptions?

When you are not reading stories on monsters and giants , read the article I posted called ' Sons of Nephilim a Hoax ' , it totally destroys this theory of yours !!

Goshen360: So what am doing doesn't teach or edify God's people Why are you in a haste to jump to conclusion You and I have been studying some stuffs lately right?

Okay , I guess the caffeine is buzzing my brain

[size=14pt]1 Timothy 1:4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work--which is by faith.[/size]

2Co:11:13: For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

2Co:11:14: And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

So Satan's lies are being believed as the truth,

Back to what the true scriptures say though, .....read

Ge:6:4: 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.

More on Giants.

There were giants after the Flood, a genetic trait carried in man as can be seen still today

Nu:13:33: And there we saw the giants (nĕphiyl), the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

Anak was the forefather of the Anakites or Anakim who were seen as strong and tall. The use of the word "nephilim" in this verse is used to describe their Ungodliness as enemy of Israel. Their physical stature was genetically gigantic and the genetics were carried by Noah and none other.

The text states that Anak was a Rephaite and a son of Arba , Anak means long neck, also note there was no Angelic procreation affair here, obviously this is after the flood. Yet the word Nephilim (nĕphiyl)is used for these big men, and they cant be off spring of Angels either, not that it ever did happen.

De:3:11: For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants ; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man.

[U]Og was between 8 & 9 feet tall[/U] looking at his bed size, although there are various cubit sizes you may even think his bed could have been 12 ft long.

There were big men in existence before and after the flood and this is where the other meaning of the word Giant appears

To sum this up would basically be:

There were no Angelic Human hybrids, nor were there sub groups of Hybrids.

There were giants and the interpretation of the meanings was twisted, they were just big evil men influenced by the Devil hence the meaning of Nephilim to to describe a fallen mind and soul of man.

If by any chance that there were Hybrids at any time before the flood, then obviously they would have all been destroyed by the Flood, and Noah's offspring were not the carriers of Hybrid genes.

Can demons have intercourse with humans, they can but there will be no offspring, there are demons known as Incubus and Succubus for perversion of the flesh, and lusts, but have never produced off spring, God made them sexless and blanks after he judged them and tossed them onto the earth.

The latest addition to try and falsely build on the Theory of Aliens, is that in these last days before Jesus Christ comes is that Aliens have been experimenting and altering mens DNA and genes, which is obviously a total hoax, but this is the verse and only verse that they have used to actually imply this.

Dan 2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

This is talking about the New World Order, and how they will Globalize the world under their control , and it also shows that the NWO will collapse, and not work.

The "mingle" is describing how the mixing of nations will take place, by destroying borders and cultures to create a One world Government, just like it was in Babylon as the First global Kingdom after the flood, where God changed the language of Babylon to different languages and this caused the collapse of Babylon. Babylon today is the NEW WORLD ORDER and controlled in Europe the "Beast" with seven heads and ten horns .

There are no Aliens , but Fallen Angels

Do not believe a lie

Go well

http://hoowantstono.hubpages.com/hub/Sons-of-Nephilim-a-Hoax

Goshen360: What scientific prove are you talking about when that world was completely destroyed and such angels held bound for judgment? Where is the evidence for scientific prove? Do we even know the "kinds" of angels that did it or not? So if angels that you agreed are spirits and we are told they "rebelled and left where they were supposed to be and sinned" why don't you question yourself when you study what their sin was? And you don't believe they can do anything possible at their sin, rebellious? Am not holding on to this but just proving all things, you can see I first supported you when this thread began but my further study "kind of" proved otherwise. If they bible says it happened then in the world that then was, what is my business not to believe it as you said, it is not a salvation issue. As a matter of fact, there are three interpretations to this myth. Maybe God will enlighten us when we get to heaven or the word is sufficient enough for us to search it out.

Read my article, it totally destroys this silly theory of angels mating with humans.

No wonder Atheists laugh at us.

SMH

Read this https://www.nairaland.com/976045/sons-nephilim-hoax#11249145 is this topic means a lot to you

So you can see in that comment he calls the sons of God "man" and "flesh" look again

"My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

This was probably God hinting at the coming destruction of a sinful and violent world influenced by Satan. Not only that but the inhabitants were " Flesh" not fallen angels

Now that the puzzle is solved about the sons of God that turned out to be man kind, I suppose we will look at the missing words of Nephilim.

The TWO meanings of the word giants "nĕphiyl" and "rapha"

Giants in Hebrew נפיל (nĕphiyl) giants, the Nephilim (HEBREW) e·nphilim.... the·ones-distinguished

The meaning of Nephiyl, has nun-peh-lamed as its root, implying fallen, an evil nature, so in the true sense it means giants with an ungodly nature and disobedience, were terrorizing the earth and considered mighty men, but does not necessarily mean Giants in physical size, but in being "Renowned" with "Reputation". Also note that mankind lived to ripe old ages in excess of 900 years old. Imagine being a chief for 900 years.

Note the term used in Gen 6:4: "the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."

This word nĕphiyl is only used twice once in Genesis before the flood,and Numbers, and is referring to the giants as the Chiefs and Lords of the day, attached to lawlessness, and ungodliness

Gen 6:4 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.

Num 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

The word giant in Hebrew רפאים (rapha') giants, Rephaim

The followings giants as a tribe were called "Emims" by the Moabites and "Zamzummims" by the Ammonites.

In these verses it is referring to an old tribe of giants and the word for "giant" is " Rapha", they also lived before Moses, but after the flood, obviously an off shoot of Noah's children as is everyone today, and the giant gene was also carried by Noah.

The meaning of Rapha, is the same meaning as Rephaim, it was the word used for giants, some verses say Giants, the others Rephaim, and they are talking about the same thing eg :

Deu 2:11 Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims.

Note here the giants Anak and Anakims mentioned in Num 13:33 and in Deu 2:1. are the same giants and both Rapha and Nephyl used to describe them

2Sa 5:18 The Philistines also came and spread themselves in the valley of Rephaim.

Jos 15:8 And the ..............valley of Hinnom westward, which [is] at the end of the valley of the giants northward:

Deu 2:20 That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims;

Deu 3:11 For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man.

Deu 3:13 And the rest of Gilead, and all Bashan, being the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; all the region of Argob, with all Bashan, which was called the land of giants.

The word Nephilim as we have been shown, was never used correctly, nor means what we are told it means.The false meaning is again "Hybrid Humans giants"

The meaning of "Rapha", is the same meaning as Rephaim, it was the word used for giants, and some verses say "Giants", the others "Rephaim", and they are talking about the same thing.

There is also another meaning to the words Rapha which also is : deceased and is not describing Angels or demons

Isa 26:14 They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise: therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish.

The word "Nephilim" never appeared in certain Bibles because the word "giants" was used, but got placed in modified bibles and now a False Gospel appears again, because it only appeared in a book that was an imitation of scriptures namely the Book of Enoch, a manuscript imitation of the Torah used by a sect and Judaic off shoots.

Even Jude quoted from it not realising it was an imitation and a false Gospel.. read here

Jude:1:14: And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Enoch was never a prophet or called to be a prophet, neither did he prophesy....why.?

Heb:11:5: By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

So this itself tells you that Enoch/Enos was a son of God also, the son of Jared, and the father of Methuselah.

There was no city named after this Enoch either.

The Book of Enoch, estimated date of writing was between 150-80 B.C.

Fragments of the Book of Enoch was found with the Dead Sea scrolls. Obviously the Book of Enoch was not written by Enoch who lived before the flood. There never were books recorded before the flood, only after the flood by Moses, and never in any place did Moses record what Jude was saying.or even the Book of Enoch

Jesus told us who we are to believe concerning scripture.

Lu:16:29: Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

Lu:16:31: And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Lu:24:27: And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

God said he gave us "Moses and the prophets,", obviously Moses was after the flood and gave us all the books except for the Book of Enoch, which didn't exist.

The fable started with this book and the incorrect use of the word " Nephilim" as a race of giants produced by the marriage between angels and women, as stated in the Book of Enoch.

There are two types of fallen ones, there are Angels and there is Man. God in the unadulterated bible was not talking about angels in Ge:6:4. he was talking about man.The whole bible is about God saving man kind and warning us about the deceiver Satan the Devil the Deceiver.

The word Nephilim does not appear in the KJV, and others

Ge:6:4: 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.

The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the KJV
[color=#990000]The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the NKJV.
The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the RVR
The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the NLT
The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the DBY
The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the WEB
The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the HNV
The word Nephilim doesn't occur in the VUL.[/color]

So it is extremely important that you have a real bible not a deceivers choice book, as you can see the word "Nephilim" was placed into biblical thoughts and has created the UFO and Alien theory , and this is also where the thought and theories of where Aliens came from. I suppose you must identify with this lie in the world that has changed the mind of man to look for something other than God and see where it is today all about cover ups and secrets what a joke. Anything but Jesus Christ looks appealing today and offers some form of Light or enlightenment.....see this scripture

https://s3.hubimg.com/u/1557450_f260.jpg

The Delusion
Here is another one of those famous Hoaxes, intended to prick the ears of the learned, accept it as mythology and folklore.

