THE ANGELS THAT SINNED

[CrowCross]

How can spirit beings locked in chains of darkness awaiting judgment get out of their prison to marry and have children with human women not having penises nor sperm?

I'm beyond debating you....a legion of them was in one man. You say they were locked up.

Go live with your view....I'm not.

 

[Josheb]

...I'm referring to a world that existed prior to Genesis.

Source for such a premise? What was before the beginning?

 

[jeremiah1five]

I'm beyond debating you....a legion of them was in one man. You say they were locked up.

Go live with your view....I'm not.

Another professed believer who rejects the Word of God.

The Scripture says they are locked up:

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 2 Pe 2:4.

And I believe the Scripture.
And that's because I AM Christian.

 

[Josheb]

Neither 2 Peter 2:4 nor Genesis 6:5 define all hamartiology.

In addition to all that I posted in Post #69, let me say that the comment "The number of angels that sinned are one-third," is meaningless without knowing the toal number of angels. A third of 100 is only 33 but a third of legion can be as many as 2,000. A third of a legion of legions is a great many sinful angels.

When the opening posts states, "They are ALL 'cast to hell, and delivered in chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.' ALL the angels that sinned," this must be understood alongside the fact satan,* the adversary, and all the demons referenced throughout the New Testament are roaming the earth. Either earth is identical to or synonymous with hell (not a position to which I subscribe), ot a hell-bound sinful angel can go about business here on the earth, inhabiting people and making them do things they do not, presumably, want to do (like pitching themselves into fires - Mk. 9:22).


Long before Jesus showed up to cast demons, or evil spirits, out of the humans they inhabited, one evil angel, satan, the serpent of old that dwelt in Eden was present to lie and mislead humans. The opening post makes its appeal to Genesis 6:5 in support of the claim, "This means that any and all evil in the world is the result of the sinful nature in mankind," but Genesis 6:5 is a consequence of both sinful andgels and sinful humans living on the planet. Genesis 6:5 is also an appraisal by God only of sinful man. The verse specifically states, "the wickedness of mankind..." was great. It says nothing of God what God saw when He saw the wickedness of angels on the earth. Had the text done so the exact same condition would have been observed and the exact same appraisal rendered: the wickedness of sinful angels was great in the earth. The Bible is not concerned with the affairs of angels, though. The reader should not assume because somethin is not mentioned that it does not exist.



So.....

2 Peter 2:4 cannot be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth. Likewise, Genesis 6:5 should not be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth, either.


What should, furthermore, be understood, is that even though satan and his ilk are present on earth in scripture, they too are created creatures. If the statements about sin applied to humans also apply to angels, then every single angel who disobeyed God is now dead in sin. Not only are they also dead in sin, they are enslaved to sin. Their thinking is futile, and their hearts are darkened, and it is likely God has done exactly with them as He did with those who denied His power: He gave them over to their lusts. Satan is the father of lies and lying is what he does and has done from the beginning. He is the father of lies (Jn. 8:44). God does not lie (Num. 23:19). God does not lie, nor does God mislead people or call something bad, good (or vice versa). These are all things satan does and has been doing from the beginning. That means every human who has believed a lie has directly or indirectly been influenced by the father of lies. This, then, is another reason why the op's position "any and all evil in the world is the result of the sinful nature in mankind," is wrong.

Lastly (for now), is the premise of "sinful nature." This is a phrase taken from the dynamic translation of the English Bibles. The term does not exist in the Greek manuscripts. In the Greek the term used is "sarx," and the word simply means "flesh." That is how all our formal (word-for-word) translations translate the Greek. This should not be focused or conflated with the Gnostic belief all physical existence is inherently evil because God made humans and called them good (Gen. 1:31). There was a time when human flesh was good. That is not the case once sin has brought death and slavery to the individual. Once that happened, hat person's flesh was not able to please God (Rom. 8:6). Perhaps there is something called a "sinful nature," but it is not a term the Greek uses and the reason this is important is because no one should imagine this "nature" is something they can change. As long as humans have flesh that has sinned, they have only sinful flesh. There's no non-sinful flesh absent Christ.

Once this is grasped there then exists a vast lot of other means by which we understand and conclude....

