Gen 6 - Chuck Missler

[Dave]

Jesus' Strange Prediction Part 1 - Chuck Missler

Chuck Missler - Koinonia House – I love this guy – amazing Christian educator
Have often consider taking his classes as a family

He uses the term “Fallen Angels” – I will not dismiss him for his vocabulary
He makes no reference to their origin – only their involvement with Gen 6

Clarification of vocabulary
Angels = messengers – there are two groups –
One group we know as messengers of the Lord / Angels of the Lord
The other group = the Beast of Revelation – the serpent race – we call devils and agl/NTsatanas
Gnostics vocabulary – the First/Chief Archon and the Archon /Principalities / agl/NT satanas
Hebrew vocabulary – very limited but – Beelzebub, Lilith, shedim, and satyr
World vocabulary – these creatures are the ‘other gods’ of the ahl + the ‘other gods’ and devils of all the 99% - these creatures are the Hindu gods, Asian gods, African gods, Norse gods, Greek gods, = all the gods of the 99%

Clarification of vocabulary
Bane elohiym – angel view (messenger view)
These are not good guy angels (messengers) – Angels of the Lord
They are from the second group – the serpent race – the Archon – the Beast of Revelation

The Days of Noah – or the Return of the Nephilim
It is a cosmic deception
02:00 - and most Christians are not prewired for what is coming

02:12 Jesus’ strange prediction
Mat 24:37 “For just as the days of Noah were, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Gen 6:1 Now when humankind began to multiply on the face of the ground and daughters were born to them,
Gen 6:2 then the sons of God (bane elohiym / archon) saw that the daughters of men were good and they took for themselves wives, any they chose.
Gen 6:3 Then Adonai said, “My Spirit will not remain with humankind forever, since they are flesh. So their days will be 120 years.”
Gen 6:4 The Nephilim (archon offspring of the bane elohiym) were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, whenever the sons of God came to the daughters of men, and gave birth to them. Those were the mighty men of old, men of renown.

04:35 – what is meant by the Sons of God - bane elohiym
04:50 – ahl use = angels only
05:12 – he says Jon 1:11 – but my copy says John 1:12 (hard not to be human)
Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
05:22 – agl use only of believers

05:40 – Enoch – not scripture – but relevant and well understood by the audience of Jesus Christ
06:30 – the LXX translates them as angels

06:50 – Fallen Angels came down from heaven and had sex with women
It might sound strange – bazar – upset many
but IT IS WHAT THE TEXT SAYS

07:26 – Nephilim
07:55 – the Nephilim are the children of this unnatural union
08:00 - do not confuse the ‘Fallen Angels” who are the parents with the Nephilim who are the children
08:20 – he says – notice all offspring are males
Hmmm – maybe – assumption – there are female angels (Zec 5) – most everything else comes in male/female – don’t know – not arguing – just leaving a door open

08:31 – definition of Nephilim
H5303 - נְפִל נְפִיל - nephı̂yl - From H5307; properly, a feller, that is, a bully or tyrant:
H5303 - נְפִיל nphiyl נְפִל nphil (nef-eel') - (properly) a feller, i.e. a bully or tyrant.

How does he get – Fallen Ones?
He uses the root of Nephilim - nâphal

H5307 – נָפַל - nâphal - A primitive root; to fall, in a great variety of applications (intransitively or causatively, literally or figuratively): - be accepted, cast (down, self, [lots], out), cease, die, divide (by lot), (let) fail, (cause to, let, make, ready to) fall (away, down, -en, -ing), fell (-ing), fugitive, have [inheritamce], inferior, be judged [by mistake for H6419], lay (along), (cause to) lie down, light (down), be (X hast) lost, lying, overthrow,

So he has “Fallen Angels” who fathered “the Fallen Ones”
You have to ask then – what is meant by the term “Fallen”?

