Doctrine Discussion about matters of the faith.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 06-01-2009, 08:59 PM
CKG CKG is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Warner Robins, Georgia
Posts: 197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenbear View Post
CKG,
These verses indicate to me that the events of Genesis 6:2 will happen again unless there are giants who survived being wiped out by Israel. The days of Noe are distinguished by the corruption of human flesh by fallen angels. Why would Jesus liken the last days before His second coming to the days of Noe if the events of Gen 6:2 and I assume you also mean on through 6:12 don't happen again? Do you think Jesus is only referring to the quick destruction, every imagination of man's heart being evil continually, the earth being filled with violence but not the other defining aspect of Gen 6 and Sodom and Gomorrah, namely going after strange flesh? It's true that Satan doesn't need to try to corrupt the messianic line in the last days so that much is different.
Why would Jesus liken the last days before His second coming to the days of Noe? If you read what it says, the attitude of the people in light of the coming judgment is the context of Matthew 24:37-41 and Luke 17:26-30. That is what Jesus is telling us and nothing else. They continued their lives with a "business as usual" mentality and ignored the coming judgment. This is the point Jesus is making.
Matthew 24
37. But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38. 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,
39. And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Luke 17
26. And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29. But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed
.

To say this is referring to another occurrence like the angels that sinned in Genesis 6 is to read something into it that is not there. The angels that sinned in copulating with women have been dealt with.
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)

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 Peter 2:4)
The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software
  #72  
Old 06-01-2009, 09:26 PM
tonybones2112's Avatar
tonybones2112 tonybones2112 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Tim View Post
The necessity is to consider it a possibility, since there is no evidence other than pure speculation*** that something intervened to stop the activity prior to the flood. The age argument doesn't work because that continued past the flood for a number of generations.

*** Of course, the whole angels-mating-with-women is speculation based on a phrase, "sons of God" which we have seen may have several meanings, although NO SCRIPTURE equates the phrase with angels.
Tim, I sort of hate to leave you alone in the thread as the sole dissenter, would you like me to return brother? I have a few roadside bombs to set off.

Grace and peace

Vo Nghuyen Giap
  #73  
Old 06-01-2009, 11:20 PM
greenbear's Avatar
greenbear greenbear is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CKG View Post
Why would Jesus liken the last days before His second coming to the days of Noe? If you read what it says, the attitude of the people in light of the coming judgment is the context of Matthew 24:37-41 and Luke 17:26-30. That is what Jesus is telling us and nothing else. They continued their lives with a "business as usual" mentality and ignored the coming judgment. This is the point Jesus is making.
Matthew 24
37. But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38. 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,
39. And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Luke 17
26. And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29. But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed
.

To say this is referring to another occurrence like the angels that sinned in Genesis 6 is to read something into it that is not there. The angels that sinned in copulating with women have been dealt with.
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)

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 Peter 2:4)
CKG,

You make a valid point. I'll have to think about that.
  #74  
Old 06-02-2009, 12:16 PM
greenbear's Avatar
greenbear greenbear is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CKG View Post
I'm not sure why you addressed this to me because I never said Jesus had a sin nature. I already knew he didn't have one because no such thing as a sin nature exists in the Bible. The term sin nature comes from reformation theology, not Bible theology. If we sin because we have a sin nature then what caused Adam and Eve to sin? Did they have a sin nature before the fall? They sinned because of the same reason we do. They chose their own lusts and desires over God's will.
But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. (James 1:14-15)

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. (Genesis 3:6)

For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. (1 John 2:16)
Our problem is the flesh!
This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. (Galatians 5:16-17)
The virgin birth of Christ is an important, essential and non-negotiable doctrine of the faith, but the idea that Jesus had to be virgin born to avoid the sin nature is silly and a moot point. It was the only way he could be born into this world since he is God and has existed from eternity past. You and I don't have a pre-existence. Our life begins at conception as the result of the union between a man and woman (preferably husband and wife). He couldn't be conceived the same way you and I are or else he would've just been another man. He had to enter the world and take on a body like ours in order to die on a cross and pay for our sins and the only way he could be born was through the virgin birth. He took on a body just like ours EXCEPT he never ever once sinned. I know there are many deep things in the Bible that require a lot of study to understand but a lot of times it is man who complicates things with his man-made theology.
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: (Romans 8:3)

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; (Hebrews 2:14)
As far as Genesis 6; Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:7 is pretty clear about who these sons of God were.
.................................................. ..................................................
Quote:
The term sin nature comes from reformation theology, not Bible theology.
Nevertheless what saith the scripture?

Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
These thirteen words prove there is a sin nature.

Quote:
If we sin because we have a sin nature then what caused Adam and Eve to sin? Did they have a sin nature before the fall? They sinned because of the same reason we do. They chose their own lusts and desires over God's will.
God says Eve transgressed because she was deceived.

1 Timothy 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

2 Cor 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Paul says we have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. Eve was deceived but Adam's eyes were wide open. He knew what he was doing. Adam is a son of God, a direct creation of God, like the angels who rebelled. He was not conceived in sin or shapen in iniquity. His descendants are, though.

Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Adam and Eve didn't have a sin nature when they ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Eve was deceived and Adam decided to follow his wife. God said they would die in the day they eatest thereof. Clearly, something happened immediatley after they disobeyed God's only commandment for them. God wasn't just speaking of the physical death of the body but also spiritual death. They knew they were naked; they were ashamed and they hid from God that day. They knew they needed a covering so they sewed aprons of fig leaves. 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. The coat of skins is typical of the Jewish sacrificial system and ultimately the sacrifice of the Lamb of God for the sins of adam's descendants. There is such a thing as a sin nature passed down to adam's descendants.

Genesis
2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

3:11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? 3:12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

3:13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

Adam's offense put the curse of death upon all of his descendants.
Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

Mankind has no power to keep from sinning. If we only had to deal with the same circumstances that Adam did perhaps we would make the decision to obey God? We're not in the same situation that Adam was in. God says we are helpless to cease sinning

5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

It seems to me that the idea that sin is in the flesh, flesh being defined as purely physical , is not of christian origin. I think there is some connection to the manichaean view that sin is of the physical realm. When Adam sinned he died spiritually. Sin is a spiritual, not a physical, thing. This idea that there is no sin nature seems dangerous to me.
  #75  
Old 06-02-2009, 12:32 PM
greenbear's Avatar
greenbear greenbear is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 492
Default

I just now read George's post on women teaching men that he posted yesterday on a woman's place thread. I think my preceding post is true but I don't know if I should post doctrinal stuff. I don't want anyone to think I am trying to be offensive. I'll stop posting for now.
  #76  
Old 06-02-2009, 02:32 PM
Bro. Parrish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Greenbear, we're not in a church service in Corinth, I think you are free to state your opinions on the Bible here. If you get too "bossy" we can always have Bro. Tim beat you about the head.

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenbear View Post
God hasn't allowed it to go on!!! He locked the offending angels in prision unto the day of judgement. There is no necessary corollary!!!
She has a point Tim... of course the "offense" in this passage could be merely the fact that they left their "first estate," but still it could be the sexual interaction as well. Like I said we just don't know for sure, but let's face it; there remain some salient facts in this discussion that are still standing like 800 lb. gorilas in the room:

1. The word Nephilim means "fallen ones."

2. The Bible itself clearly defines who the "sons of God" are.
(see scripture in post 23 and 25)

3. To my knowledge, the Sethites were never called the "sons of God."
  #77  
Old 06-02-2009, 04:03 PM
greenbear's Avatar
greenbear greenbear is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish View Post
Greenbear, we're not in a church service in Corinth, I think you are free to state your opinions on the Bible here. If you get too "bossy" we can always have Bro. Tim beat you about the head.



She has a point Tim... of course the "offense" in this passage could be merely the fact that they left their "first estate," but still it could be the sexual interaction as well. Like I said we just don't know for sure, but let's face it; there remain some salient facts in this discussion that are still standing like 800 lb. gorilas in the room:

1. The word Nephilim means "fallen ones."

2. The Bible itself clearly defines who the "sons of God" are.
(see scripture in post 23 and 25)

3. To my knowledge, the Sethites were never called the "sons of God."
Quote:
Greenbear, we're not in a church service in Corinth, I think you are free to state your opinions on the Bible here. If you get too "bossy" we can always have Bro. Tim beat you about the head.
Well...O.K. I'm getting very confused.

Not only did the angels leave "their first estate" they also left "their own habitation". I'm tempted to do a word study. Sons of God=fallen angels naysayers please explain what else these verses could mean? Doesn't scripture always define/interpret itself?
Quote:
1:6 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.
  #78  
Old 06-02-2009, 04:08 PM
Winman Winman is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 464
Default

Habitation is defined as:

1) a dwelling place, habitation

a) of the body as a dwelling place for the spirit

So, Jude 1:6 could very well be saying they left their spiritual body.

1 Cor 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
  #79  
Old 06-02-2009, 04:14 PM
Luke's Avatar
Luke Luke is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 594
Default

To refute the "godly line of seth"

i) There is no such thing as a godly line of anyone. Jesus genealogy was not godly - it included murderers, adulterers and harlots.

ii) A "saved", "righteous" or "godly" person does not have gigantic children, anywhere in scripture. The opposite is true. Goliath, had four brothers and all of them were his sons. He committed incest with his mother. Not a godly act.

iii) If seth is so godly, why did he do this thing, and why is everyone judged for it?
  #80  
Old 06-02-2009, 04:15 PM
Bro. Parrish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenbear View Post
Well...O.K. I'm getting very confused.

Not only did the angels leave "their first estate" they also left "their own habitation". I'm tempted to do a word study. Sons of God=fallen angels naysayers please explain what else these verses could mean? Doesn't scripture always define/interpret itself?
To me it's simple. I think you are correct in this point about the sons of God, it is defined in scripture as we already showed.
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Website © AV1611.Com.
Posts represent only the opinions of users of this forum and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the webmaster.

Software for Believing Bible Study

 
Contact Us AV1611.Com