The lies about gen 6

[theefaith]

Is that your personal opinion or one of those "traditions" of the RCC because that totally contradicts the words of Jesus. Based on statements which you have been making about Mary and Joseph having no children after Jesus is "true heresy" according to scripture even though I do understand the power of indoctrination.

no contradictions

scripture never says anyone is a child of Mary except for Christ!

never says Mary has sex, just the opposite Lk 1:34

 

[theefaith]

Once they had sex according ot what Scripture says! It is you who is demanding they were celibate in the garden. They may have been, but nothing in Scripture gives evidence of that! They didn't have children until lafter they were evicted from the garden.

they did not have sex until after
Scripture says Adam knew his wife in gen 4 and not in the garden

 

[Moriah's Song]

meow! Most fundamentalists stick with the Kjv and say dan 13 & 14 are not scripture

LOL! You got me on that one. I should have opened by Bible even though I was really joking.

 

[Moriah's Song]

never says Mary has sex, just the opposite Lk 1:34

Luk 1:34...And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" Of course she would say she had no husband because they were not married yet. They did not actually get married until after Jesus was born according to the customs at that time. (See the Lexicon below)
Mat 1:18...Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit; (Note: It could very well be said..."After she gave birth, they came together..."
Luk 1:27...to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
Luk 2:5...to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child.​

Marriages at that time were different than what we do today...to some degree. When Mary got pregnant from the Holy Spirt she was "engaged" to Joseph, not married to him. "Engaged" has the same meaning as "betrothed" does in Greek. Engagements were to be for 1 year. During that year the "husband to be" could "divorce" the promise to marry if he found his "betrothed" to have been unfaithful to him. The Jewish scholar, turned Christian scholar, Alfred Edersheim writes about this very thing. This is also what the Lexicon says about "betrothed/engaged."

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS G3423:
μνηστεύω: passive, perfect participle μεμνηστευμενος (R G) and ἐμνηστευμενος (L T Tr WH) (cf. Winers Grammar, § 12, 10; Veitch, under the word; Tdf. Proleg., p. 121); 1 aorist participle μνηστευθεις; (μνηστός betrothed, espoused); from Homer down; the Sept. for אֵרֵשׂ; τινα (γυναῖκα), to woo her and ask her in marriage; passive, to be promised in marriage, be betrothed: τίνι, Matthew 1:18; Luke 1:27; Luke 2:5.

 

[Moriah's Song]

Scripture says Adam knew his wife in gen 4 and not in the garden

That probably is true even though it does not say whether or not they did or did not have sex in the garden. I would tend to say they did because "God joined them together" while they were in the garden. Sex would not have been a sin because God had married them. It's really not worth debating about is it???

 

[Randy Kluth]

Yes when a word like aggelos has several meanings we must use context. But show me from a reputrable Hebrew source that shows "bene-Elohim" has another definition other than spirit beings aka angels.

1st year Greek is insufficient to make that kind of determination. As I said, good scholars have argued this. The best amateur students of Greek can do is consult study guides and examine the context. The kind of argument you're making *does not work!*

If the phrase "bene_Elohim" was used more than just angels elsewhere in the OT, I would say you have a solid case!

I will say it again: the kind of argument you're making *doesn't work!* Words mean what they mean in context. No matter how often a particular term is used in the Bible, it does not *by that means* obtain a fixed meaning. At any point the meaning of the term can change, based on the context.

I've had this argument before, and just like our situation nothing got resolved. It was an argument over prophecy and the Olivet Discourse, which is something I often discuss. The argument was made that "standing in the holy place" can only refer to the temple itself, and not an area around the temple, because the word for temple is used exclusively for the physical temple in the OT Scriptures.

But I disagreed with that assessment because the holy place, once the "the" part is removed, is used for a number of things besides the temple. So my detractor argued that the form of the word that includes "the" is *always* used only for the temple. And my argument then became, "standing in the holy place" is used, contextually, for the area around Jerusalem where the Roman Army stood. Therefore, "the holy place" means what it means in context. There is no fixed definition for "the holy place" simply because it only had one application under the old temple worship.

