₦airaland Forum

Primesky:
[s]If you do not believe in the Trinity, you do not believe in God. Denial of the trinity is an agenda of Satan to sideline Jesus Christ, and if he succeeds in making you accept that, your connection to God is broken.[/s] Because without Jesus Christ, you cannnot get to God.

Now stop swallowing the lies of watch tower. Jesus Christ was never created, watch tower is the one twisting and lieing about the person of Jesus Christ.

To show you the falsehood of that organization, I will like you tomakint, to answer these questions that Peaceful love and oneJ have refused to answer.

1. When Jesus came in 1914 according to watch tower, where did He enter, and where is He now. What actually did the Bible say about the time and coming of Jesus Christ?.

2. Jesus Christ commanded that we observe the holy communion, so why do you guys make a mockery of it?, are you not then mocking Jesus Christ who gave the command?.

3. How did Jesus Christ rise from the dead, bodily or spiritually?.

4. Is spirit a being or a mere force?. If yes, can mere force talk, teach and reason with people?.

Let me stop here. Please do well to answer the above questions. Thank you.

MuttleyLaff:
The post is 99.9% a lot better now

You see the issue here, is that you want to get away with murder.
As much as I dont want to reply at length, I just needed to address some of the holes in your post.
There are too many to gaping holes to mention, so we have an elongated reply post

Take your time, there isnt any need for rushed up post

I dont want to reply with a long post
so I'll look for your prominent point(s), likely going for two or three of them, if I wont do just one

Maamin, you did yourself in, when you agreed that sun and moon are addressed as sons of God

Now tell, what are the sons of God in Job 38:7, that happens to be one out of the three stars verses, you were waving in Mobilia's face?

I am trying to get you see that the expression "sons of God" isnt exclusively used for animated spiritual or celestial beings

You're not used to hyperboles and metaphors being used in the bible.
The bible does this quite a lot, like in this case,
using a figure of speech that directly refers to one thing (e.g. human beings) by mentioning another (e.g. celestial beings) for rhetorical effect.

I dont want slip into writing a lengthy post and getting information lost in it, so I'll for now, only post this much

MuttleyLaff:
Maamin tidy up the above post.
You turned it into a spaghetti post

MuttleyLaff
Maamin, I recall remarking that your earlier post has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.
Now in this new post, you're digging bigger holes to the already present ones in your previous post
I dont even know where to start from, as you've presented too many holes for me plug

I will try and curtail my post, so not to cause information overload

Now, you earlier asked me, by typing:
"This giants were they physically big?"

At which I replied:
"Yeah now
Of course, they're physically big, as big, if not bigger than the original and previous Nephilims"

"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well,
when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
- Genesis 6:4

"We even saw the Nephilim there—the descendants of Anak that come from the Nephilim!
We seemed like grasshoppers in our own sight, and we must have seemed the same to them!”"
- Numbers 13:33

"Some of these nations are descendants of the Anakim.
You know how tall and strong they are, and you've heard that no one can defeat them in battle."
- Deuteronomy 9:2

As I earlier said, the giants truly were wiped out during the Noah flood.
but guess what again Maamin, the giant (i.e. the Nephilim) gene survived.

The gene survived the flood, to re-produce Nephilims (i.e. still extra size looking beings)
Aside Numbers 13:33 and Deuteronomy 9:2, we know, anyway from Genesis 6:4, that giants were on the earth in those days and afterwards.

So, the gene surviving, is what is responsible for the still extra size looking beings

I know what your next question will be or should be

1/ How, where and when has God impregnated humans?
2/ How do you mean " they are not specifically said not to be able to do so on earth"?

1/ What verses are you basing "Angels that left their original estate and took daughters of men..." on?
2/ Who do you think angels in "angels that left their original state" are?

You should know better, not to repeat the narrative that it is a snake that spoke
You also should know better, that Satan hasnt the power to make smallest animal to speak, talkess making a "snake" sic to speak
Get the facts right.

Please stop doing this, it feels like hearing fingernails on a chalkboard

Bearing in mind, that the sun and moon are called sons of God,
I half expect you to say, the sun and moon took the daughters of men

I hear you Maamin
even though Genesis 1:26-28, identifies categorically, clearly and definitely, who is to procreate
and knowing that angels when dispatched for a mission, dont have sexual designs, when they are sent and/or when they appear

"²The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.
³So the LORD said,
“My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.”
⁴The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well, when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown. "
- Genesis 6:2-4

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

I sure hope you clearly can see this, that, they are no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4
You're asking an invalid question, when you ask of the sins of imaginary celestial beings (i.e. angels)

Watch this. You're like asking a single man "Are you still beating your wife?"
That's an invalid question, as he has no wife,
just as, there were no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4, for you to be asking what where the angels sins.