H5307 – נָפַל - nâphal – is a very flexible word – so many uses
divide (by lot), (let) fail, (cause to, let, make, ready to) fall (away, down, -en, -ing), fell (-ing),
(cause to) lie down, lost, overthrow,

I think of the Nephilim as – THOSE WHO CAUSE OTHERS TO FALL
It happens to be their function / role in scripture

09:00 - Giants in Greek
He says = earth born

Clarification of vocabulary
Greek giants = children of Gia (mother earth)
Greek giants = Titans – father by god Cronos + Gia (mother earth)

09:40 – Gen 6 is the prelude to The Flood of Noah
09:50 a return to the genealogy of Noah
10:40 – Fallen Angels – fathered the Nephilim and they were agents of unusual violence
11:20 – he says – “There was a gene pool problem”

11:35 – NT Confirmation of the angel view
These angels are set aside for for a special judgment
Jude 6:7, 2 Peter 3:8


Jesus' Strange Prediction Part 2 - Chuck Missler

Clarification of vocabulary
Hades is not Catholic hell – it is the realm of the unseen – all the heavens
Tartarus = the pit of the unseen world – Hebrew Gehenna of shoel
Rev 9:1 Then the fifth angel trumpeted, and I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to earth. The key to the bottomless pit was given to him.

01:30- he describes and dismiss the Sethian view
If you do not properly understand what happen in Gen 6 there are many aspects of scripture you will not understand

07:25 – Noah perfect geanology – why does it matter

07:30 – the angel view from the agl

08:25 - the angel view before Christ

08:42 – angel view of the early church

09:28 – angel vie – modern scholarship – Mainstream Christianity

First Point – He says (messengers) Angels came down to earth and had sex with women to father the Nephilim
The (messengers) here are not God’s Angels / Angels of the Lord
They are from the other group – the Beast of Revelation, the serpent race – the Archon

Second Point – they did not come down – they were already here before mankind – the Archon

Third Point – if you do not understand this passage – you will not understand much of scripture or prophesy

Eph 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers (Archon/Principalities), against the powers, against the worldly forces of this darkness, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places (Archon/Principalities – the Beast of Revelation – the serpent race – who we call devils and agl/NT satanas)

No mention of Robert's satan anywhere

[Deleted]

I watched all your videos Dave, you cling to straws using these men,

Missler speaks of two theories and presents the Seth /Cain theory against the fallen angels theory.

No where does anybody speak of archons, only fallen angels, but you are happy to twist their presentations to suit your view.

Do you have any videos of the satan/ satanas debate you profess to follow, but nobody does?

While some such as Missler like the idea of fallen angels having sex with humans, he does not support your archon idea. I get the impression nobody does. You are truly alone?

I will stick to my Seth theory, as for the giant idea, all the humans were naturally giants, we have mutated into smaller sizes as a result of the curse of sin.

Shalom

[Dave]

No where does anybody speak of archons, only fallen angels, but you are happy to twist their presentations to suit your view.
Everything he says is all about the archon – and you know it
Playing a word game trying to hide behind vocabulary

He makes zero reference to Exk 28 - Isa 4 - or Rev 12
He says absolutley nothinh about your Hebrew satan
He and Jude are speaking about the same event

Jud 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. 

While some such as Missler like the idea of fallen angels having sex with humans, he does not support your archon idea. I get the impression nobody does. You are truly alone?
He absolutely supports that the bane elohiym of gen 6 are ‘angelic beings’ – bad-guy angels = archon the Beast of Revelation the serpent race we call devils and satanas

Everyone I have ever met agrees that Jude is speaking of the bane elohiym of Gen 6

I will stick to my Seth theory, as for the giant idea, all the humans were naturally giants, we have mutated into smaller sizes as a result of the curse of sin.
Except – Chuck Missler totally destroys your Sethian doctrine – you fail to defend

Just to say - I do not believe - does not a study make

No where does anybody speak of archons, only fallen angels
Your attempt at word games - confuse the vocabulary - change definitions as you need to - to keep the true identity of your Catholic satan in a position of power

[Deleted]

D" Everything he says is all about the archon – and you know it
Playing a word game trying to hide behind vocabulary

He makes zero reference to Exk 28 - Isa 4 - or Rev 12
He says absolutley nothinh about your Hebrew satan
He and Jude are speaking about the same event
R" Hmm? perhaps. He says they are fallen angels. By definition this includes Ek 28 which talks about fallen angel.
He doesn't use the term gnostic, or archons or anything you would like.

