THE ANGELS THAT SINNED

[Rella]

Let me just say that God is not the author of confusion.

And neither am I. Cinderella was a young woman greatly taken advantage of. Why I would use a portion of her name is no ones business but my own.

Rella should have been a dead giveaway.

What does Rella mean? R ella as a girls' name is of Old German origin, and the meaning of Rella is "other, foreign". Variant of Ella. ... MIDDLE NAME PAIRINGS Rella Reagan (R.R.), .. How popular is Rella? Rella is a rare given name for females but a very popular last name for both adults and children (#27439 out of 150436,

YES... I swear by all that is Holy and to our Heavenly Father that I am a card carrying Girl, Woman, Female, Lady and any other identifications you apply .

NOW, TELL ME, HONESTLY, WHY IT MATTERS?

 

[Wordsmith]

That's correct. They are not flesh and blood but are mental. The attitudes of evil men are the ones in charge at this time and they are the rulers of this world.

​

Matthew 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

You would say tempted of an attitude.

2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

You would say the attitude came to Him and talked.

4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

You would say the attitude took Him up to the Holy City.

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

You would say the attitude tried to question who Jesus actually was.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

You would say Jesus was quoting scripture to an attitude.

8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

You would again say the attitude took Jesus somewhere.

9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

You would say the attitude ask Jesus for worship in exchange for the kingdoms of this world.

10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

You would say Jesus spoke to the attitude and called the attitude satan and told the attitude to worship and serve God.

Tell us who's attitude was Jesus talking to?

You see this whole messed up theory of yours is nonsense and totally unbelievable to anyone who takes a common sense approach to scripture. You do tout common sense right?

 

[jeremiah1five]

Jude 6 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.

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

How many time do we have to go through this? It is you rejecting the Holy Spirit's words. THIS VERSE TELLS YOU WHAT THE SIN WAS! It was not the is. of rebellion that got SOME of them chained up.

The problem is that you put their rebellion in Genesis 6 and interpret the "sons of God" as angels which is unreasonable considering the text.
I'm a son of God but does that make me an angel? That makes no sense.
Tell me, if you're going to interpret "sons of God" in Job 38:7, WHO are the morning stars?

I place their rebellion against God between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 BEFORE God created man.

24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled,
And all the hills moved lightly.
25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man,
And all the birds of the heavens were fled.
26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness,
And all the cities thereof were broken down
At the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.
Jer. 4:24–26.

"There was no man" is translated as "There was no Adam."
WHEN did the Lord express fierce anger that the mountains trembled, and the hills moved 'lightly?'
What caused all the angels/birds to flee, and the fruitful place became a wilderness and all the cities broken down?
When did God express such fierce anger that He destroyed the earth and made it a wilderness that can be described as "empty, without form and void and darkness upon the face of the deep?"
In Genesis 1:1 God created the heaven and the earth. Period. Complete. Beautiful.
But in verse 1:2 it says the earth was "without form, and void, and darkness upon the face of the deep." What happened that verse 2 describes the earth in this condition? God doesn't create anything "without form, and void, and darkness on the face" of anything. I find that Isaiah adds to my understanding:

24 Behold, the LORD maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste,
And turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof.
Isaiah 24.

WHEN did the Lord turn the earth UPSIDE DOWN? Antartica used to be at the north of the earth, now it's at the bottom. When did the Lord make the earth waste? Not a region, but THE EARTH itself. Tell me, if you have understanding, WHEN did the Lord turn the earth UPSIDE DOWN?

So, there we are. You hold to the fantasy that the angels came down to earth on their own will (angels have no free will) and engaged in HOLY matrimony with human women, angels that are spirit like wind, they created bodies with the correct DNA (angels do not have creative attributes as God), impregnated their wives and had children that some say are demons or large humans like Goliath whom David slew. And from here you place God putting them in chains of darkness and interpret 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude as your source and foundation. So very unreasonable.
This version is so far-fetched and fantastical. Very unreasonable.

The sin that the angels committed was the same sin that the cherub Lucifer had in mind when sin was FOUND in him. He had the thoughts of ascending into heaven (from first heaven) to be like God, but before he could act out these thought God dealt with him and his buddies and cast them down to hell and put them in chains.
Then God in fierce anger destroyed the earth and turned it upside down.
Tell me, when did God turn the world upside down? Such an act would destroy whatever eco-system there was, maybe cause an Ice Age and all human life (if there were any) would die like a pre-flood destruction of the earth but not water, with God's very own hands in fierce anger.
One question for you: WHEN did God turn the earth upside down?

