Matthew 24:45
“Who then is a faithful and wise servant,
whom his lord hath made
ruler over his household,
to give them meat in due season?”
Well I know this much
there is plenty of it right here:
Chapter 10
Trouble in Paradise
p.73
"Consequently, the point of Genesis 3 is not to inform us about ancient zoology or a time when animals could talk. We're not in the realm of science by design. Genesis telegraphed simple but profound ideas to Israelite readers: The world you experience was created by an all-powerful God; human beings are his created representatives; Eden was his abode; he was accompanied by a supernatural host; one member of that divine entourage was not pleased by God's decisions to create humanity and give them dominion. All that leads to how humanity got into the mess it's in."
(And that was written in 2015.
Just 11 years ago.
Look how much more of a mess now
that just a few short years ago.
Unsustainable much?)
"In some respects, we know that the Genesis "serpent" wasn't really a member of the animal kingdom. We have other passages to help us grasp that point, particularly in the New Testament. We understand that, even though New Testament writers refer to the serpent back in Eden,
they are really referring to a supernatural entity-not a mere member of the animal kingdom
(2 Cor 11:3; 1 Thess 3:5; Rev 12:9).
p.74
P.74
"You can see quickly that, other than Genesis 2-3, the other source of verse citations is Ezekiel 28. That's one of the chapters conceptually linked to Genesis 3. Its connection is explicit. Ezekiel 28:13-14 refers to "Eden, the garden of God...God's holy mountain." The table does not list all the points of connection between the two. There are a number of others, most of them hotly debated by scholars.3 Back in the first chapter I told you that there are many interpretations for strange passages in the Bible,
but the best ones are those that make sense
in the context of many others-the mosaic.
The relationship of Genesis 3 to Ezekiel 28 and other passages is going to illustrate that point.'
(Divine enlightenment and revelation
will always take precedence
of any and all intellectual
or scholastic endeavors.
ALWAYS.)
p.76
"In verse 10 God adds a strange detail: "You will die the death of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers." Since the prince of Tyre is an uncircumcised Gentile anyway, the phrasing seems to lack coherence. If we read a little further in Ezekiel, the point would be clear to an ancient reader. The underworld realm of the dead, Sheol, is described by Ezekiel as the place where the uncircumcised warrior-king enemies of Israel find themselves (Ezek 32:21, 24-30, 32; Isa 14:9). This is the place of the Rephaim dead, quasi-supernatural beings we'll encounter later."
"uncircumcised warrior-king enemies of Israel"
In no way equals
who are not in Sheol.
Dead is dead
even those who were once
"mighty" "warrior kings."
p.78
"Let's reconsider the gemstones
that describe the appearance of
the "the sealer" in Ezekiel 28:13.
(And Hello String Theory Enthusiast lol.
Welcome.
The strings are the dimensions
spoken of here in terms of "fiery stones"
signifying the presence of God.
Ezekiel 28:13
Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
Counting "Thou" as its own
celestial dimension
would then gives us
11 total dimensions.
Adding God as his own dimension
makes a whole lot of sense
as it would bring the total to 12
which is a number
that should be very familiar
to us:
12 tribes of Israel
12 Disciples.
12 months of the year etc...
But we only currently experience four dimensions:
Space and time are woven together as one
and we also get: height, width, and depth as well.
Which currently leaves us
with six dimensions
(Six = right before completion)
we are incapable of experiencing
as we will not be able to experience the angelic dimension
nor the Dimension of God.
So these numbers all add up
and make a lot of sense
in several different directions.
Also?
Revelation 20 also supports this notion:
And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;
20 The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.
When I start thinking about being
an eternal light being with my creator
With six more dimensions to experience?
In perfection?
Not even the hint of a celestial rebel?
Excuse me if I start getting a lil excited.
(And Relax there is till space
so that dimension doesn't entirely go away lol)
And that listed above is an example
of what was talked about here:
Saturday, November 7, 2026
"And point two
would be:
Purely absorbing the text
with the awe and wonder
of a first century Israelite
(In whom there is no guile)
and not through any
"modern theological tradition",
combined with:
the modern knowledge
of "True Science"
and its recent discovery's
in the fields of:
Cosmology
Particle Physics
and Biology
(Ty Stephen C. Meyer)
is 100% where we are headed.
And it will be a
formidable army indeed.
I pray you come along.")
"As I mentioned earlier, proponents of the view that Ezekiel is drawing on Adam's rebellion for his analogous portrayal of the prince of Tyre want to argue that the gemstones point to a human priest-king. But the "adornment" can quite easily be telegraphing something else-divinity.
All of the gems have one thing in common-they shine or sparkle. Luminescence is a characteristic of divine beings or divine presence across the ancient Near Eastern world and the Old Testament (e.g., Ezek 1:4-7, 27- 28 [cf. Ezek 10:19-20; Dan 10:6; Rev 1:15). This description of the divine cherub in Eden is designed to convey divinity-a shining presence. There are more details. The anointed cherub ultimately gets cast out of Eden, out from "the midst of the stones of fire." We already know from other data that Eden is the place of the council. The "stones of fire" is another clue in that direction. This phrase is associated in other Jewish texts (1 Enoch 18:6-11; 1 Enoch 24-25) with the supernatural, mountainous dwelling of God and the divine council.7
(Enoch wasnt Jewish
That is Pre-Abraham
and he wrote that book.
And it was on the ark.
And Gobekli Tepe
(Noah's temple)
is right down the road
from the Durupinar site
(Site of the ark.)
See: Thursday, October 12, 2023
Notes From Noah to New Earth series
"Drew? Dude? That is just horseshit."
To which I say:
Gobekli Tepe has a 12,000 year old calendar.
It was so accurate it accounted for the wobble of the earths axis.
The next closest calendar
in terms of age is the Egyptian calendar
at 6000 years old.
Some of Noah's descendants settled in Egypt.
There is DNA evidence of peoples of antolia
in mummified remains of the late dynasty pharaohs
in egypt.
Enoch took a tour of the heavens.
EVERYTHING
was explained to him.
he wrote it all down
to be passed from generation to generation
even to the farthest ends.
Thats us now.
And the generation that is addicted to short format media?
And that cant walk out at night
and know where Mars or Venus is?
Doesn't want to believe it?
TO YOU I SAY:
SUIT YOURSELVES THEN
You go try and make a calendar from scratch
that accounts for the wobble of the earth
since your so fucking smart
from watching tic-toc videos or watever.
