abijah wrote: ↑December 11th, 2022, 11:37 pm
onefour1 wrote: ↑December 9th, 2022, 6:47 pmHate to inform you but angels are mankind.
Doctrine and Covenants 130:4-5
4 In answer to the question—Is not the reckoning of God’s time, angel’s time, prophet’s time, and man’s time, according to the planet on which they reside?
5 I answer, Yes. But there are no angels who minister to this earth but those who do belong or have belonged to it.
In other words, all angels that ever administer to anyone on this earth were either someone who has already lived on this earth, are currently living on this earth, or will come to live on this earth as mankind...
Well I believe these things too. I don't quite see how this doctrine is inconsistent with what Paul, Peter and Jude all explicitly say on the matter, or at all incompatible with the larger scriptural nephilim account. If anything, this understanding of how angels = the spirits of men who belong to this earth sheds even
more light to what Paul, Peter and Jude are saying, and provide even
more context to the true nature and magnitude of the sin of sodom, and how it relates to the antediluvian nephilim-wives.
1 Corinthians 11
For this cause ought the woman to have power on her
head,
because of the angels.
onefour1 wrote: ↑December 9th, 2022, 6:47 pmThe sons of God intermingling with the daughters of men were those men who were among the righteous followers of God who went after the women who were among the unrighteous and didn't follow God.
These are the same the thing - the
same pattern - just on different scales. The two interpretations are probably much less mutually-exclusive than you might first think. Contrary to before, i know better now than to knock the 'sons of seth' interpretation as well. There are serious rabbitholes here (so many) you aren't aware of, and that I don't fully understand yet, certainly not well enough to articulate coherently in a post here, at least not yet.
onefour1 wrote: ↑December 9th, 2022, 6:47 pm This is taught by President Spencer W. Kimball in his book, Miracle of Forgiveness.
*abijah facepalm*,
ok cool, but upon closer examination you may just find that stale lds dogma and the timeless,
expirementable truth in the scriptures may just not be the same thing at the end of the day, or even on the same level of comparison. We have truths no one else has/comprehends, but we have our share of false traditions as well. This particular false tradition however is certainly not unique to lds however, confusing the context surrounding the flood has likely been one of the adversary's chief goals in history, and has seemingly accomplished this fairly well, throughout nearly the entirety of modern/recent christendom. its origin is in rabbinic judaism, as a reaction to Christianity because of the Christ-affirming implications of the original/traditional
`angelic` interpretation of Genesis 6.
onefour1 wrote: ↑December 9th, 2022, 6:47 pmNot only that but it is doctrine that Jesus Christ was the first to resurrect. This means that all angels before the days of Christ were premortal spirits or men on the earth.
The nephilim births (which ultimately precipitate the need for a Flood) are presented in the scriptures as cosmic-scale
miscarriages/abortions. (mind-blowing rabbithole here pertaining to the exodus`1 midwives who pharaoh tried to coerce to drown-in-the-
flood/abort the hebrew man-babies)
Just as nephilim are counterfeit christs (offspring of a
mortal women and a
divine sire), so are nephilim incarnations
counterfeit resurrections:
Isaiah 45
*Woe* unto him that saith unto his father,
What begettest thou? or to the
woman,
*What* hast thou brought forth? onefour1 wrote: ↑December 9th, 2022, 6:47 pmA premortal spirit is not capable of having sex with a mortal.
There were no resurrected beings who could have come in the Old Testament since all angels belong to this earth and Christ was the first to resurrect. So unless it was men on this earth who were called the Sons of God then there is no other possibility. So it's self evident that this does not refer to other beings that were not mortal men on the earth. There was never any supernatural beings having sex with women on the earth.
firstly, angels do physical things in the scriptures all the time (pre-resurrection).
Secondly, nephilim can still be born via
satanic proxy-work (demonic-possessed ritual fornication with a temple/shrine prostitute), a la the
bed of King Og.