 

[Wordsmith]

Need to read what scripture says especially when it comes from Christ...
Matthew 22:29-30
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Mark 12:24-25
24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?
25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

Luke 20:34-36
34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

These Scriptures have been addressed many times

1. Fallen angels are not in heaven.
2. These passages only addressed angels of God in heaven no others.
3. These passage do not address what angels are capable of but only that they do not marry in heaven.
4. Luke makes the connection to immortality which angels enjoy but no where addresses what fallen angels can or can not do.

We can deduce from these passages that there will be no marriages or need for them in heaven, more than that is an addition to scripture only used in this case to try to support a false narrative.

 

[jeremiah1five]

And neither am I. Cinderella was a young woman greatly taken advantage of. Why I would use a portion of her name is no ones business but my own.

Rella should have been a dead giveaway.

What does Rella mean? R ella as a girls' name is of Old German origin, and the meaning of Rella is "other, foreign". Variant of Ella. ... MIDDLE NAME PAIRINGS Rella Reagan (R.R.), .. How popular is Rella? Rella is a rare given name for females but a very popular last name for both adults and children (#27439 out of 150436,

YES... I swear by all that is Holy and to our Heavenly Father that I am a card carrying Girl, Woman, Female, Lady and any other identifications you apply .

NOW, TELL ME, HONESTLY, WHY IT MATTERS?

Because God is not the author of confusion and by your hiding your identity it caused confusion in my mind. Christians do not, or should I say, should not cause confusion in the body of Christ upon other brethren (if you are brethren.)

And thank you for the lesson. Informative. And interesting.

 

[jeremiah1five]

​

Matthew 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

You would say tempted of an attitude.

2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

You would say the attitude came to Him and talked.

4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

You would say the attitude took Him up to the Holy City.

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

You would say the attitude tried to question who Jesus actually was.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

You would say Jesus was quoting scripture to an attitude.

8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

You would again say the attitude took Jesus somewhere.

9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

You would say the attitude ask Jesus for worship in exchange for the kingdoms of this world.

10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

You would say Jesus spoke to the attitude and called the attitude satan and told the attitude to worship and serve God.

Tell us who's attitude was Jesus talking to?

You see this whole messed up theory of yours is nonsense and totally unbelievable to anyone who takes a common sense approach to scripture. You do tout common sense right?

Jesus was fully man. That human nature of his Person needed to be tested.
He was speaking/thinking to Himself as He allowed the human nature full reign to be exercised before He began His Ministry to His people Israel.
Secondly, the word "devil" means "traducer" and "false accuser" and is an adjective. The Holy Spirit used this word to describe Jesus' human nature that was to be tested.
But the Logos answered every human thought He had about who He was and what He was there to accomplish.
Jesus had legs and feet. Why do you want to make this very human experience and supernaturalize it into something fantastical?
In the end the Logos exercised jurisdiction over His Person.

 

[Wordsmith]

Because God is not the author of confusion and by your hiding your identity it caused confusion in my mind. Christians do not, or should I say, should not cause confusion in the body of Christ upon other brethren (if you are brethren.)

And thank you for the lesson. Informative. And interesting.

This is messed up and sad!

 

[jeremiah1five]

This statement has noting to do with the quote you attached it to . Go back reread my post and try again.

I prefer to read the Scripture you posted in Ephesians and Paul says under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that those forces ARE OF THIS WORLD and the only conclusion is they are from man, the ruler of this world.

 

[jeremiah1five]

This is messed up and sad!

No, it is Biblical and I AM a Biblical Christian.

 

[Rella]

No, it is Biblical and I AM a Biblical Christian.

Are you a Messianic Jew?

 

[jeremiah1five]

Are you a Messianic Jew?

As far as 'religion' is your question my answer is no.
Why does it matter?

 

[Red Baker]

3 Resurrections~Greetings this Lord's day, I have read Genesis 6 many time sover in the last fifty years, and will continue to do as you said....

Good advice, but as you preach to me are you heeding Romans 2:21a~"Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself?"

I think I fully understand these words: "My Spirit shall not ALWAYS strive with man~the meaning of the passage therefore is, that it is in vain for the Spirit of God to dispute with the flesh, which is incapable of reasoning. God gives the name of flesh as a mark of ignominy to men, whom he, nevertheless, had formed in his own image. And this is a mode of speaking familiar to Scripture.~why reason any longer with man, because he ALSO IS FLESH, and we know well what the scriptures said of flesh from Romans 8:5-8!