The question shouldnt be what was the sin of these angels (i.e. celestial beings that are angels or messengers)
but it should have been what were the sins of these human beings

You got caught up in the metaphors used in the bible.
The bible does this quite a lot,
using figure of speech that directly refers to one thing (e.g. human beings) by mentioning another (e.g. celestial beings) for rhetorical effect.

"³Never marry any of them. Never let your daughters marry their sons or your sons marry their daughters."
⁴These people will turn your children away from me to worship other gods.
Then the LORD will get very angry with you and will quickly destroy you.
- Deutronomy 7:3-4

Did I notice you, in there above, capitalised the s, in sons of God?

Mobilia succinctly on Page 1 and I on Page 3, had already told you, their very sins were intermarrying
The giants were already on the earth before and after, produced by the sons and daughters of men
but when the sons of men decided to begin having sex with the daughters of men too,
then the children born turned out to be famous with plenty of brains, as well as not just only brawn.

Read Genesis 6:4-7 slowly but loud out, to see how because of their infamy, wickedness and warrior fixated attitude they met their waterloo.

All fallen angels are demons of some sorts
The word angel, designates messenger, beings whether celestial or human, who is given work to carry messages or do a task

I disagree along with you too

You get possessed by whatever you expose yourself to.
You can be possessed by whatever you permit yourself to come under its influence.
All it takes is, a lapse of judgement, drop in guard, error of judgement, metal lapse, being emotionally vulnerable for possession to take place

Satan has a free pass, and so with it, enters everywhere on earth with it.

Satan doesnt really need a green light before popping head in or around
Satan is already being and still is here on this thread, reading aptly with keen interest

Satan enters you, I and everyone.
It's not just Judas, remember the serpent, remember Peter
(i.e. when and where in Matthew 16:23, Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan!'')

Thank you. I am grateful to you for replying back as best as you can.

I am sorry to be the one bursting your bubble
but your beliefs believing that Genesis was not speaking about human sons of God but is speaking of angelic sons of God are false and wacky.

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

Luke 3:36-38 goes back, to men, before the period of the flood and its happening.
and then verse 38, tracing to the very beginning, says about Adam, that he was the son of God.

The sons of God, are descendants of Adam, but more specifically that of Seth, who had high regard for God.

You are making a fallacy of equivalence.

Paste here each or all these older scriptures in the Torah that refers to sons of God as no other than angelic beings
and I'll prove you wrong, that not all the so called older scriptures in the Torah, refers to sons of God, as angelic beings (i.e. celestial beings)

Written up the way you've done, I have just come across and read a discombobulated post
I am sorry Maamin, but just you have to improve and do better than this

I am not teaching.
We havent, even with all I've put forward, scratched the tip of the iceberg, for it to even to be called teaching

Buff up and start pushing the envelope then

"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil:
whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."
- 1 John 3:10

If Adam is called a son of God in Luke 3:38, what do you think makes Noah?

Why repeat a known and unnecessary fact, huh?
Look at 1 John 3:10 now.
Maamin, anyone practising righteousness, is of God, and by default, is a son of God.

You whats the issue here?
You're too carnally minded, thats why you're clinging on to "angels" (i.e. incubi) taking human females for themselves
Where were and what were the succubi doing?
Painting their feet and finger nails?

1/ Maamin, why is it that its the men, as in human beings, that God singled out to punish for the sins of the daughter of men, committed with your supposedly "angels" with overly-imaginative and unrealistic tendencies?
2/ Why is it, that its man, that God mentions repeatedly, as having concerns over and so the reason He is going to destroy them?
3/ Why isnt there is a single mention of your supposedly randy "angels" being at fault as why He wants to clear up the earth with flood?

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=70994045]Yeah now.
Of course, they're physically big as big if not bigger than the original and previous Nephilims

Human beings are the only ones permitted and mandated to physically impregnate themselves

It is only God that is capable of physically impregnating humans.
Not angels, whether fallen or non fallen, who are 110% incapable of physically impregnating humans.

Show me one incident of fallen angel shape shifting in the bible.
None. Nada, not even one

Mobilia is right, about the effect of all these fantastical/Hollywood-inspired influences

The neatly arranged perfect natural order with its serene and systematic functioning set up was disrupted the instant the fruit was shared.
The world's already is and still is, in disorder.

Be my guest, if you want to live in that fantasy world of fallen angels humping humans

Is that the only scripture for your fallen angel transforming into or appearing in physical human forms and performing fleshly activities?