Good luck.
It is obvious the calendar at Gobekli Tepe
REQUIRES
Divine assistance.
Pretty simple.
"Purely absorbing the text
with the awe and wonder
of a first century Israelite
(In whom there is no guile)
and not through any
"modern theological tradition",
combined with:
the modern knowledge
of "True Science"
and its recent discovery's
in the fields of:
Cosmology
Particle Physics
and Biology
(Ty Stephen C. Meyer)
is 100% where we are headed."
See: Saturday, August 31, 2024
Eight and a half hours about a Calendar lol
Also worthy of consideration is:
So were gonna reference:
1 Enoch 18:6-11; 1 Enoch 24-25
as authentic representations?
But not:
Enoch 82:1-3
1. And now, my son Methuselah, all these things I am recounting to thee and writing down for thee! and I have revealed to thee everything, and given thee books concerning all these: so preserve, my son Methuselah, the books from thy father's hand, and (see) that thou deliver them to the generations of the world.
2. I have given Wisdom to thee and to thy children,
[And thy children that shall be to thee],
That they may give it to their children for generations,
This wisdom (namely) that passeth their thought.
3. And those who understand it
shall not sleep,
But shall listen with the ear
that they may learn this wisdom,
And it shall please those
that eat thereof better than good food.
I just can not do the mental gymnastics
that kinda logic requires.
And Verse 3 above is indicative of
these works being done here as not being
"scholarly endeavors' but instead are being guided by the spirit.
I only have verse 1 highlighted in my Ethiopian Bible
and I just went ahead and read past it for some odd reason
and like is the case lots of times
"It just fell in my lap." so to speak.
)
CHAPTER 11
Like The Most High?
"In Isaiah 14:4, God tells the prophet to take up a "taunt" (Hebrew: mashal) against the king of Babylon. A mashal is better described as a comparative parable.
(Remember that.)
"The question to keep in mind as we proceed is,
to whom is the king of Babylon being compared1"
(I think the better question is:
Which entity is being talked about in which verses?
Cause at times it seems like its both
and then at other times its cut and dried
as to it being about one or the other
In any event? It is very interesting reading.)
"The beginning of the parable sounds as unfavorable to the king of Babylon as Ezekiel's description of the prince of Tyre is to that ruler. The king of Babylon is called an "oppressor" (ESV; v. 4) who ruthlessly persecuted the nations (vv. 5-6). The world will finally be at rest when the oppressor is "laid low" (ESV; vv. 7-8). In anticipation of the joy of finally being rid of the king of Babylon, the prophet writes:
9 Sheol below is getting excited over you,
to meet you when you come;
it arouses the dead spirits
[rephaim] for you,
all of the leaders of the earth ['erets].
It raises all of the kings of the nations
from their thrones.
You have become the same as us!"
11 Your pride is brought down to Sheol,
and the sound of your harps;
maggots are spread out beneath you like a bed,
and your covering is worms (Isa 14:9-11).
"As in Ezekiel 28, the figure in Isaiah 14 who is the target of its diatribe goes to Sheol, the underworld."
(Only if you misread the text.)
"The Rephaim are there,
here identified again as
the dead warrior-kings
Like as was in Ez. 28.
Not all of the dead in Sheol are dead warrior kings
Sheol is the land of the deceased
both righteous and wicked
(See: Luke 16:19-31)
and while there may be some "dead warrior kings" there?
Nowhere are ALL it's inhabitants identified as such
except in the authors own mind.
There are no:
"quasi-supernatural dead
enemies of Israel, warrior-kings
living in Sheol."
And its a shame that the author presents this in this fashion as my feeling is he is going to be "spot on" about a lot of the subject matter we are going to be working through.
In that sense this is kinda a blemish on what is to follow.
I got my own reasons as to why this was presented in this manner.
I'll say this much, people don't write books out of some sense of altruism.
And?
As I told honey last night
"Hey? I'm 1/4 of the way through the book
and this is the only issue I have had?
So that is doing really good."
:-)."
Lexical Summary
rapha: Spirit, ghost, shade
Original Word: רָפָא
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: rapha'
Pronunciation: rah-fah'
Phonetic Spelling: (raw-faw')
KJV: dead, deceased
NASB: departed spirits, dead, spirits of the dead
Word Origin: [from H7495 (רָפָא רָפָה - heal)
in the sense of H7503 (רָפָה - fail)]
1. (properly) lax, i.e. (figuratively) a ghost (as dead
2. in plural only)
Occurrences in Scripture
• Job 26:5 pictures creation from the vantage point of the netherworld: “The dead tremble—those beneath the waters and their inhabitants.”
• Psalm 88:10 laments divine distance: “Do You work wonders for the dead? Do the departed rise up to praise You?”
• Proverbs 2:18; 9:18; 21:16 warn that sin’s path “sinks down to the departed” and that the rebellious man “will rest in the assembly of the dead.”
• Isaiah 14:9 personifies Sheol as a court where the departed stir at Babylon’s fall: “Sheol beneath is eager to meet you upon your arrival; it stirs the departed spirits for you.”
(So no other verses point to the authors assertation of:
"quasi-supernatural dead
enemies of Israel, warrior-kings
living in Sheol."
It's making room.
And when you personify something
you are comparing it to a person
or comparing a person to something.
It doesn't mean the person
has become what you are comparing
(showing similarities to)
them to.
"Honey is a fox."
Saying it is so
doesn't make her a literal fox.
Even though she is one lol.)
• Isaiah 26:14 sets idolaters among the shades—“they are dead, they will not live, their spirits will not rise”—while Isaiah 26:19 reverses the imagery for the faithful: “Your dead will live; their bodies will rise.”
("you have become the same as us"
DEAD IS DEAD.
Satan doesn't go to Sheol
he gets thrown in the lake of fire.)
"The king of Babylon will be one of these living dead,
just like the prince of Tyre."
There are no quasi-supernatural dead
living in Sheol
Dead is dead,
Psalm 82:
Speaking of the divine council:
7 But ye shall die like men.
And men dont live
in the abode of the dead.
See how hard that was?
"We have met the enemy
and he is us"
Kinda comes to mind.
It doesn't matter what you were
when you were living
rich, powerful, mightily, influential, ruler etc
seems to be more to the point.
So I went digging for:
"The Rephaim"
Not so much as even a mention
in any of those three works.
