Search results

Biblicist--This certainly is an interesting theory & one that actually shows thought on your part. But let me explain what I mean when I say ‘unverifiable assumption with statements that lacks any real scriptural or scientific evidence.’ The Bible does not speak of the chemical makeup of...

Biblicist--I’m glad you actually answered—I love discussing this topic---& while I can admit the issue as a whole is not a 1st rate doctrine—accurately interpreting Gen 6 does have critical consequences on proper biblical angelology/demonology. And I say this with no disrespect---But--your...

How exactly is DNA purely physical when there are chemical elements? But regardless-- do angels bypass this when these spirits take physical form in an angelophany? Even if we limited DNA to physical, once they become tangible do they take on DNA? (& what is your evidence for what makes up a...

Deacon & thisnumber—I could be wrong—but I think the question was—did they have any children before Seth (besides Cain & Able)—not if they simply had other children—if so the affirmative answer could impact the interpretation of other difficult texts

Also—since many believe that Cain’s wife was his sister or niece-it could imply other children before Seth—in Jubilees 4:9 & Sanhedrin 58b he marries his sister (ie Jewish tradition)--but once again the timing could be an issue—as well as overcoming other theories—regardless hope this helps

Off the top of my head—I know a common answer to who it was that Cain feared when he killed Able was the wrath of his siblings (implying they had other kids before Seth) Gen 4-13 Cain said to the LORD, "My punishment is greater than I can bear. 14 Behold, you have driven me today away from the...

Jeremy-I never try to put words in the mouth of others—but it seems you support (or at least come closest to) the “pre-wrath rapture” view—I’m a post-trib supporter, but I must admit that pre-wrath would be my 2nd choice—here is a book you might be interested in...

I don’t have time to answer at the moment—but I just wanted to say—this is absolutely one of the best list of eschatology questions I’ve seen in a while—Impressive thinking regardless of where this post goes!

Post-trib based on 1 Thess 4:16-5:11; Matt 24; Rev 11 (to name a few). Although I’m not completely opposed to the pre-wrath view (I guess it would be a close 2nd). More importantly I find the demonology in Rev 9-13 fascinating. Although I don’t see Jesus saying about the “days of Noah” (Matt...

Humblethinker--in regards to your 1st post--Very good recommendation, even when I disagree with Walton's theology, I can appreciate his insight into ANE culture. He is a must read for anyone undergoing an in-depth study of the book of Genesis!

Winman—I have no doubt your telling the truth—unfortunately if someone has not experienced similar events—they’ll have no idea about how valid your description is!

Web--When it comes to demonic activity of any kind-- the reality of the event can be hard to verify with tangible evidence. This is especially true with demons causing paranormal activity. Although the experience is very real for the person undergoing it, many (even Christians) deny the...

Well the scribes who complied the LXX weren’t exactly pagans & they used Iesous (when referring to Joshua)--& unless someone can show me ancient NT writings that pre-date the original Greek (& yes I’m well aware of the supposed earlier Hebrew or Aramaic NT versions which have never been...

Despite the problem with the link (which honestly my virus protection is set on high so maybe its oversensitive)—I have several computer programs that have the 1611 so I have no problem viewing it—but you seem to be suggesting that the 1611 is the original autograph & that the original NT was...

So your suggesting the 1611 is preferable over the original Greek? Why would this be true? And btw the sight you keep linking has a virus according to my computer virus protection—so I’m not going there anytime soon--sorry

What do you mean true Scripture? Are you suggesting that the Greek term for Jesus is not Iesous?

HisWitness now you know I like you—so this is not a personal attack—but I’m not sure why your assuming that the 1611 is superior to original Greek (which in the original Greek—Jesus is Iesous—which the scribes who compiled the LXX transliterated from the Hebrew Joshua)—regardless-- my real...

Luke 4:27 is about Elisha (not Elijah) & the 1611 has Elizeus—which is referring to Elisha--- the Greek has Elisaiou (a form of Elisha)—are you sure you didn’t mix up Elijah & Elisha? Or am I missing something?

Very well said! And yes I like Morris as well (although I haven’t read his commentary in a while). Ironically, it was my overzealous addiction to the angelic interpretation of Gen 6 that God used to lead me to study the rest of Genesis in detail. So it should be of no surprise that I...

Gotcha! ;) thanks 4 clarifying my brother!