Notwithstanding there are
two empirical facts one cannot dispute:
Fact 1: Paul, Peter & Jude
all three make a
direct comparison between the *Genesis6 flood story* and the *Genesis19 sodom story*
Fact 2: the men of Sodom were trying to have sex with Lot's
*angelic* visitors
The coexistence of ^these two facts shows that there is at least
*some* basis in what I'm saying/speculating here.
Im just curious how people who dispute the scriptural nephilim/forsworn "sons of God" can
possibly account for the way the New Testament talks about these pre-flood events, in comparison w/ the sin of sodom? Paul, Peter & Jude all present these two angels+humans narratives as being two sides of the same coin. Have you glanced at that other thread I hyperlinked in my prior post any chance?
abijah` wrote: ↑November 20th, 2021, 5:09 pm
I know it sounds silly and worthy of eyeroll, but when talking about what the scriptures say about the subject of gays - one simply cant ignore the fact that Paul, Jude as well as Peter all make a
direct comparison between the Sodomites of Genesis 19, and the SonsofGod + MortalDaughters situation of Genesis 6:
Jude
And the
angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day—
just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
Romans 1
they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For
their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;
and
in the same way the men
likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another,
men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
2 Peter 2
For if God did not spare
angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment;
if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;
and as by turning the cities of
Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly
2 Peter 3
For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,
and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.
But
by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
Nothing in scripture proves that the Sons of God were unembodied spirits. Nothing you are saying above proves that point either. Satan and his angels and all other disembodied spirits are not capable of procreation. A resurrected being probably does not have the power to procreate either unless they are exalted into the kingdom of heaven. Since all angels who administer to this earth belong to this earth according to the revelation, and since Christ was the first to resurrect, no ministering spirit to this earth before the days of Christ who was not already living upon the earth as a mortal was capable of having a body of flesh and bones. Thus the only possibility of procreating on this earth was between mortal man and woman on this earth.
Now if you want to believe that disembodied spirits can procreate that is up to you. But I certainly do not believe it and if they could, Satan and his fallen minions are probably having lots and lots of children as we speak. The two facts you bring up:
Notwithstanding there are two empirical facts one cannot dispute:
Fact 1: Paul, Peter & Jude all three make a direct comparison between the *Genesis6 flood story* and the *Genesis19 sodom story*
Fact 2: the men of Sodom were trying to have sex with Lot's *angelic* visitors
I don't see any verse by Peter, Paul, and Jude that goes against the idea presented or proves that the sons of God were disembodied spirits. The angels you speak of who visited Lot were mortal men. Read the entire chapter and you will see evidence of this.
GENESIS CHAPTER 19
Lot entertains
holy men—The men of Sodom seek to abuse Lot’s guests and are smitten with blindness—Lot is sent out of Sodom—The Lord rains brimstone and fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah—Lot’s daughters preserve his seed in the land.
1 And there came
two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant’s house, and tarry all night, and
wash your feet, and ye shall
rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.
3 And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast,
and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.
4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are
the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto
these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
10 But
the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door.
12 And
the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place:
The verse above, although they are referred to as angels, were referenced by the men of Sodom as men and also mentioned in other verses as men. Lot cooked them a meal and they did eat of it and they were going to sleep through the night at Lots home. These do not sound like unembodied spirits but mortal holy men who came to destroy the city. They also washed their feet. JST Genesis 19:18 calls them Holy men. I think these men were called angels because they were sent to delivery a message from God and not because they were disembodied spirits.
ok cool, but upon closer examination you may just find that stale lds dogma and the timeless, expirementable truth in the scriptures may just not be the same thing at the end of the day, or even on the same level of comparison. We have truths no one else has/comprehends, but we have our share of false traditions as well. This particular false tradition however is certainly not unique to lds however, confusing the context surrounding the flood has likely been one of the adversary's chief goals in history, and has seemingly accomplished this fairly well, throughout nearly the entirety of modern/recent christendom. its origin is in rabbinic judaism, as a reaction to Christianity because of the Christ-affirming implications of the original/traditional `angelic` interpretation of Genesis 6. 