Which were compiled by multiple people
and involved a lot more scholarship
than just one person writing one book.
Have I mentioned people
don't write books for altruistic reasons?
Regardless, on with it:)
"Recall that Ezekiel 28 shifted from the prince of Tyre to a divine figure in Eden. That shift informed us that the writer was using a story of cosmic, divine rebellion to, by comparison, portray the arrogance of the earthly prince. After verse 11, Isaiah 14 shifts to a divine context with clear links to Ezekiel 28."
(OH after the pride is dead.
Verse 11 Your pride is brought down to Sheol,)
"Those connections in turn
take us conceptually back to Genesis 3.
Isaiah 14:12-15 reads:
How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of dawn!
You are cut down to the ground, conqueror of nations!
13 And you yourself said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise up my throne above the stars of God;
and I will sit on the mountain of assembly
on the summit of Zaphon;
14)I will ascend to the high places of the clouds,
I will make myself like the Most High."
15) But you are brought down to Sheol,
to the depths of the pit
(Isa 14:12-15).
(NEWSFLASH:
Its two different "you's"
that are being referred to.
The first one is celestial
while the second one is mortal.
Remember now:
"A mashal is better described as a comparative parable. The question to keep in mind as we proceed is, to whom is the king of Babylon being compared1"
(I think the better question is:
Who is being talked about in which verses?
Cause at times it seems like its both
See how hard that was?)
"The divine council context is transparent. You've already seen much of the terminology in chapter 6 about divine gardens and mountains. The figure to whom the king of Babylon is being compared is a divine being fallen "from heaven" (v. 12). He is called the "morning star, son of dawn." The language takes us back to Job 38:7, where the sons of God were called "morning stars." But the Hebrew terms in Isaiah 14:12 are different than those in Job 38:7.
"Morning star, son of dawn" is an English rendering of the Hebrew helelben-shachar, which literally means "shining one, son of the dawn." When we talked about Job 38:7 in chapter 3, I noted that "morning stars" were the visible bright stars seen on the horizon as the sun rose. Astronomers (ancient and modern) knew another celestial object that behaved the same way-an object so bright it could still be seen as the sun rose. That object was Venus, and so Venus, though a planet, became known to the ancients as the "bright morning star."
In essence, borrowing the language of Ezekiel 28, Isaiah portrays this particular divine being as hopelessly enamored of his own brilliance. So great was his arrogance that he declared himself above all the "stars of God"(kokebey el), the other members of the divine council (Job 38:7).
(Thats is making an assumption that just isn't there.
Not all of the heavenly host are members of the divine council
as angels are created as immortal spirit beings
Luke 20:36
Neither can they die any more:
for they are equal unto the angels;
and are the children of God,
being the children of the resurrection.
and the divine council, while they
"fall like one of the princes"?
They "die like men"
(Psalm 82:7 But ye shall die like men,
and fall like one of the princes.)
There is absolutely no scriptural evidence
to point to lucifer as having been
a member of the divine council
"He declared himself
above the divine council"
would have been preferred over:
"He declared himself above...
the other members of
the divine council..."
AS:
1) Michael the arch angel
is on his level or he wouldn't
have been able to defeat him
See: Revelation 12:7-9
2) He (lucifer) is a guardian Cherub.
See; Ez 28:14
How many other members of the divine council
are presented with having dual roles?
The text doesn't say, so we don't know for certain
but none are presented as such.
3) Rebellious council members "die like men"
where as angels are created eternal.
Satan is eventually
"thrown alive into the lake of fire"
as he cant be "killed" having been created eternal
so he is just "done away with" so to speak.
And most importantly
for us today:
4) Sins against the divine natural order
are the most heinous to God:
Sodom and Gomorrah with:
incest, beastialtity, homosexuality, necrophilia etc.
(and the knuckledraggers only ever wanna talk about one of those
it kinda makes me wonder about some of yawl sometimes TBH.)
Likewise with celestial entity's going after
the "Strange flesh" of mortal women.
Likewise with us today with making fake brains
smarter than Gods crowning achievement.
So it seems much more logical to purpose
that Lucifer was a Lieutenant of sorts "jumping ranks"
so to speak, and is conducting a coup
by going
above the council
to try and assume the role of "the most High."
He doesn't die like men like the council members do
having been created differently (eternal) he is thrown
in the lake of fire instead.
Luke 20:36
Neither can they die any more:
for they are equal unto the angels...
Side note:
"In the Ethiopian Andemta of the Book of Genesis, it is said that before the creation of light, the angels were created during the night of the first day of creation—a Sunday—in total darkness.
The Andemta is the traditional oral and written exegetical commentary tradition of the ancient Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church.
If all matter is "encapsulated light"?
And it is,
then the angels having been created before light
goes a long way to making a lot of sense
about their having been created eternally.)
"That this "shining one" sought superiority over the other members of the divine council is indicated by the phrase "raise ... my throne" and his desire to "sit" on "the mountain of assembly."
("over the divine council"
not:
"over the other members of
the divine council"
See the four reasons listed above.)
"That this "mountain of assembly" speaks of the divine council is clear from its location in "Zaphon" ("the north"; tsaphon) and the clouds."
See: Tuesday, August 25, 2026
Mount Hermon, Golan, Watchers, Enoch,
Bulls of Bashan, Syria, "The Assyrian" etc. etc. etc...
"The "seat" language is familiar from Ezekiel 28:2 (the "seat of the gods"). Isaiah 14 reads like an attempted coup in the divine council. Helel ben-shachar wanted his seat in the divine assembly on the divine mountain to be above all others. He wanted to be "like the Most High" (elyon). But there can be only one of those."
(I wrote the part about "a coup"
before I ever read this section BTW
If he was a member of the Divine Council?
Then why is he cast alive into the lake of fire
while the others "Die like men."?
And here is the problem with scholarly endeavors
sometimes we have a tendency to "out think ourselves"
and just blatantly ignore the obvious.
These are obviously two different levels of beings.
One is created eternal, Angels
(See: Luke 20:36)
And one "dies like men"
The divine council.
That the one that "dies like men" is of a higher rank
than those who were created eternal
is simply of no consequence other than:
It proves the upsetting of the natural order of things as
happened in the heavenly realm
prior to it occurring in the earthly one.)