I can list you lots of, a not fallen angel transforming into or appearing in physical human forms and performing fleshly activities

I will and more, after you have answered the 5 questions listed,
and answer them one after the other the same manner I asked

sons of God is not an exclusive title for angels
It is not used only for angels

The bible, in John 1:12, says:
"But as many as received Him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,
(i.e. she, daughters of God, as well) even to them that believe on his name"

The word received, in John 1:12, refers to "regard",
as in, "regarding someone's power, authority, position etcetera"
adding up to mean, as many as have regard of/to Him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God.

It is not fallen angels but it is the human beings that had high regard for God, that went further down the slippery slope
by lusting after women (i.e. daughters of men) who had no high regard for God

Why dont you drop the bible verse here.
Lets, together, do a peer review of it

Assumption, no concrete bible verse and outright speculation.
This is exactly what you are doing.

On the other what you read there, is reality, miles more and away from being assumption or speculation

ROTBL.
You know why "Noah was still termed as a Man and favour in the eyes of the lord" sic?
It is because he didnt think with his head. He thought with his other, better and correct head

Mobilia:
I know brother. I deeply apologize. I'm not running, it's just that I want to take a little time to go a little further into this subject since this is a discussion.

Just give me a few more days...and I'm gonna be able to focus and try to present this in the best way possible. I'm looking for a specific thing..so please bear with me.
Folks are more than likely, gonna disagree...but I want to at least give an alternate interpretation of (beliefs) that many of us Christians have always held so dear.....
Ultimately we want to have the correct scriptural interpretation..led by the Holy Spirit (although I don't know that we, humans, can ever come to that agreement).


CC: MuttleyLaff
(Are you a theology major? Just wondering..)

Mobilia:
Brother,
Wow, you have said a lot of powerful info here.
I love the "sons" and "daughters" explanation.
I don't really know how to improve on what you said.
But I will come back (thanks for you guys'patience) and have folks look at the definition of a "giant" and how that notion perhaps is confusing the masses to believe that angels and humans "mated" to create that phenomena (which by the way, I disagree with).
I think we may be looking at that word from a fantastical/Hollywood-inspired view..rather than a more practical view.

CC: Maamin

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=70830167]They truly were wiped out during the Noah flood
but guess what Maamin, the Nephilim (i.e. giant) gene survived

Sometimes, we give Satan and especially, like in this case, his angels, way too much credit
Imagine fallen angels having sex with human beings.
Who dash angels monkey banana?
I am sorry that is a bad pun so excuse it

To start with, after their rebellion,
Satan & his fallen angels, lost whatever abilities they might have had, to appear in physical human forms period.

Angels can ONLY appear in physical human forms and perform all permissible fleshly activities, if and/or when representing God.

Anything less than being in that official capacity, automatically renders such beings, ineligible from having rights to appear as a human being
and perform whatever permissible fleshly activities allowed

Also whats important to know, is that, angels, never had, havent any mandate to procreate, that mandate was given to human beings

Maybe I am reading the bible upside down sha
but I know, if anyone exists, that's read in the bible about any fallen angel transforming into or appearing in physical human forms
and performing fleshly activities, that person will gladly point it out, where they've done so

Maamin, you're my guy
but all your proposals and including the quoted immediate above too, unfortunately, have more holes in them than Swiss cheese

1/ Taking into account the Genesis 18:1-2, 20-22 narrative,
why were, the two in bodily form, which the people of Sodom wanted to sleep with, in the first place, at Sodom & Gomorrah for?
2/ If toeing the line of your construct,
why isnt Jesus, "who was once a spirit being but became flesh and blood dwell among us and even tasted death",
not born a Nephilim aka Biblical giant?
3/ What is the expression for the singular difference, between the body, angel(s) had, appearing as men
and the body, Jesus had, before He tasted death?
4/ Now what is the singular similarity between the body of angel(s) appearing as men
and the body of Jesus, "who was once a spirit being but became flesh and blood dwell among us..." after He tasted death?
5/ Are you aware that angels, whether fallen or not, are incapable of having physical and direct intimate sex with humans?