I have listened and seen and read many variations on this Fable and Myth, and it has many errors. I must say that stupidity is always the fault of the reader if he does not check to see if things are so. The distortions are too evident and deliberate and most are lies gathered from books not included in the Bible e g: "Book of Enoch" and Discovery Channels including deceived Christians.

How could this verse be missed out, the lineage of Joseph Jesus step father. Luke 3:23-38

Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

The Blue words are click-able for an advanced biblical break down, and meanings.

Ge:6:1: And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

Ge:6:2: That the sons of God (ben 'elohiym)saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Ge:6:3: 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.

Ge:6:4: There were giants in the earth in those days; " and also after that" when the sons of God (ben 'elohiym) came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men ('adam) which were of old (`owlam), men of renown.

"sons of God" (ben 'elohiym)

"men" ('adam)

"old" (`owlam)

These scriptures, at no point are mentioning Angels or even Fallen angels (Satan), let alone that Fallen angels are called "sons of God", imagine demons called "sons of God" biblically impossible.These scriptures were taken out of context by placing words in the "MINDS", to indicate that Angels slept with mans daughters and giants were born.

If you notice the tense, it says "and also after that" so this says there were giants before the sons of God "came into the daughters of men". Also note that "the same became "mighty men". The idea of these being Angels at all was invented by non biblical origins and taking translations out of context.

These mighty men are humans and not hybrid offspring from a demon and human .The whole of Genesis is talking about mankind falling under the influence and lies of Satan

Compare the above verses to this one

Ezr:9:2: For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy (qodesh ) seed ( zera`) have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.

holy (qodesh ) seed ( zera`)......apartness, holiness, sacredness, separateness

There are some mis-leading ideas around that men only became sons of God after Jesus died and was resurrected, and that idea is not inline with scripture as the scriptures already mentions, men that call upon the name of God, sons of God, Adam was called son of God and all humanity is Adam, but only those off spring that call on God are called sons of God. Jesus is God of the Old Covenant and also God of the New Covenant

The mention of Angels in Genesis
Ge:19:1: And there came two angels ( mal'ak ) to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

The Angels were called lords( Lot didn't know they were Angels) and also angels of God.

Ge:19:2: And he said, Behold now, my lords ('adown) , turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

Ge:28:12: And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven: and behold the angels (mal'ak) of God ('elohiym ) ascending and descending on it.

Ge:32:1: And Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him.

The Hebrew meaning for Angel is: "mal'ak".

Angels of God are called "mal'ak 'elohiym"

Interestingly enough even the Bible discriminates between Angels and Humans even down to the detail .

1Cr 15:39 All flesh [is] not the same flesh: but [there is] one [kind of] flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, [and] another of birds.

1Cr 15:40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial [is] one, and the [glory] of the terrestrial [is] another.

"Celestial" epouranios.....existing in heaven, a body that is suited for eternal existence as angels have .

"Terrestrial" epigeios....existing upon the earth, earthly, terrestrial

So Jesus compares a resurrected man to being like an Angel "they neither marry, nor are given in marriage" given in marriage refers to pro-creation. Jesus was speaking about Angels of God.

M't:22:30: For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Ge:1:28 : And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

From this we see God gave man the authority over all things on the earth, including Angels fallen or not hence" bruise the Serpents head", it is mans dominion, but the serpent beguiled Eve and you know the rest.

Angels could never pro-create with humans,they are not able to, they are not flesh, they are not biological creatures, neither can they be, they may look like humans, and appear as humans. seeAngels and Demons on my HUB

So before I say where the Hoax started we will first look at what "Sons of God" are.

"Ben Elohiym" is the Hebrew name for sons of God, and expresses man as from God , hence man created in Gods image and Likeness, unlike Angels

"Ben" means son of or male child .

Ge:4:25: And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

Ge:4:26: And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

So God gave Seth to Eve to replace Abel because he was killed by the Cain . Seth's sons began to call upon the name of the Lord .

This is where it gets interesting because the bible backs itself up again, but I will use one of many choices

Lu:3:38: Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Joh:1:12: 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:

So the sons of Seth were the sons of God, because of their godliness.

Ge:4:26 "and calling upon the name of the Lord". This does not mean that they will remain sons of God, because of their fleshly lure to woman "daughters"

God is the same in the Old Testament as in the New Testament, God has not changed, only the fact that now he lives in believers, and not external as in the Old Covenant, by being Born again.

Some confuse the "sons of God" in Job as Angels

Job:1:6: Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Job:2:1: Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.

Satan was accusing Jobs sons of doing evil, but because of Jobs righteousness, before God in offering sacrifice for sin.Righteousness covered his family, hence why they were called sons of God. Also here they did not remain sons of God, because of their lusts of the flesh. Satan destroyed them after God allowed Satan to have his way, but not harm Job to death

These are not Angels presenting themselves before God, because the judgment against Angels has already taken place, Satan is earth bound and he is restricted to movement in chains of Darkness, till God casts him into the Bottomless pit the Abyss

So Satan roams about with his demon entourage accusing man of his sins, and deceiving man, creating false beliefs and religions, cults, paranormal, psychic phenomena, etc

So who were the daughters of men ?

Cain was rebellious towards God and was influenced by Satan, that's why he killed Abel. Satan the Devil is a murderer, and this was what he caused Cain to do. Abel a son of God, with a pleasing first fruit.

Joh:8:44: Ye are of your father the devil and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Ge:4:5: But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

Ge:4:6: And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

Ge:4:8: And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

Ge:4:9: And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

Ge:4:16: And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

Ge:4:17: And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

Ge:4:22: And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-cain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

So when God saw that the sons of God the believers were getting into the non believers daughters of man, it displeased God, but God did say they were mere men also "My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh"

Ge:6:3: 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.

The word strive is "diyn " means to "to judge, contend, plead"

The word flesh is "BASAR"

Some people feel that when Jesus told the story found in Luke 16:19-31, He was sharing a glimpse of what takes place in the afterlife. Others, citing many passages of Scripture that seem to contradict the picture of heaven and hell brought to view in this message, feel that Jesus was teaching an altogether different kind of lesson.

Before we begin, it should be stated that this is the only passage in scripture that teaches consciousness between death and the resurrection. Also, there is not the least reference made to the soul or spirit of man. The question is, is it a parable or a literal story?

In Mark 4:33, 34, we read that Jesus gave His lessons as parables. To begin with, this story says nothing about immortal souls leaving the body at death. Instead, the rich man, after he died, has "eyes" and a "tongue," that is, very real body parts. He asked that Lazarus "dip the tip of his finger in water."

If the story is to be taken literally, then at death, the good and the bad do not soar away as shadowy spirits (Job 34:14, Ecclesiastes 3:21; 12:7), instead, they go to their rewards as physical beings with body parts. How could this be when their bodies return to dust? (Genesis 3:19, Ecclesiastes 3:20; 12:7, Psalm 22:29; 104:29; 146:4, Job 7:21; 17:16; 34:15, Isaiah 26:19, Daniel 12:2). We know that the body does not go to hell at death, because it is very obvious that the body remains in the grave, as the Bible says (Job 17:13; John 5:28,29).

Now, suppose we add the word "soul," so as to make it harmonize with modern theology. Then it should read;

And it came to pass, that the beggar's body died, and his soul; the rich man's body also died, and his soul, and in hell he lifted up the eyes of his soul, being in torments, and seeth Abraham's soul afar off, and he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus' soul, that he may dip the tip of the finger of his soul in water, and cool the tongue of my soul; for my soul it is tormented in this flame.

Remember the nature of the soul of man, that it is without body or parts; that it has neither interior nor exterior. Could such a being have a "tongue," "finger," and "eyes?" Absurd! Whenever there is a tongue, finger and eyes, there is a physical, material organism.

Five Questions to Ponder

If you are convinced that "The Rich Man And Lazarus" is not a parable, I have some questions for you.


Is it possible that heaven and hell are so close to each other that a conversation can be held between the inhabitants of heaven and hell?

Can those in heaven look down and see people burning in hell?

Can they hear the screams?

Would a finger dipped in water lesson the torment in a burning hell?


How large is Abraham's large bosom if it contains all the elect who go there?

Obviously, the language here is highly symbolic. How could anyone go to Abraham’s physical bosom? Nowhere in the Bible is "Abraham’s Bosom" defined as "heaven". At the time this parable was spoken, Abraham's body parts were not heaven, but in the grave (Genesis 25:8-9).


What's the Point?
This story is a parable, used by Christ, to emphasize a point. This passage is the fifth in a series of parables:


The lost sheep - Luke 15:3-7;

The lost coin - Luke 15:8-10;

The lost boy - Luke 15:11-32;

The unjust rich man - Luke 16:1-15;

The rich man and Lazarus - Luke 16:19-31.
Concerning "The rich man and Lazarus," a manuscript of the seventh century reads: "And he spake also another parable." Another of the tenth century reads: "the Lord spake this parable." I wonder why this disappeared from the Bible?