"It's no surprise that helel ben-shachar, the shining one, meets the same end as the divine throne guardian in Ezekiel 28. In three places we see his fate. You've seen two of the verses already. Take note of the emphasis in bold:
9 Sheol below is getting excited over you,
to meet you when you come;
it arouses the dead spirits for you,
all of the leaders of the earth.
It raises all of the kings of the nations from their thrones ...
12 "How you have fallen from heaven,
morningstar, son of dawn!
You are cut down to the ground ['erets] ....
15 But you
(And now the finger is pointing
at a different entity than in verse 12)
are brought down to Sheol,
to the depths of the pit (Isa 14:9, 12, 15).
"The punishment of helel is to live in the realm of the dead. Helel ends up in Sheol, the pit (bor); brought down to earth ('erets) by God, the truly Most High."
(Okay so few things:
1) This lil passage conveniently skips verse 11
11 Your pride is brought down to Sheol,
And?
As stated it is a comparison/contrast
between a celestial rebel and a Babylonian king
14 You are cut down to the ground ['erets] ....
See: Revelation 12:9
15 But you are brought down to Sheol,
Verse 15 therefore would only apply only to
the actual human ruler(s)
over Babylon, while:
Verses 11 Your pride is brought down to Sheol,
and 14 You are cut down to the ground
would seem to apply to the celestial rebel
he is being compared to
See: Revelation 20:10
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
"The lake of fire" isn't Sheol
the abode of the dead.
Revelation 20: 13-14
13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.
Never dying
just like the beast
(THE Anti-Christ)
and his False Prophet
Revelation 19:20
And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.)
that is hardly:
"Die like men"
Anyways...)
"to the depths of the pit (Isa 14:9, 12, 15).
The punishment of helel is to live in the realm of the dead. Helel ends up in Sheol, the pit (bor); brought down to earth ('erets) by God, the truly Most High."
(That just completly contradicts Revelation 19:20
which isnt brought up by the author.)
"The table below expands on the one we began in the previous chapter. As we move forward, I'll add terms and verses to those from Ezekiel 28. I'll focus on divine council connections between that chapter and Isaiah 14 and Genesis 3, but will include references from elsewhere when appropriate."
(I have no problems with Genesis 3 being connected with Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14.The problem I have is there is just no scriptural reference point for concluding Lucifer was a member of the Divine council while there are multiple instances of scripture that indicate that he couldn't have been and the main one of those being his end as described in Rev 19:20 which the author omitted.)
p.85
THE NACHASH OF GENESIS 3
The pivotal character of Genesis 3 is the serpent.
The Hebrew word translated
serpent is nachash.
The word is both plain and elastic.
The most straightforward meaning is the one virtually all translators and
interpreters opt for: serpent.
When the Hebrew root letters n-ch-sh are a noun, that's the meaning.
But n-ch-sh are also the consonants of a verb. If we changed the vowels
to a verbal form (recall that Hebrew originally had no vowels), we would
have nochesh, which means "the diviner."
Divination refers to
communication with the supernatural world.
A diviner in the ancient world
was one who foretold omens
or gave out divine information (oracles).
We can see that element in the story. Eve is getting information from this being. The consonants n-ch-sh may also form an alternative noun, nachash, which is at times used descriptively, like an adjective. This term is used in place names outside the Bible and once within the Old Testament. First Chronicles 4:12 refers to "Tehinnah, father of Ir-Nachash." The otherwise unknown Tehinnah is regarded in this verse as the founder of the city(Hebrew: ir) of nachash.
p.86
"This city has yet to be securely identified by archaeologists. The phrase means "the city of copper/bronze (smiths)." Hebrew words like nechosheth ("bronze"; "copper") are derived from this noun. Ir-nachash was a place known for copper and bronze metallurgy. The option is interesting because copper and bronze are shiny when polished. In fact, the Old Testament uses nechosheth to describe divine beings (Dan 10:6).
We have words with such elasticity in English,
where meaning depends on the part of speech.
For example:
(Noun): "Running is a good form of exercise."
(Verb): "The engine is running on diesel."
(Adjective): "Running paint is an eyesore."
"Sometimes writers, when they use a term, want their readers to think about all possible meanings and nuances. If I ask, "How has your reading been? "the reader is forced to think about all three. Do I mean the latest assignment (noun)? Am I wondering if you got the right glasses (adjective)? Or am I referencing the process (verb)? What I'm suggesting is that, since there are immediate clues in the story that the serpent is more than a mere snake, that he may be a divine adversary, the term nachash is a triple entendre. The writer wants his readers to consider all the possible nuances in their interpretive, intellectual experience. All of them carry theological weight.2"
"The serpent (nachash) was an image commonly used in reference to a divine throne guardian. Given the context of Eden, that helps identify the villain as a divine being. The divine adversary dispenses divine information, using it to goad Eve. He gives her an oracle (or, an omen!): You won't really die. God knows when you eat you will be like one of the elohim. Lastly, a shining appearance conveys a divine nature. All the meanings telegraph something important. They are also consistent with the imagery from Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28."
(2 Corinthians 4:4
In whom the god of this world
hath blinded the minds of them
which believe not,
lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ,
who is the image of God,
should shine unto them.)
p.87
"God's judgment of Eve is in some sense entwined with the curse of the nachash. Eve would suffer intensified pain in childbirth (Gen 3:16: "I will multiply your pain."). There is no indication that, had she borne children before the fall, Eve would have felt no pain at all. She was human. And it was important that she bear children, since her childbearing would have some relationship to the destiny of the nachash and his deed.
15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and her offspring;
he shall bruise your head,
and you shall bruise his heel (Gen 3:15 ESV).
"The wording of Gen 3:15 is veiled. For reasons that I'll make clear later, I believe prophecies like this that ultimately move in a messianic direction were deliberately cryptic. At the very least the verse tells us that God was not done with humanity yet. The goal of his rule on earth through humanity would not be abandoned. A descendant of Eve would come forth who would someday undo the damage caused by the divine celestial rebel, the nachash. That this descendant is linked to Eve implies that the score will be settled through her bloodline.
(Why do we always make this about eve?
And never about Adam?
They are a team...
Genesis3:6
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.
Everybody knows all about:
16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Cause we have all heard it so much.
But hardly anybody ever talks about:
17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:
cursed is the ground for thy sake;
in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
Patriarchy much?
(And this author to some extent does bring this up)
BUT YO KNUCKLEDRAGGERS:
Im sorry, when was/is afterwards again?