2 Peter 2:4 cannot be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth. Likewise, Genesis 6:5 should not be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth, either. The claims made in the opening post are incorrect and its use of scripture is shoddy; incomplete at best, falsely twisted and abusive at worst.

Let me note the opportunity to discuss all of this was provided many posts ago and ignored in favor of - ironically - sinful flesh asserting sinful actions like ad hominem and the idolatrous presumption to know and judge the mind and heart of others. As I not above, God does not lie so every time a logical fallacy is employed by any of us we all know it did not come from God.

I'll return to add more about what the Bible says about the causes of evil when I have time and inclination.








* I do not generally capitalize the word "satan" because, as the op correctly noted, the term simply means "adversary," so it's more of a title than a proper name. In that sense even a human can be a "satan" or a "devil." Furthermore, if the tradition saying Lucifer is now satan, then his glory has been stripped from him and he is not worthy of having the title or name capitalized. This is merely a personal convention of mine.
.

 

[jeremiah1five]

In addition to all that I posted in Post #69, let me say that the comment "The number of angels that sinned are one-third," is meaningless without knowing the toal number of angels. A third of 100 is only 33 but a third of legion can be as many as 2,000. A third of a legion of legions is a great many sinful angels.

When the opening posts states, "They are ALL 'cast to hell, and delivered in chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.' ALL the angels that sinned," this must be understood alongside the fact satan,* the adversary, and all the demons referenced throughout the New Testament are roaming the earth. Either earth is identical to or synonymous with hell (not a position to which I subscribe), ot a hell-bound sinful angel can go about business here on the earth, inhabiting people and making them do things they do not, presumably, want to do (like pitching themselves into fires - Mk. 9:22).


Long before Jesus showed up to cast demons, or evil spirits, out of the humans they inhabited, one evil angel, satan, the serpent of old that dwelt in Eden was present to lie and mislead humans. The opening post makes its appeal to Genesis 6:5 in support of the claim, "This means that any and all evil in the world is the result of the sinful nature in mankind," but Genesis 6:5 is a consequence of both sinful andgels and sinful humans living on the planet. Genesis 6:5 is also an appraisal by God only of sinful man. The verse specifically states, "the wickedness of mankind..." was great. It says nothing of God what God saw when He saw the wickedness of angels on the earth. Had the text done so the exact same condition would have been observed and the exact same appraisal rendered: the wickedness of sinful angels was great in the earth. The Bible is not concerned with the affairs of angels, though. The reader should not assume because somethin is not mentioned that it does not exist.



So.....

2 Peter 2:4 cannot be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth. Likewise, Genesis 6:5 should not be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth, either.


What should, furthermore, be understood, is that even though satan and his ilk are present on earth in scripture, they too are created creatures. If the statements about sin applied to humans also apply to angels, then every single angel who disobeyed God is now dead in sin. Not only are they also dead in sin, they are enslaved to sin. Their thinking is futile, and their hearts are darkened, and it is likely God has done exactly with them as He did with those who denied His power: He gave them over to their lusts. Satan is the father of lies and lying is what he does and has done from the beginning. He is the father of lies (Jn. 8:44). God does not lie (Num. 23:19). God does not lie, nor does God mislead people or call something bad, good (or vice versa). These are all things satan does and has been doing from the beginning. That means every human who has believed a lie has directly or indirectly been influenced by the father of lies. This, then, is another reason why the op's position "any and all evil in the world is the result of the sinful nature in mankind," is wrong.

Lastly (for now), is the premise of "sinful nature." This is a phrase taken from the dynamic translation of the English Bibles. The term does not exist in the Greek manuscripts. In the Greek the term used is "sarx," and the word simply means "flesh." That is how all our formal (word-for-word) translations translate the Greek. This should not be focused or conflated with the Gnostic belief all physical existence is inherently evil because God made humans and called them good (Gen. 1:31). There was a time when human flesh was good. That is not the case once sin has brought death and slavery to the individual. Once that happened, hat person's flesh was not able to please God (Rom. 8:6). Perhaps there is something called a "sinful nature," but it is not a term the Greek uses and the reason this is important is because no one should imagine this "nature" is something they can change. As long as humans have flesh that has sinned, they have only sinful flesh. There's no non-sinful flesh absent Christ.

Once this is grasped there then exists a vast lot of other means by which we understand and conclude....