The point Christ was making is found in the very last verse of this parable:

Luke 16:31, "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Nowhere does this story speak of sending back ‘spirits’, not even in the matter of returning to warn men, but of rising "from the dead." The lesson Jesus was trying to teach in this parable is apparent from the remarks with which He prefaced the story. The Pharisees were covetous (verse 14). They also regarded wealth as an evidence of God's favor and poverty of His displeasure.



The Meaning of this Parable to the Jews living in the first century

The Jewish nation, (especially the Scribes and Pharisees) were about to die as a power, as a church, as a controlling influence in the world; while the common people among them, and the Gentiles, were to be exalted in the new order of things. The details of the parable shows: "There was a certain rich man clothed in purple and fine linen." In these first words, by describing their very costume, the Savior fixed attention on the Jewish priesthood. They were, emphatically, the rich men of that nation. His description of the beggar was equally graphic. He lay at the gate of the rich, only asking to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the table. Thus dependent were the common people, and the Gentiles, on the scribes and Pharisees.

We remember how Christ once rebuked them for shutting up the kingdom of heaven against those entering. They lay at the gates of the Jewish hierarchy, for the Gentiles were literally restricted to the outer court of the temple. Hence in Revelation 11:2, we read; "But the court, which is without the temple, leave out, and measure it not, for it is given unto the Gentiles." They could only stand at the outer court, or lie at the gate. The brief, graphic descriptions given by our Savior, at once showed his hearers that he was describing those two classes, the Jewish priesthood and nation, on the one hand, and the common people, Jews and Gentiles, on the other.

The rich man died and was buried. This class died officially, nationally, and its power departed. The kingdom of God was taken from them & conferred on others (Matthew 21:43). The beggar died. The Gentiles, publicans and sinners were translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son, where is neither Jew nor Greek, but where all are one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28 ).

This is the meaning of "Abraham's bosom." They accepted the true faith and so became one with faithful Abraham. Abraham is called the father of the faithful, and the beggar is represented to have gone to Abraham's bosom, to denote the fact, which is now history, that the common people and Gentiles accepted Christ, enjoying the blessings of the faith.

What is meant by the torment of the rich man? The misery of those proud men, when, soon after, their land was captured, and their city and temple possessed by barbarians, and they scattered like chaff before the wind--a condition in which they have continued from that day (70 A.D.) to this. All efforts to bless them with the teachings of Christ have proved unavailing. At this very moment there is a great gulf fixed so that there is no passing to and fro. And observe, the Jews do not desire the gospel. Nor did the rich man ask to enter Abraham's bosom with Lazarus. He only wished Lazarus to alleviate his sufferings by dipping his finger in water and cooling his tongue. It is so with the Jews today. They do not desire the gospel; they only ask those among whom they sojourn to tolerate them and soften the hardships that accompany their wanderings.

The Jewish church and nation are now dead. Once they were exalted to heaven, but now they are thrust down to Hades, the kingdom of death. Jesus knew the Pharisees believed this and used it in a parable. Of the Pharisees, Josephus says: "They also believe that souls have an immortal vigor in them, and that, under the earth, there will be rewards and punishments, according as they lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again." (Antiquities, B. 18,Ch. 1, ß3. Whiston's Tr.).

The Lessons for us that Jesus was seeking to teach in this Parable


In this life is the time when decisions for salvation are irrevocably made. There will be no future opportunity to change.

A contrast is being drawn between those who, in this life, make wealth their dependence and the poor who have depended upon Christ. A man's value is not in his possessions; for all that he has belongs to him only as lent by the Lord. A misuse of these gifts will place him below the poorest and most afflicted man who loves God and trusts in Him.

The law and the prophets are God's appointed agencies for the salvation of men. Christ was telling His hearers to give heed to these evidences. If they do not listen to the voice of God in His Word, the testimony of a witness raised from the dead would not be heeded. This literally happened in the resurrection of Lazarus, just shortly before Christ's death. (See John 11.) Those who had rejected previous evidence as to His messiahship were so hardened, however, by their rejection of the evidence already available to them, that this crowning miracle of Jesus' ministry did not change their course toward Him.


Conclusion

Clearly, this story is a parable, and doctrines cannot to be built upon parables or allegories. A parable, like other illustrations, is generally used to make clear one particular point. To try to build doctrines on every part of the story would generally result in a completely unreasonable conclusion, if not utter contradiction. Certainly, we would not expect to find in the illustration a proof for a belief the very opposite of that held by the speaker or writer of the scriptures.

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/lazarus.html

firebrand: ^^^^
2-the story of lazarus is a parable not a real story.



No, not a parable but true story. A true account of an event that took place in heaven.

Wrong !!

Jesus always spoke in parables.

The Bible’s last book is filled with imagery and symbolism, making it a minefield for over-zealous but ill-informed students who insist on literal meanings. For example, the verse fragments just quoted use the words fire, brimstone, Lamb, smoke, and beast — all of which may have been intended symbolically, not literally.

Further, these verses contain a clear echo of Isaiah 34:9, 10: “Its [Edom’s] streams shall be turned into pitch, and its dust into brimstone; its land shall become burning pitch! It will not be quenched night or day; its smoke shall ascend forever.” This passage refers to an event that occurred hundreds of years before Christ and had long since disappeared. Both Isaiah 34 and its counterpart in Revelation contain poetic language to emphasize the totality and irreversibility of the degradation sinners will suffer, not its eternal duration.

Notice how these punishments are described as producing death: “But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8 ).

But what about Satan? Will he not suffer throughout eternity in hell? We don’t think so. Bible students are aware that “forever and ever” in some texts means merely “as long as the thing shall last.” For example, Exodus 21:5, 6 and Jonah 2:5, 6 refer to forever as either a lifetime or no more than three days and nights. Even the phrase “day and night forever and ever” is not a literal description of eternity (which will have no night) but a poetic way of saying that Satan will never be restored from his banishment and destruction.

What Jesus accomplished by sharing in our humanity was so “that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Hebrews 2:14b).

Given the less-hideous explanations available for each of the texts above, we wonder why those who know of God’s infinite and unfathomable love continue to defend the teaching of eternal torment.



More Conclusive Texts

The larger share of Bible texts that address the fate of the wicked speak with a note of finality about the punishment ahead. Unrepentant sinners will come to their appointed end: death, destruction, and annihilation.

Notice the words used in the following texts dealing with God’s final judgment:

Hebrews 10:27: Fiery indignation will devour the adversaries.

Philippians 3:19: Their end is destruction.

John 3:16: “Whoever believes in Him should not perish,” implying that unbelievers will perish.

Ezekiel 18:4: The soul who sins shall die.

Malachi 4:1-3: The wicked shall be burned up, leaving neither root nor branch — only ashes under foot.

Psalm 1:4: The wicked are blown away like chaff.

Proverbs 10:25: The wicked are no more.

Psalm 37:22, 28, 34, 38: The wicked shall be cut off.

Psalm 37:20: “The wicked shall perish . . . into smoke they shall vanish away.”

Psalm 37:36: The wicked cannot be found.

Job 11:20: The wicked “shall not escape, and their hope — loss of life!”

Romans 6:23: “The wages of sin is death.”

Now consider the words of Jesus in Matthew 10:28b: “Fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell [or Gehenna].” Traditional religious teaching says that every human has an immortal soul that can never be destroyed. Christ says, however, that God is able to destroy the soul also, after which the person will be as if he had never been (see Obadiah 16b).

Combining these words of Jesus with the foregoing passages, we conclude that God not only is able to destroy but also will destroy both the soul and body of the wicked. Now we have a clearer picture of what lies ahead for unbelieving sinners: separation, desolation, destruction, death, annihilation, nonexistence. They perish!

Seldom does Scripture refer to the instrument that God will use to destroy the wicked as hell. This word in English translations usually refers either to the grave (the place of the dead) or to Gehenna (the Jerusalem garbage pit where refuse was burned by fire or eaten by worms).

Instead of hell, God’s plan for the destruction of sinners at the final judgment is called lake of fire (Revelation 19:20; 20:10, 14, 15; 21:8 ). This is God’s “strange” work — strange compared to His proper work of salvation — and He will “cut it short in righteousness” (compare Isaiah 28:21, 22 with Romans 9:28 ).

It is a mistake to establish a dark doctrine like eternal torment from the doubtful interpretation of a few verses. Rather, we should let the clear verses regarding the fate of sinners speak for themselves. We need not impugn God’s character by teaching ghastly intentions for the fate of sinners when God has made His merciful and righteous judgment so plain.

Still, that merciful and righteous judgment will not be pleasant, and it will be avoided only by following God’s plan of salvation. A major aspect regarding the punishment of the wicked and unbelievers is that they will miss out on eternal fellowship with God, Christ, loved ones, and the saints of God. Their remembrance will fade away, even as their lives. Eternal life and an abode in God’s eternal kingdom will be awarded only to the faithful who trust, confess, and follow Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.



Unbiblical Assumption

The doctrine of eternal punishment is based on the assumption that humans have an immortal soul. However, such a theory has no biblical basis. Immortality itself is a trait possessed only by God, according to 1 Timothy 6:15b, 16). The only human immortality and eternal life known in Scripture come as the gift of God through the gospel of Christ! “[God’s purpose] has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has . . . brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10; see also Romans 6:23).