No, there is only one type of flesh mentioned in Genesis 6! The sinful flesh of man, void of the Spirit of God, which is incapable of submitting itself to the law of God, and indeed has no desire to do so.

I have already dealt with this above, and left you a number to call to get help.

3 Resurrections let look at Jesus' words when speaking about the days of Noah.

MAtthew 24: 37-39~"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

Jesus took the sins that those men were guilty of in Noah's day and described his days for us, to tell us they shall repeat themselves again "JUST AS IT WAS" BACK IN NOAH'S DAY! They were eating, drinking, marrying and given in marriage~just as we are saying~the sons of the righteous line marrying into the children of men. More later on this.

3 Resurrections, that is simple to answer: giants not account of the enormous size of their body, but MEN OF RENOWN, know for their building and planting, etc! much like we see in our day. Men of old, where men of renown! Note: Moses does not speaks of all the men of this age; but of certain individuals, who, being stronger than the rest, and relying on their own might and power, exalted themselves unlawfully, and without measure much like men do in our day whom the world consider giants as far as what they have accomplished.

At one time America was a religious nation overall, but look at it now~where are those children of godly parents of old~they have married into the world and their children are the giants of Genesis 6! The wealth of the world is at an all time HIGH! But the true worship of God is at an all time low!

 

[Rella]

As far as 'religion' is your question my answer is no.
Why does it matter?

Simply because your attitude of challenging what is not confusion as being confusion is seemingly Messianic OR cofC.

Not to mention your Texas sun might be altering your perceptions on interpretations.

 

[Hobie]

Very good.

The word "devils" is a verb in this passage.

The word "devils" is a verb in this passage.

The word "devils" is a verb in this passage.

The word "devils" is a verb in this passage.

From James Strong:

Greek Word: δαιμονίζομαι
Transliteration: daimonizomai

English Words used in KJV:
possessed with devils 4 times
possessed with the devil 3
of the devils 2
vexed with a devil 1
possessed with a devil 1
have a devil 1
[Total Count: 13]

middle from <G#1142> (daimon); to be exercised by a dæmon.

Strong's G#1142 from daio (to distribute fortunes); a dæmon or supernatural spirit (of a bad nature.)

Attitudes, especially evil ones are (of a bad nature.)

Well, its not as easy as that, as scripture shows even more as you can see from other passages..
Matthew 8:28-32
28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.
29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?
30 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding.
31 So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.
32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.

Luke 8:26-35
26 And they arrived at the country of the Gadarenes, which is over against Galilee.
27 And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs.
28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.
29 (For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness.)
30 And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him.
31 And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep.
32 And there was there an herd of many swine feeding on the mountain: and they besought him that he would suffer them to enter into them. And he suffered them.
33 Then went the devils out of the man, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the lake, and were choked.
34 When they that fed them saw what was done, they fled, and went and told it in the city and in the country.
35 Then they went out to see what was done; and came to Jesus, and found the man, out of whom the devils were departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.

So it is clear they are here, but exactly in what nature and state of existence, is hard to comprehend.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Your definition of "celestial bodies" is not what a celestial body is~celestial bodies are bodies or heavenly bodies which are "objects in space" such as the sun, moon, planets, and stars~not angels! Sir, they are not species of created angelic flesh! Need help call NASA.1 (202) 358-0001

RB, you are crippled in your understanding of what "celestial bodies" are since you deliberately refuse to consider the significance of the Greek word for "body" in this verse. Paul was using this term "celestial bodies" to describe the heavenly host - of the angelic creatures. This was contrasting the glory of the human bodies which we have on earth with the different glory of the bodies which the angels of the heavenly host have. The one glory is set in opposition to the other.

Paul was not contrasting our earthly bodies with astronomical things such as sun, moon, and stars, which are not living organisms. That is not the sense in which the Greek word "somata" for "bodies" is to be understood.

But if you wish to only rely on the KJV instead of referring to Greek, Jude 6-8 tells you without a doubt that the fallen angels, just like the "filthy dreamers" of Jude's day, had "defiled the flesh" by their actions. The word "flesh" in this context is speaking of the material substance which makes up a body's form. The angels, just as the men of Sodom had done, had "in like manner" gone after "OTHER flesh" than their own species of flesh. "LIKEWISE" the filthy dreamers of Judas' day were "defiling the flesh" by their actions, just as the angels had defiled their own flesh bodies by going after "OTHER flesh" - of humankind's daughters.