I personally would never use him for your view.

D"Just to say - I do not believe - does not a study make
R" I am still waiting for your scholar study of satan and satanas, you play word games more than I do.

And you just believe this, you even say Missler says this... when He doesn't.

When I meet a scholar of Greek and Hebrew, I will ask this question, and get back to you

SHalom

[Dave]

R" Hmm? perhaps. He says they are fallen angels. By definition this includes Ek 28 which talks about fallen angel.

By definition - Please defend your definition - where is your pre-Romen proof
Please provide documantation that everyone bleieved the OT as Rome presents at the time of Jesus Christ
Please prove that your Ezk 28 existed in your view - before Rome invented it
Why can't you defend your own doctrine

He doesn't use the term gnostic, or archons or anything you would like.

What he says is very straight forward - only you choose to stumble over vocabulary

[Deleted]

1Ti 6:20 O Dave, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of gnosticism falsely so called:
21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen

[Dave]

By definition - Please defend your definition - where is your pre-Romen proof
Please provide documantation that everyone bleieved the OT as Rome presents at the time of Jesus Christ
Please prove that your Ezk 28 existed in your view - before Rome invented it
Why can't you defend your own doctrine

[Deleted]

Greetings Dave, you asked a difficult thing.

You cannot sway a person with a world view with evidence. Impossible, so in some respects our witness to different views, is a waste of time. Pride interferes with our world views.

I am surprised at your continued stand for more evidence.

I gave you two sources. The Ancient CHinese pictographs depict a devil hiding secret in the garden to do four changes to thinking, (ie beginnings of sin) and this writing show a devil completely different to your good angel only obeying the Lord to prosecute humans. The Chinese depict a being actually secretly deceiving them so they sin as much as the devil himself sins.

Than I also showed you the Waldensians from 100AD to 300 AD had a view of the devil sinning to make humans also sin, before the Catholic view of edited Scriptures. If the Waldensians were on the Roman Catholic side of things, why were they killed and exterminated over the years?

Since you have access to Jewish and a Jewish assembly, ask them are there any Karanite Messanic Jews who have different views of ha-satan more in line with the torah as a cherub who sinned long before Mankind even existed? My Australian Rabbi Apple has this view, but you ignored his comments on the Ezekiel 28 verse.

So overall you have pushed aside 3 pieces of evidence I have presented. In the balance of probabilities, one can conclude you have ignored the probability that the Scripture is correct and you are wrong.

Shalom

[Dave]

The Ancient Chinese pictographs depict a devil hiding secret in the garden
YES Robert – the serpent was in the garden – who here denies this?

Than I also showed you the Waldensians from 100AD to 300 AD had a view of the devil sinning to make humans also sin, before the Catholic view of edited Scriptures.
You showed me that the Waldensians used the Latin Vulgate commissioned by St Jerome in 104AD

What is your point?

The challenge before you is to show me a pre-Roman source for your Ezk 28 concept of a rebellious satan that opposes God

Still waiting

[Deleted]

OK Dave, I will pray that God send me to a scholar even a Jew who will help me, so I will get back to you on this question.

Shalom

[Dave]

There are 12 Rabbinic videos on this forum defining Hebrew satan
There are multiple links on this forum to the rabbinic commentaries on Ezk 28
I support many videos by Chuck Missler on this forum
I have posted my own studies on this forum
I have posted links to the source data

Just to point fingers and call names because no one agrees with you – belongs in the 6th grade