So I'm not new to this. And I know how far it can go. Waste of time unless you recognize the principle that these kinds of arguments may add weight to your argument. But they prove nothing really.

What do you make of the angels who have left their first estate?

They cannot be the ones who sided with Lucifer in the rebellion! The NT says they are free and roaming around the earth, while these angles are chained in darkness awaiting the lake of fire!

I try to resist angelology. It ends up nowhere unless it has a genuine spiritual application to our lives.

So you believe no daughters of Cain were ever righteous? You build an entire fable on one passage that includes daughters of God were not fair, that daughters of men can only refer to daughters of Cain.

No, you're being ultra-literal. The principle is that men of faith should be careful to choose mates base on spirituality first, and physical attraction after.

You assume no sons of God could be from Cain ever! Where do you get that empirical facts that Scripture does not say? You do do an awful lot of assuming.

No, I don't make that assumption at all. I quite think sons of God came from Cain. They were, however, heavily influenced by Cain and children who were like him. I suppose children of faith would be outnumbered and outmaneuvered.

This is just a generalization to make a point. In my opinion...

 

[Randy Kluth]

And what lessons in Greek has your brother had! Why do we need another translation? does He feel th erest are heretical or ill written?

My brother is a very nice, a very humble guy. But he's a straight A student and he's been a pastor, one class short of a seminary degree. He probably should have a doctorate for all of the courses and careers he's had!

My brother does the translation work because he loves it. He prefers it over theology. He always says that I like the theology whereas he likes the languages.

If you care to take the on-line courses, they are very good. I've listened to a few of them. Learn Biblical Greek

 

[Randy Kluth]

Did you know that DC Talk was also a Christian rock group?

That's why I cited it. Was a very good band, I might add.

 

[Moriah's Song]

Daniel ends at chapter 12.

#1 - I was joking about theefaith's headache.
#2 - I don't read Daniel and I was joking about that anyway.
Duh!

 

[Moriah's Song]

they were joined only by consent without sex
They sacrificed a lower good of sex for a higher good of bringing our salvation

~ they were "joined only by consent without sex"...

a- that "they were joined only by consent without sex" is a false statement based on NO supporting verses at all - not one. Opinion only.
b- scripture destroys your false assertion. It's a false doctrine created by the Roman Catholic church around 600 a.d.
c- they had at least 6 children after the birth of Jesus. Scripture has been supported of the FACTS multiple times. You are in denial of scriptural truth concerning Mary's children.
​

~ "They sacrificed a lower good of sex for a higher good of bringing our salvation".

d- Again no scripture support for this entire claim.
e- they did not need to sacrifice anything. They were not married when Mary got pregnant. (see lexicon below re:wife and OT marriage ceremonies)
f- they did NOTHING to bring about my salvation nor anyone elses salvation. That is heresy.
g- Mary needed a Savior just like the rest of us; she was not without sin as the RCC falsely claims.

And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, Luk 1:46-47

STRONGS G1135: γυνή, -αικός, ἡ;
1. universally, a woman of any age, whether a virgin, or married, or a widow: Matthew 9:20; Matthew 13:33; Matthew 27:55; Luke 13:11; Acts 5:14, etc.; ἡ μεμνηστευμένη τινὶ γυνή, Luke 2:5 R G; ἡ ὕπανδρος γυνή, Romans 7:2; γυνὴ χήρα, Luke 4:26 (1 Kings 7:2 (1 Kings 7:14); 1 Kings 17:9; femina vidua, Nepos, praef. 4).
2. a wife: 1 Corinthians 7:3f, 10, 18; Ephesians 5:22, etc.; γυνή τινος, Matthew 5:31; Matthew 19:3, 5; Acts 5:1, 7; 1 Corinthians 7:2; Ephesians 5:28; Revelation 2:20 [G L WH marginal reading], etc. of a betrothed woman...