2 Peter 2:4 cannot be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth. Likewise, Genesis 6:5 should not be read to say sinful angels are not ONLY in hell and never on earth and never contributing to the presence of sin on earth, either. The claims made in the opening post are incorrect and its use of scripture is shoddy; incomplete at best, falsely twisted and abusive at worst.

Let me note the opportunity to discuss all of this was provided many posts ago and ignored in favor of - ironically - sinful flesh asserting sinful actions like ad hominem and the idolatrous presumption to know and judge the mind and heart of others. As I not above, God does not lie so every time a logical fallacy is employed by any of us we all know it did not come from God.

I'll return to add more about what the Bible says about the causes of evil when I have time and inclination.








* I do not generally capitalize the word "satan" because, as the op correctly noted, the term simply means "adversary," so it's more of a title than a proper name. In that sense even a human can be a "satan" or a "devil." Furthermore, if the tradition saying Lucifer is now satan, then his glory has been stripped from him and he is not worthy of having the title or name capitalized. This is merely a personal convention of mine.
.

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment. 2 Pe 2:4.

ALL the angels that sinned were cast to hell and delivered in chains of darkness awaiting judgment.

Get past this truth and I'll consider what you say.
But since you can't get past this Biblical truth then all your surmising's and all your beliefs about angels being out and about are in error.
One-third of the total leaves two-thirds.
One-third are cast into hell in chains of darkness awaiting judgment and the other two-thirds are kept by the power of God and serve God.

 

[Josheb]

Let me note the opportunity to discuss all of this was provided many posts ago and ignored in favor of - ironically - sinful flesh asserting sinful actions like ad hominem and the idolatrous presumption to know and judge the mind and heart of others. As I note above, God does not lie so every time a logical fallacy is employed by any of us we all know it did not come from God.

I forgot to mention this, but now that a more whole-scripture alternative has been posted there is no end to the responses - even though informed they'd be ignored. This will continue every time I add content that should have been discussed without epithet when first broached.

Everyone else is invited to discuss the op and posts #69 and #84 with me, as long as the discourse is collaborative, polite, respectful, and op-relevant.

 

[Wordsmith]

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.

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

The sin is not the rebellion with satan against God. The sin of Jude and 2 Peter in the sin of Genesis 6.

All fallen angels are not in chains only the ones who committed the sin of Jude 7. Satan is not currently in chains.

Daniel 10:13
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.

Michael fought a fallen angel who was not in chains.

Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

There are fallen angels mentioned above who are not in chains.

There are no human "sons of God" referred to in the OT except for one prophetic passage.

The sons of Seth theory is false!

 

[CrowCross]

Source for such a premise? What was before the beginning?

No time

 

[Wordsmith]

ALL the angels that sinned were cast to hell and delivered in chains of darkness awaiting judgment.

Get past this truth and I'll consider what you say.

No scripture says what you claim. 1 the angels that sinned are in chains. 2 . What was the sin ? Jude 7 Genesis 6. 3. No passage says the sin was the rebellion against God . No passage anywhere says that “all” fallen angels are in chains. In fact I gave scriptural reasons that was not true.

 

[jeremiah1five]

No scripture says what you claim. 1 the angels that sinned are in chains. 2 . What was the sin ? Jude 7 Genesis 6. 3. No passage says the sin was the rebellion against God . No passage anywhere says that “all” fallen angels are in chains. In fact I gave scriptural reasons that was not true.

Sorry but the Scripture is clear.

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment. 2 Pe 2:4.

It says, "the angels that sinned [which is all encompassing to every angels that sinned] was cast down to hell and delivered into chains of darkness reserved unto judgment."

It is very straightforward. It's just that you would rather keep leaning on your own understanding in the vanity of your mind than allow God to dictate what you are to believe.

This reeks of disobedience to God's Word.
You're trying to tell Scripture what to say but in this instance you and the others fail.

How can you be boldfaced opposing God's Word here?

That's unchristian and anti-Scriptural.

 

[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.

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

The sin is not the rebellion with satan against God. The sin of Jude and 2 Peter in the sin of Genesis 6.

All fallen angels are not in chains only the ones who committed the sin of Jude 7. Satan is not currently in chains.

Daniel 10:13
But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.

Michael fought a fallen angel who was not in chains.

Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

There are fallen angels mentioned above who are not in chains.

There are no human "sons of God" referred to in the OT except for one prophetic passage.

The sons of Seth theory is false!

Tell me how spirit beings can have sex with human women let alone get married to them.
They are ALL cast down to hell delivered in chains of darkness reserved unto judgment.

It must've been one hell of an orgy because if the number of sinning angels cast to hell are one million there were not enough women by the time Genesis 6 came along. Including the men there must've been only about one hundred thousand people on the planet.

Regardless, the nephalim were the human children of men and because the sons of God (Sethian line) married and were unequally yoked to non-covenant women their children grew up without law and without restriction and did whatever they pleased.
The word nephal means "bullies" and "tyrants."

 

[Wordsmith]

Sorry but the Scripture is clear.

Actually neither of our positions is as clear as you seem to believe.

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment. 2 Pe 2:4.

It says, "the angels that sinned [which is all encompassing to every angels that sinned] was cast down to hell and delivered into chains of darkness reserved unto judgment."

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.

This is clear. "The angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation" are the ones we are discussing. The question is what does that mean?

Verse 7 "EVEN AS" ties verse 6 to verse 7. Verse 7 describes the sin as " giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh".

You assume the angels that sinned committed the sin of rebellion which is all encompassing of those that rebelled, but based on Jude 7 I have offered an alternative to the sin being referred to in 2 Peter 2:4.

It is very straightforward. It's just that you would rather keep leaning on your own understanding in the vanity of your mind than allow God to dictate what you are to believe.

This reeks of disobedience to God's Word.

This seems to be an often used tactic to shut down debate but I am unaffected. Because I see this differently that you DOES NOT MEAN I am disobedient to God's Word, leaning on my own understanding or not allowing God's word to dictate what I believe.

I have done much study on this from both perspectives and have arrived where I am theologically based on the preponderance of evidence. In others words I believe I can produce more scripturally based arguments than you. We shall see.

You're trying to tell Scripture what to say but in this instance you and the others fail.

I believe you are doing just that very thing with your declaration of "all encompassing".

How can you be boldfaced opposing God's Word here?

That's unchristian and anti-Scriptural.

Again I am not deterred by this tactic. I will say what I believe and why I believe it. Answer my points with scriptural arguments.

Everyone who disagrees with you are not opposing God's Word, on this topic there are many who disagree wit you. If we continue this discussion I will point out that your theory leaves far more unanswered questions than does mine.

 

[CrowCross]

Regardless, the nephalim were the human children of men and because the sons of God (Sethian line) married and were unequally yoked to non-covenant women their children grew up without law and without restriction and did whatever they pleased.
The word nephal means "bullies" and "tyrants."

This is speculation.

 

[Wordsmith]

Tell me how spirit beings can have sex with human women let alone get married to them.

Tell me how an angel can appear as human so that we could entertain and not know the difference? Hebrews 13:2

Show me the scripture that list all of the capabilities that angels have?

Mark 12:25
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.

1. Fallen angels are not in heaven
2. Simply states angels in heaven do not marry anything above and beyond that fact is assumption and INHO adding to scripture!

They are ALL cast down to hell delivered in chains of darkness reserved unto judgment.

Assumption previously addressed.

It must've been one hell of an orgy because if the number of sinning angels cast to hell are one million there were not enough women by the time Genesis 6 came along. Including the men there must've been only about one hundred thousand people on the planet.

You make lots of assumptions here.
1. You assume all angels that rebelled against God were involved but I have given you reasons from scripture that is not the case.
2. You assume a mathematical defense that is not defensible.

Regardless, the nephalim were the human children of men and because the sons of God (Sethian line) married and were unequally yoked to non-covenant women their children grew up without law and without restriction and did whatever they pleased.
The word nephal means "bullies" and "tyrants."

Again you assume you are right. I will be waiting for your scriptural evidence to support your claims about the line of Seth.

Tell me how the sons of Seth (not God) can marry non-covenant women and produce a race of giants?

No OT scriptures call humans "sons of God" with one exception and it is prophetic.

Hosea 1:10
Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

It shall be said in the future it was and is in the NT. We are now the sons of God.

The has no relation the the OT use of the phrase. All OT references were beings created by the hand of God , angels and Adam who is refereed to as a son of God in Luke.