Positive vs. Negative Motivation

When considering eternal “hellfire and brimstone” to induce sinners to repent and trust Jesus as Savior and Lord, we benefit by evaluating the likely effect of such tactics. The best persuasion to trust and obey the Lord does not focus on a threat of punishment, especially a highly dubious one. The most effective motivation for faith and repentance springs from God’s love, not His wrath: “We love Him because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19).

We can’t imagine that a benevolent God would use the warning of eternal torment to coerce His creatures, those to whom He had given the right to choose life or death. Luke 14:26-31 teaches us to “count the cost” of giving up life’s sinful pleasures to gain the pleasures of God’s kingdom. Logically, we should count the cost of not accepting God’s salvation. However, it is not right to overstate that cost by spinning horror stories of eternal torment.

Positive, productive motivation includes the desire to know God and be known by Him, the opportunity for loving relationships, the possibility of reward, good examples, and earnest encouragement. Under these influences, we do things because we want to, not because we feel coerced. God showers us with these positive motivations through His Word, His Spirit, and the loving witness of His people, thus changing our desire to something better than it was by nature.

Negative motivation, on the other hand, is heavy with fear, guilt, and threat. This may be effective for short periods, but it commonly has little lasting effect.

Is there room for a holy fear of God in our human experience? Of course there is. Such is needed today more than ever. We should be taught early in life to develop a healthy respect for the judgment seat of God, for “‘The Lord will judge His people.’ It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:30, 31). And “Our God is a consuming fire” (12:29).

However, it is neither biblical nor rational that the doubtful threat of eternal torment should be the strongest motivation to be saved. Rather, it is the loving appeal of Jesus Christ in the gospel, driven home to the heart by the Holy Spirit, which prompts and plants genuine faith and hope.

The goodness of God — not an exaggerated view of His wrath — leads us to repentance (Romans 2:4). God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 18:32). How much less would He be pleased to give them everlasting life in torment!

To sum up the matter, yes, God will punish the wicked with destruction. But no, He will not torment them for eternity.

When a friend or loved one dies, we grieve. If that person was a faithful Christian, we find comfort in the promise of the gospel: resurrection and eternal life. If, on the other hand, the deceased did not know the Lord Jesus Christ in trusting obedience, we have more cause for sorrow and concern about his eternal fate.

An almost indescribable heaviness must be in the minds and hearts of those who believe that their loved ones who didn’t know the Lord are suffering the torments of eternal hellfire.

Is there any comfort for the surviving spouse, parent, child, or friend who is taught that the one whom they held dear in life already endures the misery and pain of the infernal regions, and that without end?

If the human heart is repulsed by such a gloomy and cruel thought, how much more removed must it be from the mind of a gracious and loving God.

In spite of the utter incongruity of it, many Christians believe that a person who dies without Jesus Christ goes to hell at the moment of death to suffer eternally in the fire prepared for the Devil and his angels. This drastic doctrine may offer incentive for a few sinners to seek the Lord, but it has probably turned more people away from God and our Lord Jesus Christ than it has attracted.

The real issue about this doctrine is not how it impacts those who hear it, but whether it accurately reflects Holy Scripture. In this tract we will examine verses often used to support the doctrine of an everlasting hell, hopefully showing that they fail to prove it. When someone dies without Christ, there may be some consolation in knowing that his punishment, according to Scripture, lasts only a short time and then ends in eternal nothingness. Bible verses that support this thought will be listed below.

We offer for your consideration three biblical reasons why the fate of sinners will not involve endless agony in a burning hell.

1. The doctrine of eternal torment is incompatible with the overwhelming testimony of Scripture that God is love!

The few Bible texts that suggest the doctrine of eternal torment may be understood in ways that do not oppose the idea of a loving God.

Many Bible texts picture the fate of the wicked and unbelieving as having its end in total destruction and eternal death.


A Loving God

The dark doctrine of eternal torment stands in stark contrast to the fuller and brighter portrait of God painted in the Bible. Let us gaze with gratitude at the One that Scripture repeatedly describes in the noblest of terms:

But you, O Lord, are a God full of compassion, and gracious, longsuffering and abundant in mercy and truth (Psalm 86:15; see also Exodus 34:6, 7);

The Lord is very compassionate and merciful (James 5:11);
God is love (1 John 4:8, 16); and

“His mercy endures forever” (Psalm 136; all twenty-six verses of this psalm end with the same joyous declaration that the mercy of God, not His anger, never ends!)

Many more plain statements of Scripture picture God as merciful, loving, kind, good, gentle, and just. These, in fact, are among His primary attributes. God loves all His creatures, and His holiness insures that He will do what is equitable and right by them, even in the exercise of His wrath by punishment.

God’s nature of love, mercy, and justice does not nullify His promise of punishment for sin. “Though they join forces, the wicked will not go unpunished” (Proverbs 11:21). Romans 6:23 says, “The wages of sin is death.” The final judgment of sinners will result in their death and destruction. Indeed, it may be seen as an expression of love that He will give the wicked the freedom from God they have always wanted. He will not forever allow the evildoer to continue wreaking havoc among His redeemed creatures or in His restored creation.

The doctrine of eternal torment assigns to God attitudes and actions that can never truly be described as loving, merciful, or just. It says that our gracious, long-suffering God has planned the horrific, anguished suffering of human beings for ages without end.

To plan the perpetual suffering of others is not love. To determine endless suffering when it achieves no redemptive purpose is not mercy. To condemn any person to infinite punishment for finite sins is not justice.

Considering the big picture of God in Scripture, it is illogical and impossible to endorse the idea of eternal torment for anyone. Beyond this, it is unnecessary to do so from any single Bible text. Those passages often quoted to support the teaching of an eternal hell may easily be understood in a different sense.



Better Explanations

A few Bible verses are often given by proponents of eternal torment to support their convictions. But is the meaning suggested for these verses the proper one? The alternate interpretations offered here harmonize with God’s essential character of mercy and justice without violating the context or the essence of these passages.

• The first three Gospels speak of everlasting fire and punishment, of a fire that is not quenched:

He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire (Matthew 3:12; Luke 3:17)

Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire . . . these will go away into everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:41, 46).

A quick reading of these texts may seem to support the traditional view of hell as a place of eternal torment, but please note: The fire that will destroy the wicked may be described as “everlasting” and “unquenchable” simply because it cannot be extinguished. That is, it will not cease to burn until its work of death and destruction is complete.

An unquenchable fire may burn itself out. Jeremiah 17:27 foretells an unquenchable fire that would burn in the gates of Jerusalem during his day. It burned only a short while, until its work was done. In the same sense, the now non-existent fires of Sodom and Gomorrah are described as “eternal fires” in Jude 7.

The everlastingness of the punishment accurately describes the fire’s effect, not its duration. The final punishment for sin is death from which there is no return. Thus, the punishment is everlasting, but the punishing is not. “‘And the day which is coming shall burn them up,’ says the Lord of hosts, . . . ‘That will leave them neither root nor branch. . . . You shall trample the wicked, for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet’” (Malachi 4:1, 3).

None of these verses provides compelling evidence that sinners will be tormented for eternity.

• In Mark 9:43-48 Jesus refers to a fire that is not quenched. This passage differs from the ones above in that the word hell is also used. For example, “It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched — where ‘Their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’” This is repeated twice more in the same text. How are we to understand such a vivid warning and strange expression?

The Bible offers no support for the idea that the “worm” of this text refers to human consciousness or the human soul. Further, the Greek word for hell in this passage, and others in the New Testament, is gehenna. It refers directly to the Jerusalem city dump in Bible times, a place where the ever-smoldering flames and the ever-present worms eventually destroyed or consumed everything cast into it.

Jesus’ remarks here are taken from Isaiah 66:24: “They shall go forth and look upon the corpses of the men who have transgressed against Me. For their worm does not die, and their fire is not quenched. They shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.” The bodies of the condemned were cast into the city dump where they were completely destroyed by fire, decomposition, and worms.

In summary, Jesus uses Old Testament imagery to warn those who persist in sin, and He adds the analogy of gehenna — the city garbage pit where nothing lives but fire and worms — to describe the final destruction of the wicked.

• Another text often cited to support an everlasting, burning hell is the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). Taken literally, the story would teach that

Abraham’s bosom is the home of the righteous (v. 22)

The wicked dead suffer burning torment (vv. 23, 24)

Souls in torment can see the righteous in their eternal dwelling (v. 23)

Communication occurs between Abraham and those in the burning fire (vv. 24-31)
Considering the symbolic nature of at least three of these elements, this parable was obviously not intended to be read literally. What then is its meaning?

In context, Jesus tells the story because the Pharisees ridiculed Him and His teaching that man cannot serve both God and money (vv. 13, 14). Jesus’ judgment of their attitude is “You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts” (v. 15). He then relates the parable to illustrate their hypocrisy and the reality of the reversal of fortune that will someday come between those who trust in riches and those who trust only in God.