We all are learning
Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.
Learning at this side of eternity, only stops when we die

I've given a bit above,
few more follows below

My take, is that, the original poster's use of Genesis 6:2 to create the questioning "Is Woman Not From God" topic
stemmed from not understanding the verse, just as he rightly admitted he doesnt

If there were "sons of God", there will be "daughters of God"
just as, if there were "daughters of men", there will be "sons of men"

The bible, in John 1:12, says:
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,
(i.e. she, daughters of God, as well) even to them that believe on his name"

Aside John 1:12 above, now the question is, what is it about being "the sons/daughters of God"?
The major & key thing in the "the sons/daughters of God" expresssion, really, is about dependence
Dependence upon what? Dependence upon who? you'll ask
Well, whoever or whatever your dependence is upon, gives away, whether you're part of, or not part of "the sons/daughters of God"

As, any, whether angels or human beings, living in full dependence on God, are called "the sons/daughters of God"
Any, whether angel or human being, fully relying upon God, of own free will and so in glad submission, is called a "son/daughter of God"

It is from youngfocus, the original poster's failure, in understanding Genesis 6:2, that made him ask:
"is the bible trying to say woman are not from God directly"
and to incorrectly misrepresent the bible with this next remark
"the bible make reference to man, as son of God, but woman as daughter of man"

Contrary to what youngfocus, the original poster, constructed,
the bible was not making and did not, make reference to man, as son of God, nor woman, as daughter of man
but rather made a statement of fact reference, to when sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair;
and they took them wives of all which they chose

Said, in a simplified way, some sons of God, saw the daughters of God that they might be fair like the daughter of men are;
but these sons of God, didnt take to, these daughters of God, as wives material, to chose from,
rather these other sons of God, preferred the daughters of men, as wife material

When one, fast forwards to Genesis 6:8-9, moving on from Genesis 6:2, then a proper understanding of the situation in Genesis 6:2, unravels.

Noah, as a son of God, had grace
with this grace/favour, he had the sense, to avoid "daughters of men" & stick to a "daughter of God" is what Genesis 6:8 is saying.

Genesis 6:9 corroboates Genesis 6:8, saying, Noah did the right thing (i.e. he was righteous)
and that among the people of his time, he had sound, unblemished & without defect judgement (i.e. he was blameless)
Also, that he didnt depart from walking habitually with God

Noah, was the only one, found in his generation, doing just exactly, what Mobilia succinctly said, earlier on page 1, that:
"God's people were not to mix with the unbelievers"

MuttleyLaff:
Be encouraged,
and dont get distracted from the truth.
I believe you surely are coming back, and coming back not strong but coming back stronger.
Your scepticism is well founded,
and it is refreshing to see another take a stand like this

sonmvayina:
[s]Yez, and I am saying the Christians got the idea from Egyptian paganism... It is not a Jewish old testament belief.. The jews believe in reincarnation.. Job1:20-22[/s]

sonmvayina:
[s]Not every human being has got a soul... Some are soulless,like you.... You cannot be claiming the almighty creator of the universe sometimes in the past stoop so low to impregnate a women, another man's wife for that matter and be claiming you have a soul.. That is the height of mockery and insult.. A being that created the universe by speaking it to existence.... But all human has a body and spirit...

Humans are Gods(spiritual beings) experiencing this physical world.[/s].

Dalam0n:
Not when this nonsense is what they try to use to control others.

sonmvayina:
You tried in your attempt to explain it from a spiritual perspective... Until you mixed in some bull sheet... The flesh is made from dust and to dust it shall return..
Spirit and body will never come together again.. [s]This your idea is part of Egyptian paganism where they do mummification to preserve the body so it can be reunited with the spirit later on..[/s]

Dalam0n:
Christians be presenting childish mythical tales and superstitions as reality.

Mobilia:
Hi brother,
Yes....I'm sorry about that. I got terribly distracted....but I'm coming back...soon.
Thanks a million for your patience again...

Eponyeeboz:
The amount of money spent on her makeup is more than your mother's bride price.

DonroxyII:
You will think she is possessed !! lol

ichuka:
Bro the verses you quoted has nothing to do with angels and demons being same.
But ACT23:8-9 stated that there are Atleast TWO kind of spirits that can influence a man .Angelic spirits and another spirits known as evil spirit by the JEWISH.

[quote author=ichuka post=70767559]Bro you haven't given me any spiritual backing that FALLEN ANGELS are SAME with DEMONS.

The two verses I gave you in the book of Acts strongly indicate that ANGELS and DEMON/EVIL SPIRITS are different.

Is there anywhere written in the bible that a FALLEN ANGEL/Satan was cast out of a human,No?because they don't dwell in human.thats the job of demonic spirits created by the fail.

alexistaiwo:
Reminds me of my one of my ex.


The girl sex drive high so tey she will be crying if I refuse to oblige her.
My only saving grace was that I am also on the high side.


It took the intervention of her whole family (immediate and extended) to cut off the obsession with my dick.

Still doesn't stop her from sneaking over to my place once in a while.

Sexual compatibility is a very big thing in relationships.