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

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

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.

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.

Verse 4 ties the "sons of God" to the Giants

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.

You probably assume this was an earthly meeting , I assume based on other scripture it was a heavenly meeting.

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.

2 And the Lord said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

The Lord ask satan where he came from not where he was. Satan came from the earth for the meeting. Evidence.

Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

The sons of Seth were not shouting for Joy at the creation! Evidence.

There are no humans in the OT referred to as the "sons of God"

 

[CrowCross]

Tell me how an angel can appear as human so that we could entertain and not know the difference? Hebrews 13:2

Lets not forget the encounter with Lot.

3But Lot insisted so strongly that they followed him into his house. He prepared a feast for them and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.
...How do angels eat without a physical body?

16But when Lot hesitated, the men grabbed his hand and the hands of his wife and his two daughters. And they led them safely out of the city, because of the LORD’s compassion for them.
...How did the angels physically grab their hands and feet if they had no physical body?

 

[Wordsmith]

Lets not forget the encounter with Lot.

3But Lot insisted so strongly that they followed him into his house. He prepared a feast for them and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.
...How do angels eat without a physical body?

16But when Lot hesitated, the men grabbed his hand and the hands of his wife and his two daughters. And they led them safely out of the city, because of the LORD’s compassion for them.
...How did the angels physically grab their hands and feet if they had no physical body?

Thanks for bringing it up but I had not forgotten. It is an important piece of evidence. I understand why this is so controversial for many but we have to look at all possibilities and weigh them against scripture.

 

[Josheb]

In addition to all that I posted in Posts #69 and 84...
.

There numerous places in scripture were evil and sin are attributed directly to something other than human flesh.

1 John 3:8
He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.

Adam hadn't been sinning "from the beginning." The devil has. Those [humans] who sin are of the devil, and Jesus did not come solely to undo the works of sinful humans; he came to undo the works of the devil. John reiterated this in his gospel.

John 8:44
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out his desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, refusing to uphold the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, because he is a liar and the father of lies.

Paul also reported some would follow the devil in the end times.

1 Timothy 4:1
But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron...

Deceitful spirits are evil, and they are not human. The teachings of demons and the demons teaching thos teachings are both evil and neither is human.

Paul also implied (sinful) angels could propagate false gospels.

Galatians 1:8
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be under a curse!

That would be evil, and evil NOT caused by humans. Assuming Joe Smith's report was honest, we have the LDS as an example of just such an evil. John again confirmed Paul's report when he wrote,

1 John 4:1
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God. For many false prophets have gone out into the world.

False prophets have gone out into the word as a consequence of spirits that are not from God. Those spirits would be evil doing evil. Jesus was accused of doing what he did by the behest and power of Beelzebub .

Jesus attributed evil to the world.

Matthew 18:7
Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to the person through whom the stumbling block comes!

The world itself has stumbling blocks that bring woe.

This is merely a sampling of the many. many scriptures informing us evil comes from sources other than humans, as was asserted in this op.

This means that any and all evil in the world is the result of the sinful nature in mankind. And it is all-encompassing:

Turns out not to be true. The Bible says otherwise.

Keep in mind the fundamental argument of this op is that the source of all evil is evil. That is a circular argument. The redundancy is not alleviated with the inclusion of the word "human." That simply makes the argument "all evil is caused by human evil." Also keep in mind the signature of this op's author is "Biblical Christianity - Where Bible and Christian Meet" but there was an abject refusal to discuss any and all of what is contained in Posts 29, 84, and here. I was abused for asking just one single, simple, valid and op-relevant question.

That was evil.

So why give any credence to an opening post that willfully ignores a plethora of scripture written y someone who refuses to discuss valid and relevant content found firmly stated in the Bible and resorts to attacking others when they ask questions? Many were attacked here.

• But you can't get past that Scripture.
  You seem to not want to accept the Word of God....
• You forget...
• That's what YOU think.
• Why are you having so much trouble with this truth?
• But since you can't get past this Biblical truth....

Titus 3:9-11 ESV
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Let me remind everyone the original question (found in Post #35) was simply, "Is the existence of the adversaries influence on the world in Biblical times and today being denied? If not, then please clarify because that is how this op reads."