Jesus’ ministry constantly fulfilled “Moses and the prophets,” yet the Pharisees jeopardized their future by ignoring His words and still rejected Him after His death and resurrection. The folly of their refusal is one important lesson of the parable, not a way of describing hell and heaven within sight of each other, with the lost and the redeemed conversing.

• The book of Revelation contains language some use to press the idea of never-ending suffering for the wicked. Please note who will experience what in these verses.

One passage says of anyone who worships the beast “He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image . . .” (14:10b, 11). Another passage says of the Devil, the beast, and the false prophet “They will be tormented day and night forever and ever” (20:10b).

Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God by Jonathan Edwards

My rating: 2 of 5 stars

There is much truth in this sermon. God’s wrath is real and is leveled against evil and evil-doers.

Edwards takes John 8:23 out of context and changes the meaning. He was trying to make the point that people are sinful, therefore we are not only destined to Hell but are also “from Hell” in a sense and that we belong there.

But he uses a verse where Jesus is saying He is from Heaven and the Jews are not, and that is why they ought to listen to Him but don’t.

Do we belong in Hell? What about “the fire prepared for the Devil and his angels”? Hell was not made for man. Man, made in the Imago Dei (Image of God), was made “to glorify God and enjoy Him for ever” (Westminster Shorter Catechism). But Edwards says, “The devil is waiting for them.” This is a mistake! The devil is not sovereign over anything, let alone Hell. It is like a poor version of Dante’s Inferno.

The problem with this sermon is that there is no gospel to it. It is right in all its details of sin and wickedness and Hell, but it does not offer the solution. Christ is mentioned but not preached. “Preach Christ crucified!” All we are told are repetitions of black clouds over our heads, but tell us what to do! Tell us how to be saved! What must I do to be saved? But Edwards speaks of a God who heartlessly laughs and mocks the unsaved– and while the laughter of God in the face of evildoers’ attempts against Him scripturally has its place, it is not in the way Edwards represents. “I have no pleasure that the wicked should perish,” God says. “For God so loved,” not hated, “the world.” God’s hate is one of justice, not of uncontrolled rage and bloodshed. God’s hate is of sin, sinfulness and the obstinate wicked, but that does not nullify His love for the sinner.

That’s my beef with it. I can’t reconcile this sermon with the shepherd seeking the one lost sheep out of a hundred or Jesus looking on the crowds with compassion and saying, “How often I wanted to gather you under my wing!” Where is God’s love offered out? God’s wrath is real, but so is His love. His mercy is everlasting, and it must be preached. Edwards never tells us how to flee to Christ. He does not tell us to have faith, to repent. He does not tell us where to go from here. Any mentions of Christ’s mercy or love are mere footnotes, simply tacked on post-its to a huge billboard of fury.

We are told of all these horrible monstrosities that close in upon us and the only given solution is: “Run.”

But how can I run if I have not been shown the way?

http://declassification./2011/05/19/thoughts-on-sinners-in-the-hands-of-an-angry-god/

logicboy01: I like the way Frosbel is being rebuked and shamed

Oh dear, I have been shamed dear logicboy and sobbing profusely

Anyway let us know when we can initiate another teaming on ISLAM

interesting stuff

Isolation and Separation Imposed on Members

Restrictions are sometimes placed on church members concerning personal friendships. These mind and body control tactics prevent the members from having a close friendship with anyone outside of the denomination. Contact with casual friends and neighbors is acceptable to the point where the member invites the friend or neighbor to the church. Once the friend or neighbor refuses the invitation to attend the church, the member must discourage further contact. This situation is common. The members are initially very friendly, almost to the point being overly aggressive, only to become an iceberg if you won't attend their church.

Church functions are restricted to the denomination. Members are strongly indoctrinated against attending any church function outside of the denomination. A typical example is the woman who refused to join her sister at a Christmas Eve service while visiting for the holiday simply because it was in a church of a different denomination.

In some denominations, children who are engaged in sports are forbidden to participate when the event is held at the church of another denomination.

Some denominations will not allow their Pastor to attend an interdenominational conference even though all of those in attendance are considered to be Christians. These denominations generally believe nobody is saved outside of their denomination whether they will openly admit it or not.

A coercive technique used in bondage churches is to question the salvation of anyone who disagrees with anything said or done by the pastor. People who leave the church because they get sick and tired of the bondage techniques are held up as an example.

The pastor will quote 1 John 2:19 saying,

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but [they] [went] [out] that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us."

The pastor means they must be lost otherwise they would not have left the church. In reality the people may have left because the Holy Spirit revealed to them that the bondage techniques show that pastor was lost. Bondage, coercion, and false teaching are inconsistent with being regenerated by the filling with the Holy Spirit.


By a member of the body of Christ

Mandatory Attendance by the Church
Some Christian denominations impose coercive attendance requirements on members. Members are expected to attend every time the church doors are open. Services are held on Sunday morning, Sunday evening, midweek service, special meetings, evangelistic outreaches, and "revival" meetings. These commitments become so numerous that members are doing some church function every day of the week. The brainwashing technique used here is to keep the members swamped with church activities so they cannot participate in any activity outside the church. The mood in the church office almost becomes paranoia. The church officials are afraid the members will learn something about the Bible from outside the his church. Reading this web page would be strictly forbidden in most churches.

Church members are judged by their attendance record. The Pastor uses one of the many intimidation technique by saying that "faithful members are to be in their places." Little jabbing comments are made to those who miss a service. The Pastor usually has several close members who secretly make a record of the those in attendance. These secret attendance police are assigned a section of the pews and can quickly record those in attendance. Most members get into the habit of sitting in the same area or same seat so the missing member is quickly identified. He is reminded of his absence later with the question, "Where were you last service?"

These techniques are common in cults and false religions but should never be the practice in the Christian church. Attendance at church functions should be based on the free-will desire to participate in a function that blesses those in attendance. Intimidation is a serious violation of Christian doctrine.

Mandatory attendance also applies to the member while on vacation. The member is told to "be faithful in your absence." The member is expected to attend the service at the nearest church within his denomination while on vacation. The implication here is that the member cannot worship God unless he is in a church service. The denomination is also fearful of not receiving as much money during the summer vacation months.

Sometimes preachers, elders and other concerned Christians spend too much time on those who do not appreciate the gospel. We are often hesitant to "give up" on someone whom we believe to be a good prospect for the gospel. However, when our Lord sent out the apostles on the limited commission He said, "And whoever will not receive you nor hear you, when you depart from there, shake off the dust under your feet as a testimony against them" (Mark 6:11).

In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus said, "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces" (Matt. 7:6).

"The Christian must not be censoriously judicial, but he should be discriminatingly judicious. He must know dogs and swine when he sees them, and must not treat them as priests and kings, the fit objects for the bestowal of holy food and goodly ornaments. Dogs and swine were unclean animals. The former were usually undomesticated and were often fierce. In the East they are still the self-appointed scavengers of the street. The latter were undomesticated among the Jews, and hence are spoken of as wild and liable to attack man. Meats connected with the sacrificial service of the altar were holy. Even unclean men were not permitted to eat of them, much less unclean brutes. What was left after the priests and clean persons had eaten was to be burned with fire (Lev. vi. 24-30; vii. 15-21). To give holy things to dogs was to profane them. We are here forbidden, then, to use any religious office, work or ordinance, in such a manner as to degrade or profane it. Saloons ought not to be opened with prayer, nor ought adulterous marriages to be performed by a man of God. To give pearls to swine is to press the claims of the gospel upon those who despise it until they persecute you for annoying them with it. When such men are known they are to be avoided. Jesus acted on this principle in refusing to answer the Pharisees, and the apostles did the same thing in turning to the Gentiles when their Jewish hearers would begin to contradict and blaspheme." (J. W. McGarvey, The Fourfold Gospel, pp. 263, 264).

How can we tell when it is time to "give up" on someone and turn to other fields? It should be after we have taught, prayed and exercised all longsuffering -- but remember that even the longsuffering of God has limits (cf. 1 Pet. 3:20).

We need to realize that, despite our best efforts, many people will perish "because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved" (2 Thes. 2:10). Some people simply prefer their own way to the Lord's (Matt. 15:8-15). Other people will simply close their eyes to the truth (Matt. 13:15). Some Christians will fall away and it will be impossible for us to "renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame" (Heb. 6:6).

The kingdom of God is precious indeed -- our Lord compared it to a treasure hidden in a field and a pearl of great price (Matt. 13:44-46). The Jews in Antioch of Pisidia rejected the gospel and judged themselves "unworthy of everlasting life" -- so Paul turned to the Gentiles (Acts 13:47). When people ask for us to leave them alone we need to respect their wishes and move on. I believe that we degrade the gospel when we take the very best that we have and lay it at the feet of swine!

http://www.padfield.com/1998/pearls.html

TTHE declaration that “God created man in His own image, “ is frequently regarded and urged as an intimation that man was created immortal. The argument stands thus: God is immortal; man was made in the image of God, therefore man is immortal. The syllogism, however, proves too much, for it assumes that, because man was made in the image or likeness of God, man must be like God in every respect; else why select immortality from among the attributes of Deity! God is from everlasting, He is Almighty, Unchangeable, Infallible, &c. Shall we, therefore, reason that, because man was made “in the image of God, he must be like God in these qualities! If not, why select immortality as the point of resemblance! There is nothing in the context pointing out this kind of resemblance, and we would naturally expect that the point or points of resemblance would be of a palpable kind. The connection in which the words stand would lead us to fix on some characteristic distinguishing man from the other creatures, and in which he bears some resemblance to God. The resemblance, whatever it is, can only be so in kind, not in degree.