Joel 2:28-29
And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: and also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
There were prophetesses in Acts
for goodness sakes.
Just not now right?
Makes perfect sense.
NOT.
Get a grip.
Some people couldn't get a clue
even if you handed it right to them babe.
p.87
"This human threat to the nachash is fitting. The seduction to sin meant that Yahweh would have to be true to his word and eliminate humanity. The nachash counted on the justice of God to eliminate his rivals. God was just in this regard. Elimination from Eden did indeed mean death, but not in the sense of immediate annihilation. God would see to it that their lives ended, but not before continuing his plan. Humanity would die, but it would also, at some point, produce a descendant who would ultimately restore God's Edenic vision and destroy the nachash."
("Satan hates humans"
somebody is prone to saying...
Yup)
p.88
"Adam and Eve had contingent immortality prior to the fall. They had never-ending life, depending on certain circumstances. The imagery of Eden, home of the life-giver, and its tree of life convey the notion that, so long as Adam and Eve ate from the tree of life, called Eden their home, and didn't do anything that resulted in mortal injury (they were truly human after all), they would live.5 Protected in their perfect environment,
(How "perfect" was it really
if there was a celestial rebel there?
"Almost perfect" seems more appropriate.
Complete perfection comes at the very end
of the story, not the beginning)
"they could multiply and carry out their tasks as God's representatives on earth until the job was done. All of that goes by the wayside once they are removed from Eden. God even takes the extra step of preventing them from returning to Eden's tree of life (Gen 3:24).
(It never went away,
we just don't have access to
ALL of it any more.
And as explained above
about the "fiery stones" in Ez 28 (11)
and Revelation 21 (12)
are dimensions we don't have access to any longer.)
"Had they access to it, they would have gone on living, despite what had happened. After the fall, the only way to extend the work of God's human council-family was childbirth. Eve was redeemed through childbearing (1 Tim 2:15). So were the rest of us, in the sense that that is the only way God's original plan remained viable. Where there are no offspring, there can be no human imaging and no kingdom.
p.88
"The nachash was cursed to crawl on its belly, imagery that conveyed being cast down (Ezek 28:8, 17; Isa 14:11-12, 15) to the ground.
(As pointed out earlier some of those verses above are about the earthy rulers of Tyre and Babylon and not the nachash and also notice Revelation 12:7-9 is intentionally left out:
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
As I have pointed out before
that is a two step process.
And there is no way the author didnt know those verses
so to not put them here = intention.)
"In Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14, we saw the villain cast down to the 'erets, a term that refers literally to the dirt and metaphorically to the underworld (Ezek 28:17; Isa 14:9, 11-12, 15).
(How many times ya gotta say it?
Of those verses only Ez 28:17 and Isaiah 14:12
refer to a celestial entity,
the other verses are about human rulers.)
"The curse also had him "eating dirt," clearly a metaphorical reference, since snakes don't really eat dirt as food for nutrition. It isn't part of the "natural snake diet." The point being made by the curse is that the nachash, who wanted to be "most high," will be "most low" instead-cast away from God and the council to earth, and even under the earth."
(That presupposes he was on the council to begin with
which he was not or he wouldn't be
cast in the lake of fire alive
having been created eternally
while the council members
"Die like men")
"In the underworld, the nachash is even lower than the beasts of the field. He is hidden from view and from life in God's world. His domain is death. After the fall, though humankind was estranged from God and no longer immortal, the plan of God was not extinguished. Genesis 3 tells us why we die, why we need redemption and salvation, and why we cannot save ourselves. It also tells us that God's plan has only been delayed-not defeated-and that the human story will be both a tragic struggle and a miraculous, providential saga.
But the situation is going to get worse before it gets better,
p.91
CHAPTER 12
DIVINE TRANSGRESSION
"After the ruination of Eden the human story heads south in a hurry. That's to be expected. The curses that followed the events in the garden bound the fate of humanity together with the seed of the nachash, all those who oppose the rule of God in either the earthly or the spiritual realm. The rule of God known as Eden would disappear, kept alive only through a fledgling humanity to whom God extended mercy. The seed of the nachash is therefore literal (people and divine beings are real) and spiritual (the lineage is one of spiritual rebellion). This description has secure biblical roots.
(As opposed to the view of Lucifer being on the divine council which doesn't have any scriptural support and in fact has multiple "secure biblical roots" that he couldn't have been.
See reasons listed above)
"Jesus told the Pharisees, "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father" (John 8:44), and called them "serpents" and "offspring of vipers" (Matt 23:33)." In 1 John 3 the apostle John expressed the notion of spiritual seed -good or evil- manifesting itself in the human heart when he wrote:
(1 John 3:8-12)
8 The one who practices sin is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. For this reason the Son of God was revealed:in order to destroy the works of the devil.
9 Everyone who is fathered by God does not practice sin, because his seed resides in him, and he is not able to sin, because he has been fathered by God.
10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are evident: everyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, namely, the one who does not love his brother.
11 For this is the message that you have heard from the beginning: that we should love one another,
12 not as Cain, who was of the evil one and violently murdered his brother. And for what reason did he violently murder him? Because his deeds were evil and the deeds of his brother were righteous
This passage describes people whose lives are characterized by wickedness as "children of the devil," a contrast to the spiritual "children of God." This is a spiritual lineage, since the children of God have "God's seed" abiding in them, a reference to the Holy Spirit. Peter echoes the same thought in 1 Peter 1:23, where he describes those born again (literally, born "from above") as being born not as mortal offspring or seed, but of "imperishable seed, through the word of God."
(To be a member of a Kingdom?
One has to have been born there.
This gets left out of the
"Born Again" equation
as we make it all about being a new
"Earthly" creation
and not a new member of an existing Kingdom.
Ref John 3:1–21)
"The language, then, points toward the spiritual-following Yahweh or following the example of the original rebel, the nachash."
p.92
"Interestingly, John mentions Cain specifically. Cain murdered Abel sometime after their parents were expelled from Eden, the point at which we've arrived in our exploration. Cain's spiritual father was the nachash. They walked the same path.
Things eventually got so bad that in Genesis 6:5 we read, "And Yahweh saw that the evil of humankind was great upon the earth, and every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was always only evil." But that verdict is preceded by four verses that describe a different kind of rebellion-a divine one. There were those in that realm who,
as the nachash had done,
made a free choice
that violated God's design
and strategy for his rule on earth.