If I remember correctly, RB, I believe you adopt the idea that the "sons of God" were members of a godly line of Seth marrying wicked women from other families not in that "righteous line". The problem with that conjecture is that it endows a salvation status due to physical birth by a certain ancestor. That would teach salvation by natural blood relations to a family or a physical race. And I don't think you want to go there.

 

[Hobie]

These Scriptures have been addressed many times

1. Fallen angels are not in heaven.
2. These passages only addressed angels of God in heaven no others.
3. These passage do not address what angels are capable of but only that they do not marry in heaven.
4. Luke makes the connection to immortality which angels enjoy but no where addresses what fallen angels can or can not do.

We can deduce from these passages that there will be no marriages or need for them in heaven, more than that is an addition to scripture only used in this case to try to support a false narrative.

God created them all and they were in heaven, so they are the same being, whether fallen or not.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Then you do not understand the biblical meaning of 'spirit(s)."
I suppose the Holy "Spirit" has a body, too.

I'm sure you remember that the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove and remained upon Christ. Apparently even the Holy Spirit as a person of the Godhead can adopt a physical form at will. Why should it surprise you that it was also given to the creatures of the angelic realm to have a fully-functioning material form with the ability to reveal itself to mankind - or not?

Selective revelation of angels in tangible human form to some and not to others took place throughout scripture. Even Balaam's ass was able to see the angel with the drawn sword in his hand when Balaam originally could not. I would rather be an ass that is able to perceive this than even a prophet who cannot.

 

[Red Baker]

Yes, I see that you have turned from sound doctrine.

Sir, you have not taken what I posted and proved it wrong. Genesis 6 is strictly addressing the sons of God, the righteous line of believers taht we can follow in Genesis 5 for the first 6000 plus years (understanding the biblical timeline that God placed in Genesis 5, 10 to teach us how old this earth is~need help, read : https://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/timeline.shtml an excellent article. ) of creation.

This is incorrect...As mentioned before in the book of Job the angels are presented as the "sons of God"...yet you deny that.

Sir, In Job, and in the context used there, I would not reject that sons of God are angels. But, Genesis six is not angels in human flesh, committing sexual liaisons with women, producing a mongrel super race, which folks like you call the Nephilim.

I will add this, NO WHERE in the scriptures is the phrase "son(s)of God" even hinted as referring to angles other than Job and Daniel. Since God secured the elect angels first estate and kept them from falling, then I would have no problem accepting them as sons of God in this sense. But not the repbrote angels. Sons of God is a special name given for God's chosen people~and since there are some elect angels, then they fall into the number that we read about in Job. Obviously, God appointed all of them to appear before him and give an account of what they were doing, good and evil angels, and Satan came also among them~ at least that is what we gather from Job. Not very much is given to us in the scriptures concerning this.

The bible says they were thrown into prison.

I have already addressed this above. But, while we are it~one question for you...."When were cast down to hell and placed into chains of darkness?

 

[jeremiah1five]

Simply because your attitude of challenging what is not confusion as being confusion is seemingly Messianic OR cofC.

Not to mention your Texas sun might be altering your perceptions on interpretations.

If I told you hiding your identity was confusing to me why would you contradict me?
What? My comments are not worthy of being taken at face value?
Are you looking at something sinister in my approach?

I'm originally from California where we have beach, mountains, and desert within reach.
Today's El Paso weather is forecast up to 100 degrees heat. It hasn't gotten that hot yet, but if I begin sweating and hallucinating from heat stroke, I'll call 911.
Believe me, there is nothing sinister in my Christianity.

 

[3 Resurrections]

However, scriptures do not teach that Satan was once good and became bad.

Ummm, yes, scripture does teach that the angels were originally created perfect. Just like the anointed cherub in Ezekiel 28:13-15. "Thou hast been in Eden, the garden of God...Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth...Thou was PERFECT in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee."

Angels were created with the option of choosing good or evil, just as mankind was given a choice to obey or not. Any creation of God is necessarily of a lesser order than their Creator, and when given this opportunity to choose between good and evil, even a creature that is created perfect can be corrupted by that option to choose evil, unless they are preserved by the Creator in a sinless state (which the "elect angels" were).