The most obvious resemblance in kind between man and his Maker is in his mental and moral qualities. These separate him by a wide and impassable gulf from all the other animal tribes. Some creatures approach very near him in structure; but in the formation and development of his brain, and consequent moral and intellectual powers, he stands far apart from and above all the rest, and that these moral and intellectual qualities, in an incomparable degree, belong to God, will not be disputed. But Adam was not only made superior in organization to the other animals; he was also, by divine appointment, their lord; and it is in connection with the intimation of this fact that his being made in the likeness of God is mentioned. Thus we read: “And God said, Let us make man in our own image, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth. “

Endowed by his Maker with powers distinguishing him from all other earthly beings, and elevating him far above them, and fitted to control and subdue them, man was divinely constituted the lord of the world. Having the right of dominion over earth, and all upon it, he thus far resembled God-the Ruler of all. That man is not, by creation, an immortal being is clear from the penalty threatened him for disobedience. “The Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of. Eden, to dress it and to keep it; and the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day thou eatest of it thou shalt surely die. “-Gen. ii. 15-17. The penalty threatened was death. But an immortal being cannot die. This is so self-evident, that those who maintain that man is, by nature, immortal, in order to make the penalty threatened square with that idea, interpret death to mean endless life in misery!

It meant, say the divines

-1st. Death temporal; that is, the death of the body till the resurrection, and the separate existence of the soul during that time “in an intermediate state of misery and shivering anticipation of worse. “

2nd. Death spiritual or deadness of feeling toward God, associated with active hostility to His authority, and intense desires towards all that is evil.

3rd. Death eternal or eternal life, to the reunitedsoul and body, in most excruciating torments, to all eternity.

All this was threatened to Adam by the words, “Thou shalt surely die I “ How strange! Surely had God meant to punish Adam so severely, He would have pronounced the doom in plain, distinct terms, or added the necessary explanation? But we have no record of any explanation being given; and as we cannot imagine that Adam was skilled in metaphysics and systematic divinity, we cannot suppose him to have understood “death “ to mean all that. It was death that was threatened to the living soul, Adam. “Thou “-not thy body merely- “ thou shalt surely die, “-cease to be a living soul. That which sinned was to die. And so we find it expressed in the sentence passed upon Adam after his sin: “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread until thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. “ – Gen.iii. 19. Is it possible for language to express more unambiguously and emphatically, that, because he had sinned, Adam – the man formed out of the dust of the ground, and into whose nostrils God had breathed the breath of life-was doomed to die-to be resolved into the original elements whence he came! Verily, no. At the very morning of human history, we see verified the divine fiat- “ The wages of sin is death. “

In confirmation of the foregoing statement of man’s original nature and penal condition, we point to the fact of his banishment from the tree of life, and the reason assigned for that enactment. Man was driven out of Eden “ lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever, “-language quite meaningless if Adam was an immortal being, and could never die, but most expressive in the light of the facts as we have set them forth. Thou shalt die; “dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. “ The tree of life in the midst of the garden, which Adam was appointed to dress and to keep, was endowed with such-life-preserving qualities, that it prevented dissolution, and imparted immortality to those who partook of its wonderful fruit. Had man stood the trial to which he was subjected, this tree of life would have made him immortal; but we know how he fell, and was driven beyond its reach, to toil and moil in suffering, sorrow, and decay, till life’s brittle cord snapped asunder, and’ he returned to dust!

Ere we leave the sad and mournfully suggestive scene, let us notice the mercy of God tempering His judgments. He drove out the man, lest he should eat of the tree of Iife, and live forever. God’s will is against the immortalizing of sin and sinners. He will put an end to both; only the righteous shall live forever. And surely it is in mercy to the sinner himself. Eternal life in sin, could the Holy One permit it, would be an awful fate to the sinner. Jehovah [sic] at once stamps sin with His reprobation, and shows pity to the incorrigible transgressor by consigning him to utter hopeless death.

In the record of man’s original creation, constitution, and position in the world, we have seen that he was not immortal, but simply endowed with life, and with the means of prolonging it everlastingly, placed within his reach, on certain specified conditions; that he was, in short, a candidate for immortality. In this candidature he failed he lost the prize, and was banished from his state of primeval innocence and bliss under the doom of impending death. Such being the case, his offspring cannot be possessed of immortality by natural constitution. “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return, “ was the fate appointed by God for the fallen father of our race -a fate which has descended to his children; for though to some the term of life may be comparatively prolonged, sooner or later the same result comes alike to all. “All are of the dust, all turn to dust again. “ “The dust shall return to the earth, as it was, and the spirit (or breath of life) unto God who gave it. “-Eccl. iii. 20; xii. 7. “Man dieth and wasteth away; yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he! As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up; so man lieth down, and riseth not; till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep. “-Job xiv. 10-12. “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. “-Psalm cxlvi. 3-4.

Not only is mankind without immortality by nature; but also, in consequence of personal transgression, under sentence of death; for “ The wages of sin is death. “-Rom. vi. 23. “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. “-Ezek. xviii. 4. That the death which is the wages of sin is real death, and not eternal life in misery, we shall afterwards have occasion to demonstrate; but we hasten to a happier side of the picture -

That the Lord was sent into the world, that sinners, by believing in Him, might obtain life everlasting, is so plainly taught both by the Lord and His Apostles, that it is hard to conceive how any attentive reader of the Bible can believe the opposite. Let us consider a few of the testimonies. “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him might not perish, but have everlasting life. “-John iii. 16. The teaching of this and kindred passages is commonly put aside by the remark, that the term “life “ in these passages, simply means “happiness. “ That those who obtain everlasting life shall be everlastingly happy, is true; but it is a truth which is not expressed in the term “ life, “ for we know that “ misery “ as well as “happiness “ is commonly associated with life, and that it is as lawful to speak of a miserable life as of a happy one. According to the common teaching, all men live forever; and it is simply because of this foregone conclusion, that “life “ is interpreted to mean “happiness. “ Happiness and life are not synonymous terms, and had the Lord meant to express the idea of happiness simply, he would have used the proper term.


There is nothing in the context forbidding us to understand the terms “perish “ and “everlasting life “ in their ordinary acceptation; yea, rather, we should say, the context demands that these terms be understood to have their common and primary meaning (see verses 14-15). “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. “ The analogy or comparison employed clearly establishes that the sense we are contending for is the true one. A reference to Num, xxi. 4-9 will show this: “The Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. “ -v. 6. “And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole: and it came to pass, if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived. “-v. 9. The Israelites were perishing because of sin; to save them from dying, a serpent of brass, by the command of Jehovah, is elevated on a pole, and the appointment made, that whosoever of the dying Israelites looked at the brazen serpent, should live. And “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.” The comparison is so simple and expressive, that he who runs may read it.

And so is that other comparison which Jesus applies to himself in John vi. 51, “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread he shall live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” The parties to whom our Lord thus addressed Himself had desired from Him some miraculous display of power, as evidence that He was sent by God; and they supported their demand by referring to the circumstance that their fathers had been miraculously fed in the wilderness by the hand of Moses. “Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. “ Jesus replied by asserting that God had given them a blessing of far superior value, and that He Himself was that gift. “My Father giveth you the true bread from heaven; I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever. “

Jesus, in representing Himself as “bread”, plainly intimates that one grand end of His mission was to give life. The only use of bread is to sustain life; and the only proper mark of analogy between Christ and the bread consists in His being the source of life to all who believe on Him. The property of bread is not to communicate happiness; for how many at this hour have abundance of bread, and continue unhappy!

That it is as the Giver of life that Jesus represents Himself as bread, is still further evident from His language in verse 49-50: “Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. “Where is the antithesis, on the supposition that the Lord meant, your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof and not be unhappy, or not live in misery forever?

The true antithesis is this. The manna which fell in the desert only sustained life for a while; it did not prevent their fathers from dying; but the bread which God had now sent down to them gave everlasting being. God had sent it that a man might eat of it and not die.

The sense in which the Lord used the terms “life“ and “death”, as consequences of fidelity or infidelity to Himself, is clearly defined in His language recorded in Matt. xvi. 25-26: Whosoever will save his life shall lose it, and whosoever will lose his life for My sake shall find it. For what is a man profited if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? “We are at no loss to understand what sort of life it is which the unfaithful servant seeks to save. It is the same kind of life which he shall lose. No one hesitates about the kind of life which the faithful martyr loses for Christ’s sake. Well, the Lord affirms that he who loses his life for His sake shall find it-surely that life which he lost.