(From above:
4) Sins against the natural order of things
are the most heinous to God.
Sodom and Gomorra with
incest, beastialtity, homosexuality, necrophilia etc
Likewise with celestial entity's going after
"Strange flesh" of mortal women.
And us now with fake brains
So it seems much more logical to purpose
that Lucifer was a Lieutenant of sorts
"jumping ranks" so to speak, and is conducting a coup
by going above the council
to try and assume the role of "the most High."
"In what remains of this chapter, we'll take a closer look at this divine transgression, focusing on how the account has been stripped of its supernatural features-and therefore its intended meaning-by most Christian interpreters.
(AS YOU WELL KNOW BY NOW LOL
NOT US TWO OVER HERE.)
"We'll continue the discussion in the two chapters that follow, where we'll examine how the original context and intent of the passage compels a supernatural interpretation and then explore that interpretation's implications."
"PRECURSOR TO THE FLOOD:
DIVINE REBELLION
"Genesis 6:1-4 is one of those texts
that many readers
and pastors
would rather skip."
(That means pay particular attention to it.
Somewhere in here he stated:
"If its weird? Its important."
And I couldn't agree anymore.
And that was straight up Satan at work
so that we would not understand what was
going to be happening in the last days of this age
that we are currently witnessing.
See: Friday, September 11, 2026
Revelation 9:21:Neither repented they
of their murders, nor of their sorceries
"They gave homes
to the spirits
of the Nephilim
which simply have
no place to go until judgement.
Has been verified.")
"Not here."
(Not here either brother.)
"Its theological message is important.
1 And it happened that, when humankind began to multiply on the face of the ground, daughters were born to them. 2 Then the sons of God saw the daughters of humankind, that they were beautiful. And they took for themselves wives from all that they chose. 3 And Yahweh said, "My Spirit shall not abide with humankind forever in that he is also flesh. And his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." 4 The Nephilim were upon the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God went into the daughters of humankind, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty warriors that were from ancient times, men of renown.
(I think "the mighty" tells us exactly
who they were and where they came from:
Psalms 82:1, 6
God standeth in the congregation of the mighty
he judgeth among the Gods.
6) I have said, Ye are Gods
and all of you
are children
of the most high)
p.93
There are few Bible passages
that raise as many questions as this one.
(This is why Satan has everyone Pastors included avoid it.
As it is 100% completely relevant to what we are seeing today:
Matthew 24:37
37 But as the days of Noah were,
so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
See also: Age of hybrids)
"Who are the sons of God?
Are they divine or human?
Who were the Nephilim?
How do these verses relate to the human evil
described in Genesis 6:5?
Before we start tackling these questions and others,2
we need to learn how not to interpret this passage."
"THE SETHITE INTERPRETATION
This interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 is the one most commonly taught in Christian churches, evangelical or otherwise. It has been the dominant Christian position since the late fourth century AD.3
(I have been maintaining for years on end that this interpretation was completely wrong, and that this was Satan trying to devour Gods church at right after its birth:
Revelation 12:4 The early church
And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
And its end of this age counterpart
Revelation 12:14 The last church
And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
The woman being the wisdom
that was with God from the beginning.
Proverbs 8:22-23
22 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way,
before his works of old.
23 I was set up from everlasting,
from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
"In this approach, the sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 are merely human
beings, men from the line of Seth, Adam and Eve's son who was born after
Cain murdered Abel (Gen 4:25-26; 5:3-4).
Presumably, these four verses describe forbidden intermarriage between the godly men of Seth's lineage("sons of God") and the ungodly women of Cain's line ("daughters of humankind").
In this reading, everyone who lived on earth ultimately came
from these two lines, both of them lines descended from Adam and Eve's
children.4 In this way, the Bible distinguished the godly from the ungodly.
Part of the rationale for this view comes from Genesis 4:26, where,
depending on the translation, we read that either Seth or humankind "began
to call on the name of the Lord" (NIV).5 The line of Seth was to remain pure
and separate from evil lineage.
The marriages of Genesis 6:1-4 erased this
separation and incurred the wrath of God in the flood.
Exposing the deficiencies
of the Sethite view
isn't difficult.
The position is deeply flawed.
First, Genesis 4:26 never says the only people who
"called on the name of the Lord"
were men from Seth's lineage.
That idea is imposed on the text.
(Just like Satan being a member of the divine council was)
p.94
"Second, as we'll see in the next chapter, the view fails miserably in explaining the Nephilim. Third, the text never calls the women in the episode "daughters of Cain." Rather, they are "daughters of humankind." There is no actual link in the text to Cain. This means that the Sethite view of the text is supported by something not present in the text, which is the very antithesis of exegesis.
(Same as with the view of Lucifer
being a member of the divine council,
100% same exact problem
"the...view of the text is supported by something
not present in the text,
which is the very antithesis of exegesis.")
"Fourth, there is no command in the text regarding marriages or any prohibition against marrying certain persons. There are no "Jews and Gentiles" at this time.6
(Remember that)
"Fifth, nothing in Genesis 6:1-4 or anywhere else in the Bible identifies people who come from Seth's lineage with the descriptive phrase "sons of God." That connection is purely an assumption through which the story is filtered by those who hold the Sethite view."
(Been saying it forever:
We have been dumbing down scripture
to make it say things that are comfortable
for us right from the get go.
400 ad or so.)
"A close reading of Genesis 6:1-4 makes it clear that a contrast is being created between two classes of individuals, one human and the other divine. When speaking of how humanity was multiplying on earth (v. 1), the text mentions only daughters ("daughters were born to them"). The point is not literally that every birth in the history of the earth after Cain and Abel resulted in a girl.7 Rather, the writer is setting up a contrast of two groups.
The first group is human and female (the "daughters of humankind"). Verse 2 introduces the other group for the contrast: the sons of God. That group is not human, but divine. There are more deficiencies in this viewpoint than I will take time here to expose, but the point is evident. The Sethite hypothesis collapses under the weight of its own incoherence."
(100% agreed, it is man made garbage
and it is headed to the dump.
GOOD RIDDANCE!
)p.95
DIVINIZED HUMAN RULERS
Another approach that argues the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:1-4 are human suggests that they should be understood as divinized human rulers.
(Anything but the truth
will simply not add up.)