There was common ground to be discussed. It's ironic because Post #7 states,

I'll be the first to say there are angels hanging around the world doing dastardly deeds in opposition to God.

The refusal to answer the question asked proves the claim false! He was NOT the first to say angels are a source of evil in the world.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Actually neither of our positions is as clear as you seem to believe.


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.

This is clear. "The angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation" are the ones we are discussing. The question is what does that mean?

No, that is what you want to discuss to try to force an understanding that the angels that sinned are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 but that's not correct.
Angels are in the masculine.
They are a fixed number.
They don't have genitals.
They are spirit-beings (like wind but unseen.)
I'm a son of God. Does that mean I'm an angel?
No, it doesn't.
Before God created man angels that sinned were already delivered in chains of darkness awaiting judgment.

Verse 7 "EVEN AS" ties verse 6 to verse 7. Verse 7 describes the sin as " giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh".

You assume the angels that sinned committed the sin of rebellion which is all encompassing of those that rebelled, but based on Jude 7 I have offered an alternative to the sin being referred to in 2 Peter 2:4.


This seems to be an often used tactic to shut down debate but I am unaffected. Because I see this differently that you DOES NOT MEAN I am disobedient to God's Word, leaning on my own understanding or not allowing God's word to dictate what I believe.

Yes, you see it differently than what is written in Scripture.
You're making things up.

I have done much study on this from both perspectives and have arrived where I am theologically based on the preponderance of evidence. In others words I believe I can produce more scripturally based arguments than you. We shall see.

I believe you are doing just that very thing with your declaration of "all encompassing".
Again I am not deterred by this tactic. I will say what I believe and why I believe it. Answer my points with scriptural arguments.

Everyone who disagrees with you are not opposing God's Word, on this topic there are many who disagree wit you. If we continue this discussion I will point out that your theory leaves far more unanswered questions than does mine.

OK. what are those unanswered questions?

But before we begin it is important that you show you are a child of truth by accepting the Word of Truth written by the Spirit of Truth in 2 Peter 2:4 about the God is Truth.

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 2 Pe 2:4.

It says the angels that sinned.
That would mean all the angels that sinned.
God cast them to hell and delivered them in chains of darkness awaiting judgment.
Peter makes no mention as you do that these angels that sinned - spirit beings - married women - of whom these women cannot see spirit-beings and had children with them when angels have no genitals, all are masculine, and it would violate the ordinance of God created in the created species of the planet earth that horses mate with horses "after their kind" and whales mate with whales "after their kind."
This is an ordinance in creation, and it is inviolable.

 

[Wordsmith]

No, that is what you want to discuss to try to force an understanding that the angels that sinned are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 but that's not correct.

I am not trying to "force" anything, I am giving reasons for what I believe based on my study. I will challenge things I disagree agree with the same as you do.

Angels are in the masculine.

I believe there is one exception in scripture.

Zechariah 5:9 Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven.

10 Then said I to the angel that talked with me, Whither do these bear the ephah?

Not here to argue that point, but you brought it up.

They are a fixed number.

Sure there is a fixed number, but neither you nor I know that number, and that number is irrelevant to what we are discussing.

They don't have genitals.

You have no scripture to support that. If they can appear as human in other respects, who are you to say they cannot accomplish that as well?

They are spirit-beings (like wind but unseen.)

Not always, do we really need to list the multiple scriptures that disagree with you on this?

I'm a son of God. Does that mean I'm an angel?

Nope, I explained that but you ignored it. I will try again. In the NT it is clear born again believers are referred to as the sons of God.

John 1:129 Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven.

You have NO SCRIPTURE from the OT that clearly says believers are sons of God, you assume that apparently based on the NT definition of sons of God which is a huge mistake.

As per the scriptures I posted there is evidence OT references to sons of God is angels and that is a very common belief in the Christian world.

Before God created man angels that sinned were already delivered in chains of darkness awaiting judgment.

You cannot possibly confirm that which scripture. It does fit your narrative but no scripture says that. If you disagree post it.
Sounds like forcing a narrative to me.

 

[Wordsmith]

Yes, you see it differently than what is written in Scripture.

No I see it differently that you but I am basing it on scripture and have posted such.

You're making things up.

You should probably look in the mirror or at least come up with some scripture to back some of you declarations.