It is of importance to notice that the word rendered “soul“ twice in verse 26, is the identical Greek word twice translated “life“ in verse 25; and should have been rendered “life“ in these four occurrences. “The Greeks,” writes the late Dean of Canterbury, “in their wonderfully accurate language, expressed by the same term (psuche) the soul of man which he has to save, and the life of the reptile which man crushes under his foot. And it would have been immensely to our profit if we had done the same. For then we should have understood what very few now do understand -the true nature, the true place, of this our intellectual and emotional being. We should then have read in our Bibles not only: “Whoever will save his life shall lose it, and whosoever shall lose his life for My sake shall find it,“ but also-for the same word is used: “For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own life? or what shall a man give in exchange for his life?” For it is the life of man which carries his practical will, with all those motions of intellect and feeling which sets it at work; it is the life which is mysteriously bound up with the body, which is reft from it at death; it is this life, which, if a man spend upon God and upon good, he shall save to life eternal.” [Good Words, January, 186.]

That the Lord Jesus Christ came to give “life” in its primary sense, is also taught in the beautiful language of John x. 10-18: “The thief cometh not but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd giveth His life for the sheep. “I lay down My life for the sheep. No man taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. “Did Jesus lay down His spiritual life, or did He lay down mere happiness! Nay, it was His own “ life “ He laid down and took up again; and He likens Himself to a shepherd who, to save his sheep, lays down his own life; unlike the hireling, who, to save His life, flies in time of danger, and allows the wolves to devour the flock. If such language does not express the idea, that “life” in its ordinary sense, is the boon which Jesus laid down His own life to confer upon His own flock, then it is impossible to find language to express that idea.

The beauty and force of the comparison would appear all the more lively to a pastoral people in the East, where the attachment betwixt a shepherd and his flock seems much stronger than in our Western clime. “Thy servant,” said the son of Jesse to King Saul- “ thy servant kept his father’s sheep, and there came a lion and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock; and I went after him, and smote him, and slew him. The Lord that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, He will deliver me out of the hand of this Philistine.”-l Sam, xvii. 34-37. David’s love for this lamb of his little flock was great indeed; but how unspeakably greater is the love of Christ for us sinners, since He not only risked His life, but “ laid it down. “ He threw Himself into the lion’s mouth that His sheep might escape. He “poured out His soul unto death,” “that whosoever believeth in Him might not perish, but have everlasting life.” Herein indeed is love! Contemplate it calmly and gratefully, till tears of joy and adoration flow from your eyes. To save you from the destiny of the brute, and make you a partaker of His own eternal Iife, the blessed God sent His only begotten Son into the world, to live a mortal’s life and die a mortal’s death. He, with the benignity of God, gave up freely not happiness alone, but life itself, that you, through faith in Him, the risen and immortal Christ, might, at His appearing, enter into life that knows no end, no sinning, and no sorrow!

O Lamb of God! was ever love like Thine.

D Annointed: A big question.
Actually, God don’t condemn anyone to anywhere. Everyone writes their own ticket. Everyone gets on their own train to wherever they end up. God gives people opportunities to make choices. People choose where they want to go by the choices they make in their lives. What is disturbing is that people make the wrong choices knowing when they make the choice, that choice is wrong and then they think God will be understanding and let them slide by and alter their destination. Each of us carves our future in stone that cannot be erased except by repentance and coming to Christ for forgiveness. All the mistakes, all the wrongs, all the decisions made with a sinful heart can be erased when people come to the Cross and understand who Christ was and is and then they must repent and turn away from their sinful life.

Totally Agree !!

Life is short n we shouldnt buy to the Devils lie that when we live it to the fullest,that is the end of it.Our souls will never die and will burn in eternal Hell fire if one is unrepentant of his or her sin before death.

You are taking scripture out of context, The SOUL that sins will die . so says the Lord.


Ezekiel 18:4 - Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Ezekiel 18:20 - The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Proverbs 8:36 - But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.

James 5:20 - Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.


But we agree that at the end of the age all sinners will be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone for everlasting destruction.

Matthew 3:12 - Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

Luke 3:17 - Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.

Matthew 13:41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.
Matthew 13:42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Pastor Kun: And just a reminder to those adding to scripture that Cain's descendants were cursed; Enoch who the bible recorded as being very close to God was cain's direct son. So all these hogwash about the "phrase daughters of men" refering to cain's descendants is at best the figment of the imagination of it's promoters.

No Pastor , There are 2 Enochs , one from Seth which is the good seed and the other from Cain. Please read scripture below. Thanks.



17 [size=13pt]And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.[/size]

18 And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.

19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.

20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.

21 And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ........

25 ....... And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

26 [size=13pt]And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos:[/size] then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.


[size=15pt]Remember before Seth was born, no man called upon the name of the Lord.[/size]


Seth produced good seed , Cain produced bad, simples !

Ptolomeus: I think the thread title is offensive to Christians, and hardly find something else other than that:offend.
I really doubt that there is interest in discussing this topic.
I've said many times, a very bad argument, offend or disparage others, and to call others of "demonic", does not make us better, however.

My greatest respect.

I agree, it was an article I posted without changing the heading.

Will do so when I am able to login with my other fr0sbel ID.

Thanks.

Goshen360: Gen. 6:2-4: “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also afterward, 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.”

The question of the mention of sons of God in Gen. 6 has always provoked much controversy. Did Angels actually co-habitat with humans, or were they the godly descendant's of Seth that took women from the ungodly line of Cain.

It has been the opinion of the majority of Rabbis that this event had actually occurred, and that they were indeed angels. Ancient rabbinical sources, and the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ all upheld this view. The early church agreed with this view almost to the end of the fourth century. ( Justin, Cyprian, Athenagoras, Eusebius, also Josephus, Philo, and Judeaus accepted this traditional view. While we should not let tradition be the final say in doctrinal matters we can learn from their statements why they considered this view. What changed this view is only speculated but it very well could have been from an anti supernatural out look.

Today there are many conservative scholars that hold to the view of actual angels. M. R. DeHaan, C. H. McIntosh, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, F. Delitzsch, A. C. Gaebelein, A. W.Pink, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Henry Morris, Chuck Smith. While we don't interpret the Bible because of their view, it is good to read why they have come to these conclusions.

The Hebrew word for "sons of God" is Bene elohim. This term for angels occurs four times in the Old Testament in the Septuagint version (the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures ) It's meaning is always used as angels of God, never of man. Most scholars believe this event describes a union between fallen angels who cohabited with human females. This unnatural occurrence of combining two different species resulted in a offspring of what is called 'giants' in the King James/N K J version and "Nephilim" in the New American Standard, and the English translation of the Jewish Masoretic text.

No Brother.

Who are these Men ? There were many so called church fathers and recent pastors I respected , but after due diligence in my research found that many of them did not believe the bible in it's entirety.

I know ONLY of Christ and what his word says.

Besides I cannot take the explanation of Rabbis who could not decipher the scripture to know that the Messiah was coming to explain this subject.

Earlier, and using the strong s dictionary , I quoted and explained what the Hebrew word meant, which is anything from Sons as in Humans to Angels.

But in the context of quotation, the Sons of God saw that the women were beautiful , they went into anyone of them they chose and produced a Giant and wicked offspring.

Again , let me make it clear, God will never , has never , and it has never occurred to him, to create a situation where angels and humans could mate.

Why is it not happening today at least once, what will the offspring look like, what where their names.

Please let us now wrest scripture , let us take the bible at face value.

God bless.

Romans 2:7 - To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

1 Corinthians 15:53 - For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

1 Corinthians 15:54 - So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

1 Timothy 1:17 - Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

1 Timothy 6:16 - Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

2 Timothy 1:10 - But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality [/b]to light through the gospel:


From the verses above, this is proof that ONLY those who are born again will ONE DAY experience immortality. This is not one of our attributes as beings today.

So therefore the damned will remain Mortal, which means they are capable of experiencing death , the second death.

The Soul that sinneth shall die, not live !!

The wages of sin for the mortal soul is death !!!

Why do people keep erroneously insisting , contrary to scripture that even the souls of the damned will be immortalised forever in the lake of fire ?

At the moment ONLY GOD has immortality.

In the lake of fire all mortal unrepentant and damned souls will be devoured by the fire of God and experience the second death which is total destruction from the presence of the Lord.

"They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power" - [b]2 Thessalonians 1:9

TheShopKeeper: Let us all be aware that this text in Genesis is brief and not too easy to understand.
We should also understand it will be difficult to build an elaborate theology out of this and other similar fragments of biblical information. If we needed this information, God would have provided it in a more clear and complete form.

'sons of God' this phrase although most often used for angelic beings rarely refers to human beings. There has been great controversy over the identification of this phrase. However there have been three major interpretations:

1. it referes to the godly line of Seth (Genesis 5)
2. it refers to a group of angelic beings
3. it refers to the kings or tyrants of Cain's line (Genesis 4)

Furthermore, this phrase is used overwhelmingly in the Old Testamemt for 'angels' (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Psalm 29:1; 89:6-7; Dan 3:25).