"A survey of the academic literature arguing this perspective reveals that it springs from
the following: (1) taking the phrase "sons of the Most High" in Psalm 82:6 as
referring to humans, then reading that back into Genesis 6:1-4; (2) noting
language where God refers to humans as his sons (Exod 4:23; Psa 2:7),
which, it is argued, is parallel to ancient Near Eastem beliefs that kings were
thought to be divine offspring; and (3) arguing that the evil mamriages
condemned in the verses were human polygamy on the part of these divinized rulers."
"We have already seen how the human view of the plural elohim language in Psalm 82 fails, so that fundamental flaw need not be reiterated here. But there are other flaws in this approach."
"First, the text of Genesis 6 never says the marriages were polygamous. That idea must be read into the passage. Second, ancient parallels restrict divine sonship language to kings. Consequently, the idea of a group of sons of God lacks a coherent ancient Near Easten parallel. The precise plural phrase refers to divine beings elsewhere in the Old Testament, not kings (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Pss 29:1; 82:6 [cf. 82:1b]: 89:6 [Hebrew: 89:7]).8
Third, the broad idea of "human divine kingship" elsewhere in the Old Testament is not a coherent argument against a supernatural view of Genesis 6. It was God's original design for his human children to be servant rulers over the earth under his authority as his representatives-in the presence of his glory. Restoring the loss of the Edenic vision eventually involves creating a people known as Israel and giving them a king (David), who is the template for messiah. In the final eschatological outcome, the messiah is the ultimate Davidic king, and all glorified believers share that rule in a new, global Eden." But it is flawed hermeneutics to read either ancient kingship or the glorification of believers back into Genesis 6. The reason is obvious: the marriages in Genesis 6:1-4 corrupt the earth in the prelude to the flood story.
Where did the text say
anything at all about:
"Marriages"
???????????
Genesis 6:2
"They took them wives
all of which they choose"
It was more like being kidnapped into slavery.)
"A biblical theology of divinized human rulership in the restored Eden would not be corruptive and evil."
"In summary, the plurality of the phrase "sons of God" and the heavenly contexts of its use elsewhere show us
there is no exegetical reason to exclude
the occurrences of the phrase in Genesis 6:2,4
from the list of supernatural beings.
What drives this choice
is apprehension about the alterative."
That was/is 100% the case!
And it just happened to be relevant
for exactly, what we are seeing today
Now he is in my wheelhouse.
PREACH!
p.96
PETER AND JUDE
Peter and Jude did not fear the alterative.
They embraced a supernatural
view of Genesis 6:1-4.
Two passages are especially relevant.
1 But there were also false prophets among the people ... 3 And in
greediness they will exploit you with false words, whose condemnation
from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep. 4 For if God
did not spare the angels who sinned, but held them captive in Tartarus
with chains of darkness and handed them over to be kept for judgment,
5 and did not spare the ancient world,
but preserved Noah,
(Revelation 3:10
Because thou hast kept the word of my patience,
I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation,
which shall come upon all the world,
to try them that dwell upon the earth.
Sorry, sometimes it gets personal .)
"a proclaimer of righteousness,
and seven others when he brought a flood
on the world of the ungodly, 6 and condemned the cities of Sodom and
Gomorrah to destruction, reducing them to ashes, having appointed them
as an example for those who are going to be ungodly, 7 and rescued
righteous Lot, worn down by the way of life of lawless persons in
licentiousness 8 (for that righteous man, as he lived among them day after
day, was tormenting his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he was seeing
and hearing), 9 then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials
and to reserve the unrighteous to be punished at the day of judgment,
10 and especially those who go after the flesh
in defiling lust
(craving)
and who
despise authority
(Godly)
(2 Peter 2:1-10).
5 Now I want to remind you,
although you know everything once and for all,
that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt,
the second time
destroyed those who did not believe.
(The reference is to Numbers 16
and his is why I just keep harping on the pretrib rapture as being of Satan,
we do not just get to invent things we wanna believe
1800 years after the fact
and then make the book match up with it.
Korah and his band of rebels believed in God
but wanted to do things their way
and not trust Gods will through Moses
AND THEY WERE DESTROYED
it will be the same exact thing this time around.)
6 And the angels who
did not keep to their own domain
(Left Heaven)
but deserted their proper dwelling place,
(And then deserted their own "essence"
It's a Two step process,
and it mirrors Satan fall:
1) Expelled from heaven
2) Cast to the earth.)
he has kept in eternal bonds
under deep gloom for the
judgment of the great day,
7 as Sodom and Gomorrah and the towns around them
indulged in sexual immorality
and pursued unnatural desire
(Already shard this list of
repulsive offenses, not repeating them here.)
in the same way as these,
are exhibited as an example by undergoing the
punishment of eternal fire
(Jude 5-7).
"Scholars agree that the passages are about the same subject matter.1 They describe an episode from the time of Noah and the flood where "angels" sinned." That sin, which precipitated the flood, was sexual in nature; it is placed in the same category as the sin which prompted the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah. The transgression was interpreted by Peter and Jude as evidence of despising authority and the boundaries of "proper dwelling" for the parties concerned.
( Earlier from the author:
"as the nachash had done,
made a free choice
that violated God's design
and strategy for his rule on earth."
(Yours truly, from above:
'4) Sins against the natural order of things
are the most heinous to God.
Sodom and Gomorra with
incest, beastialtity, homosexuality, necrophilia etc
Likewise with celestial entity's going after
the "Strange flesh" of mortal women.
As us today with fake brains.
So it seems much more logical to purpose
that Lucifer was a Lieutenant of sorts
"jumping ranks" so to speak,
and is conducting a coup
by going above the council
to try and assume the role of
"the most High."
If he had already demonstrated such
in the heavenly realms?
What was to stop it in the earthly?)
"All of those elements are transparent in Genesis6:1-4. There is simply no other sin in the Old Testament that meets these specific details-and no other "angelic" sin at all in the Old Testament that might be the referent.12
"The punishment for the transgression, however, is not mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. Peter has the divine sons of God held captive in "Tartarus" in chains of darkness until a time of judgment.13 Jude echoes the thought and clarifies the judgment as the day of the Lord ("the great day"; cf. Zeph 1:1-7;Rev 16:14). These elements come from Jewish literature written between our Old and New Testaments (the "Second Temple" period) that retell the Genesis 6 episode. The most famous of these is 1 Enoch. That book informed the thinking of Peter and Jude; it was part of their intellectual workiview.14 The inspired New Testament writers were perfectly comfortable referencing content found in 1 Enoch and other Jewish books to articulate their theology.15
(From above:
"Gobekli Tepe has a 12,000 year old calendar.