OT marriage ceremonies: (partial portion from:(The Bible - Read and Study Free Online)

Jewish marriage included a number of steps: first, betrothal (which involved the prospective groom’s traveling from his father’s house to the home of the prospective bride, paying the purchase price, and thus establishing the marriage covenant); second, the groom’s returning to his father’s house (which meant remaining separate from his bride for 12 months, during which time he prepared the living accommodations for his wife in his father’s house)....​

You’re assertions are not in scripture

Without a doubt, it is "your assertions that are not in scripture" as you have been repeatedly shown many scripture verses that refutes your posts.
​

 

[theefaith]

LOL! You got me on that one. I should have opened by Bible even though I was really joking.

it was in the Bible for a 1000 yrs before being deleted by the tradition of men under king james

 

[Ronald Nolette]

they did not have sex until after
Scripture says Adam knew his wife in gen 4 and not in the garden

That doesn't mean He didn't have sex. What Gen. 4 does say, is that when Adam knew His wife here she got pregnant. any other declaration is pure personal opinion.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

#1 - I was joking about theefaith's headache.
#2 - I don't read Daniel and I was joking about that anyway.
Duh!

Okay. Jus checkin. I am sure you know lots of people here believe that Danniel would have 14 chapters. Wasn't trying to accuse, just check.

 

[Moriah's Song]

scripture never says anyone is a child of Mary except for Christ!

Identifying False Doctrine 101:
If it teaches something different from what God's word says, it's false.

Ask yourself this: Did the writers of the New Testament create heresy when they wrote indicating that Joseph and Mary had children after Jesus was born? Remember, there were different writers in different areas writing letters to the church in Jerusalem and at different times. So how could they be in agreement with one another to the degree that scripture shows if Mary and Joseph did not have children later?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

never says Mary has sex, just the opposite Lk 1:34

Luke 1:34
King James Version

34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?


To say this means that Mary would never have sex not only contradicts Scripture, but is guilty of twisting Scriptures and trashing all teh rules of Grammar god gave man to communicate!

Matthew 1:24-25
King James Version

24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.


If you were honest with God's word you would see that God revealed that Joseph did not have sex with Mary UNTIL AFTER Jesus was born. That is the normal, common, usual way people would understand this according to grammar God gave us!

but you twist and allegorize scripture not only here but in many other places and fulfill the Words of the Apostle Peter:

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

 

[theefaith]

Identifying False Doctrine 101:
If it teaches something different from what God's word says, it's false.

Ask yourself this: Did the writers of the New Testament create heresy when they wrote indicating that Joseph and Mary had children after Jesus was born? Remember, there were different writers in different areas writing letters to the church in Jerusalem and at different times. So how could they be in agreement with one another to the degree that scripture shows if Mary and Joseph did not have children later?

they never indicated any such thing


Matt 1:25 He knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.

Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Until only states that they had no relation up to that point, the Bible does not say they had sex ever, before or after that point!

 

[theefaith]

Luke 1:34
King James Version

34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?


To say this means that Mary would never have sex not only contradicts Scripture, but is guilty of twisting Scriptures and trashing all teh rules of Grammar god gave man to communicate!

Matthew 1:24-25
King James Version

24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.


If you were honest with God's word you would see that God revealed that Joseph did not have sex with Mary UNTIL AFTER Jesus was born. That is the normal, common, usual way people would understand this according to grammar God gave us!

but you twist and allegorize scripture not only here but in many other places and fulfill the Words of the Apostle Peter:

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Sex is not a requirement for marriage

it never says sex!

 

[Moriah's Song]

Sex is not a requirement for marriage

it never says sex!

LoL! Ok what synonym do you want the use for "sex?"

 

[Moriah's Song]

2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.

Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

Now that would be a genuine miracle now wouldn't it!

 

[theefaith]

Some made good point if the sons of God in Gen 6 are fallen angels and have offspring with the daughters of men then the offspring would Have to obey the commandments and honor fallen angels! Is that even possible?