In the Intertestamental book of I Enoch, which was a very popular book among the believers in the New Testamemt period, along with the 'Genesis Apocryhon' from the Dead Sea Scrolls, interpretes 'sons of God' as rebellious angels (I Enoch 12:4; 19:1; 21:1-10). I Enoch even asserts that Noah's flood came to destroy the angelic/human union which was hostile towards God and His plan for creation.

Above all we should know that it will be difficult to relate our understanding and level of theology with God's divine theology.

All in all, great topic from the poster and good level of understanding from everyone.

Sons of God

The descendants of Seth were called by the name of the Lord (Genesis 4:25,26). This is not true in reference to the descendants of Cain. The servants of God in all ages have been called the sons of God (Job 1:6; Romans 8:14; 1 John 3:2). The character of Seth's descendants proves that they were the sons of God (Genesis 5:3-29; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 7:1). The character of Cain's descendants proves that they were not the sons of God, for Cain Himself was a murderer, a fugitive, and vagabond (Genesis 4:8-14), and his descendants were polygamists and murderers (Genesis 4:17-23)- Source / Condensed Biblical Cyclopedia

The scripture is plain for those who are humble and led by the Spirit of God.

God is not the author of confusion.

In our pride to understand 'twisted theology' we have wandered away from the truth.

I recently came across a quote from a bestselling children’s author who based her bestseller on her understanding of a passage in Genesis. Author Lauren Kate wrote the book Fallen about an angel who is romantically attracted to and pursues a relationship with a human teenager. In the January 11, 2010 issue of Publisher’s Weekly (PW) on p. 13, Kate claims, “The idea for the book came from a line I read in Genesis about a group of angels who were effectively kicked out of heaven because they lusted after mortal women. I became curious about what the experience might be of a teenage mortal who suddenly became the object of an angel’s affection.”

The passage Lauren Kate refers to is Genesis 6:1-6, but from her quote to PW it is obvious she did not read the passage for herself and probably just heard about it from someone. The scripture never talks about anyone being kicked out of heaven for their lust. Here’s what the passage says:

1And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

3And 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.

4There 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.

5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. [Genesis 6]

It has often been claimed that the “sons of God” in this passage refers to fallen angels and that the giants (often called Nephilim) who walked the Earth in ancient times were the offspring of the angels and the women. Those who hold to the belief that angels mated with humans use the argument that the phrase “sons of God” only refers to angels in the Old Testament (OT), using the book of Job as their proof–

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. [Job 1:6]

Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. [Job 2:1]

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. …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? [Job 38:4, 6-7]

They are correct that the phrase “sons of God” is talking about angels in Job, but a closer examination of the scriptures shows that Genesis 6 is NOT talking about angels. It is referring to humans and this truth can be deducted from the principles and context of what the Bible teaches. I will highlight a few points from the Bible as proof.

Point 1: Sons of God are humans who follow God. This is shown in both the OT and the New Testament (NT). In the OT, God gives the message to Pharaoh through Moses that Israel is his son–

And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn. [Exodus 4:22-23]

We also know from the OT that God said Solomon was his son–

I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: [2 Samuel 7:14]

When we look at the NT, we are plainly told that believers are the sons of God–

But as many as received him [Jesus Christ], to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: [John 1:12]

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. [Romans 8:14]

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God… [1 John 3:1]

Now if we go back to Genesis 4, it establishes the context for chapters 5 and 6. At the end of Genesis 4, we are shown that two families of men are emerging in the Earth–Cain’s descendants and Seth’s descendants. It was Seth’s descendants who “call upon the name of the LORD,” [Genesis 4:26]. In other words, Seth’s descendants were those who worshiped God and their lineage is highlighted in Genesis 5. Since they worshiped God, they were considered sons of God and were the sons of God in Genesis 6. It was Cain’s descendants and other unbelievers who were the “daughters of men.”

Point 2: Fallen angels are never called sons of God. Satan, who is the fallen angel Lucifer (see Isaiah 14:12-15, Ezekiel 28:12-17), first appears in the garden of Eden in Genesis 3. We must also take into account that Satan, according to Revelation 12:4, convinced 1/3 of the angels in heaven to follow him in his rebellion against God as he started a war in heaven. Revelation 12 also tells us that Satan lost the war and was kicked out of heaven with his angels. It was at this point that

…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, [2 Peter 2:4] AND

…the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. [Jude 6]

Since these angels “kept not their first estate,” they lost all the privileges and benefits they had in heaven, including the right to be called the “sons of God.” Because Satan is present in Genesis 3, we know he has already been kicked out of heaven with his angels. So by the time Genesis 6 comes around, neither Satan nor his angels would have been referred to as the “sons of God.”

Point 3: God did not create angels with the ability to procreate with each other or with humans. God, who knew from the beginning that he would be betrayed, established at the creation of the angels that angels in heaven would neither marry nor be given in marriage (see Mark 12:25). He created them without this capability so that even when the fallen angels rebelled, nothing they could do would ever change this fact. This is why the fallen angels who were not yet placed in the chains of darkness in hell, and who roam the Earth freely, can only go so far as to possess unbelievers. If the immortal fallen angels could procreate, they would not waste their time possessing people since procreation would be a more direct route of affecting and infecting humanity for their evil purposes. Even when they possess unbelievers, their possession cannot affect the reproductive cells of the man or woman they possess so that they can spawn children. This is also why unbelievers in the Bible who are called “children of the devil” are only considered his children in the spiritual sense and not in the physical sense.

Point 4: God only complained about mankind in Genesis 6. The Lord makes several statements in Genesis 6 that prove he is upset with humans, not angelic beings. Here is what he says–

3And 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. …

5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. [Genesis 6]

God was clearly angry by what he saw. If fallen angels were actively participating in these events, why would he just focus on punishing men and not the angels who were involved? Throughout scripture we see how God places boundaries on what fallen angels can do and how he rebukes devils when they go too far (e.g. the serpent’s judgment at Eden, the story of Job, Michael’s dispute with Satan over Moses’ body, Jesus casting out devils, Gabriel and Michael’s fight with the Prince of Persia to get to Daniel), so if they were involved here, why is it that there is no mention of him saying he would punish them? He didn’t mention them because it was only humans involved in this situation.

Conclusion: Based on these four points, I’ve concluded that the big deal made over sons of God marrying and having children by the daughters of men speaks to the ongoing theme throughout scripture that God dislikes spiritually mixed marriages. In other words, God gets upset when his followers marry unbelievers. He did not like it in Genesis 6, or when he established the nation of Israel as his chosen people, or when he called believers in Jesus Christ to be separated from the world. The Lord has never liked such relationships because it is always the spiritual state of the believer that gets the short end of the stick. It is always the worshiper of God who ends up severely compromising their relationship with Yahweh when they get hitched to unbelievers.

Angels have never mated with humans and have never produced offspring by humans. This is one thing God has never allowed and will never allow.

–posted by Harry A. Gaylord–

logicboy01: Erm. Didnt Jesus say that he came for the lost sheep of Isreal?

Yes he did and yet he also said to preach the gospel to the 4 corners of the world.

"And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation." - Mark 16:15

There is a very important parallel between the world system and the “flesh”. Just as the “flesh” must die because it cannot be dressed up or improved or perfected, similarly, the World System is destined by God for destruction. The World System cannot be dressed up or improved or perfected, but must be destroyed and replaced by the New Heaven and New Earth.

Just as mystical religions and psychological techniques are man’s attempts to try to perfect his “flesh” and to conjure up the fruit of the Spirit apart from the Spirit of God, similarly, the religious and political and economic agendas of this world are driven by man’s fleshly attempts to build his Babel and its Tower and create his Heaven on Earth.

Followers of the Lord Jesus Christ are called to trust in Him to make us that New Creation now and give us our resurrected bodies on that Day. We are called to have New Testament priorities for being in this world but not of this world; to rescue people out of this world system rather than trying to reconstruct this world system; to look for that Blessed Hope of Jesus’ return; to have our hope in heaven, not on this earth; and to look to that eternal City and that eternal love relationship with our God.

Note: The Bible teaches that God, Himself, will judge and destroy the world system. Followers of Jesus Christ are called to proclaim the Good News, to do good to all men, to love everyone, and to suffer at the hands of the evil system. Propaganda in the media often portrays crazed religious types who try to do evil to "bring about Armageddon". This misrepresents what the Bible teaches and what Biblical Christians believe.

http://procinwarn.net/new_world_order/world_system_destroyed.htm

Anyone who suggests that scripture does not contain all that we need and we should therefore go to other so called books for reference should be avoided.

Everything we need to know is in the bible , divinely inspired by GOD.

Sons of GOD cannot mean fallen angels, just like John says that he that sinneth is of the devil , so he says that he that is of God sinneth not.

Secondly, if male angels have sexual organs, what about female angels. How biologically possible is it for 2 creatures of totally different make-ups to mate and produce offspring. How sillier can this get ?

So God who formed man and designed his sexual organs for procreation also made sure that he could mate with angels

And how does this edify the body of Christ , how does it result in the salvation of souls , how does it glorify God.

Angels and Men cannot procreate, the same as Man cannot procreate with animals. Angels DO not Marry, they have no Sex organs , period !!!

Or maybe they borrowed sex organs from the Men of renown who lived in those old days