It was so accurate it accounted for the wobble of the earths axis.
The next closest calendar
in terms of age is the Egyptian calendar
at 6000 years old.
Some of Noah's descendants settled in Egypt.
There is DNA evidence of peoples of anatolia
in mummified remains of the late dynasty pharaohs
in egypt.
Enoch took a tour of the heavens.
EVERYTHING
was explained to him.
he wrote it all down
to be passed from generation to generation
even to the farthest ends.
Thats us now.
And the generation that is addicted to short format media?
And that cant walk out at night
and know where Mars or Venus is?
Doesn't want to believe it?
TO YOU I SAY:
SUIT YOURSELVES THEN
You go try and make a calendar from scratch
that accounts for the wobble of the earth
since your so fucking smart
from watching tic-toc videos or watever.
Good luck.
It is obvious the calendar at Gobekli Tepe
REQUIRES
Divine assistance.
Pretty simple.
"Purely absorbing the text
with the awe and wonder
of a first century Israelite
(In whom there is no guile)
and not through any
"modern theological tradition",
combined with:
the modern knowledge
of "True Science"
and its recent discovery's
in the fields of:
Cosmology
Particle Physics
and Biology
(Ty Stephen C. Meyer)
is 100% where we are headed."
See: Saturday, August 31, 2024
Eight and a half hours about a Calendar lol
It was on the Ark.
Enoch 82:1-3
1. And now, my son Methuselah, all these things I am recounting to thee and writing down for thee! and I have revealed to thee everything, and given thee books concerning all these: so preserve, my son Methuselah, the books from thy father's hand, and (see) that thou deliver them to the generations of the world.
2. I have given Wisdom to thee and to thy children,
[And thy children that shall be to thee],
That they may give it to their children for generations,
This wisdom (namely) that passeth their thought.
3. And those who understand it
shall not sleep,
(Timely to say the least.)
Tuesday, November 10, 2026
But shall listen with the ear
that they may learn this wisdom,
And it shall please those
that eat thereof better than good food.
"These observations are important. All Jewish traditions before the NewTestament era took a supernatural view of Genesis 6:1-4.16 In other words, they were in line with 2 Peter and Jude."
(Who were in line with Enoch
for a reason!
Christ himself quoted from it:
John 3:6
(Interesting numbers for chapter and verse
trinity (3) right before completion (6)
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh;
and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
Enoch 15:10
As for the spirits of heaven, in heaven shall be their dwelling, but as for the spirits of the earth which were born upon the earth, on the earth shall be their dwelling.
Thats Christ, Peter and Jude
so Im gonna quote from it as well.)
"The interpretation of the passage, at least with respect to its supernatural orientation, was not an issue until the late fourth century An, when it fell out of favor with some influential church fathers, especially Augustine."
(Been saying it for years now
That was Satan devouring the church
(trying anyway)
as soon as it is born
Revelation 12:4
And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
Satan knew just how pivotal a role
Genesis 6:1-5 would be playing
at the end of this age
Christ again:
Matthew 24:37
But as the days of Noah were,
so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Friday, September 11, 2026
Revelation 9:21:Neither repented they
of their murders, nor of their sorceries)
"But biblical theology does not derive from the church fathers. It derives from the biblical text, framed in its own context. Scholars agree that the Second Temple Jewish literature that influenced Peter and Jude shows intimate familiarity with the original Mesopotamian context of Genesis 6:1-4.17 For the person who considers the Old and New Testament to be equally inspired, interpreting Genesis 6:1-4 "in context" means analyzing it in light of its Mesopotamian background as well as 2 Peter and Jude, whose content utilizes supernatural interpretations from Jewish theology of their own day.
(From before
there were even Jews.)
"Filtering Genesis 6:1-4 through Christian tradition that arose centuries after the New Testament period cannot honesty be considered interpreting Genesis 6:1-4 in context."
(So Fuck your "tradition"
IT IS ALL GOING TO GO AWAY.
And the word of God will still stand
including
1 Enoch.
"Our next step is to build on what we've learned. In the next chapter, we'll take a closer look at how the ancient contexts of Genesis 6:1-4 demand a supernatural outlook for the passage. Doing so will enable us to understand its message and role in the larger biblical narrative."
So do you want the entire narrative?
Or just parts of it?
Do you want this:
I know this much
Once youve seen this?
This simply
wont cut it any more:
Pun intended, as always.
And I know this much as well:
There are a people(s) on this earth
who were descended from Solomon,
The Davidic line, Genetic Jews
through Solomon and the Queen of Sheba
(The Remnant everybody forgot about)
who converted to Christianity
and who claim Enoch as their own
and they say that he wrote that book
and they put it in their cannon
and they never took it out
and they took his words to heart
and they started preparing
for the tribulation period
1600 years ago
when they started making
I aint saying we need to all go and join
The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
or that we need another
type of
Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church.
What I am saying is:
The facts
are all converging
and they are all pointing
in the same exact direction,
and that some things
that were so easily dismissed
some 1600 years ago
should be reexamined
and be accepted as fact today.
Been saying it for years:
"Church took a wrong turn
1600 years ago."
Constantine's view of Genesis 6 etc.)
Tuesday, December 13, 2022
"The problem is what you see as literal
I see as allegorical
and what you see as allegorical
I see as literal,
especially when applied
to the books of Genesis and Revelation."
(UAP as locust of the deep Revelation 9
and The Nephilim of Genesis 6
if you need examples)
"An advocate for a more "Revisionist"
(as in,
"We need to reexamine some things
we have been thinking of as settled long ago),
and "Apostolistic"
(Teach the word and preach the gospel,
and live it such that others can see it in you.)
church."
It may not ever
make a lick of sense to you
but I finally
completely understand
why I was a 19 year old white boy
living in the suburbs
just completely enamored
with
.jpg)
at a time when nobody else
had even heard of him.
I was 17 in 1981 when I first heard him
and 19 in 1983 when I bought the bio
and my 1st record of his.
It all makes sense now.
Gods timing is perfect indeed.
Journey well.
Additional links/resources
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_Enoch_Scroll
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Strugnell
https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/18/
No comments:
Post a Comment