Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 11/02/06 10:36:04 PM |
Age 59, FL |
There is another way weaknesses could have entered mankind. Some believe angels/spirits mated with daughters of men. I believe the Sons of God were Adams offspring. The daughters of men were Cain's offspring. His father was revealed in 2Cor.11:3 and 1Jo.3:12. Remember, Eve was called the mother of all living but Adam was not called the father of all living... Genetics. GENESIS Genes Is. Satan was in the garden. His serpent was handsome and manlike. If it was apples that caused Adam and Eve to KNOW they were naked, then today we need to pass the apples.
Michael
|
Re: Re: Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/10/06 06:34:55 AM |
Age 46, MN |
Your claim, "Genes do not grant any spiritual advantage," is exactly the point of this paper. I am claiming that at one point in time they did. Even in more recent times genetics did play a part in spirituality. ONLY the genetic sons of Aaron are legitimate high priests. ONLY the genetic sons of Levi can be priests. Moreover, ONLY a son of David can reign on the throne of the Kingdom of God. All of these have genetic overtones. In fact, the promise of the gospel was primarily based upon genetics. It began with the seed promises; the seed of the woman, the seed of Abraham, the seed of David. God's plan of salvation was based upon genetics. This attack by the fallen angels was an attempt to corrupt the seed and render God's promise false.
In terms of your claim that the sins was for men to marry younger women - there is absolutely no scripture backing this up. It is only a product of someone's imagination. The age of one's wife is never something mandated in scripture. Abraham, the father of our faith, married younger women both before and after (Gen 25:1) the death of Sarah. Jacob also married younger women and had 4 wives. This is not recorded as being a sin - certainly not one worth destroying the whole world over. King David also married younger women as he aged. I am not advocating this practice, just demonstrating that if this was a sin that God considered wicked enough to destroy the entire world, it seems odd that the fathers of our faith did so and were not explicitly rebuked for it. This claim to me seems ridiculous.
Finally, the sin of the wicked diviner Balaam is found in Rev 2:14, "He kept teaching Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit acts of immorality." Balaam is not recorded as "teaching divination" but idolatry and immorality.
I do, however, heartily agree with your conclusion. Whatever the specifics of the pre-Moses and pre-flood we now know with certainty just as you have stated, "What has changed is that Jesus Christ has died for our sins, we have the complete revelation of Him in the Bible and we have the indwelling Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth." AMEN! I agree with you and am grateful for this revelation.
|
Re: Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/08/06 02:38:16 PM |
Age 52, NY |
The genetic outlook has been used before, and I would suggest that the degeneration is better explained by the increased introduction of UV light that was once totally screened out by the "waters above the firmament". Genes DO NOT grant any spiritual advantage. What is flesh is flesh and what is spirit is spirit. The natural man does not discen the things of God. Fallen man can be dominated by the devil, a born again experience is necessary before a person can see the kingdon of God, and the compelling witness of the Holy Spirit demand an answer from man (John 16 and Romans 1)to surrender or supress the truth in righteosness.
Next, as a published Sciemce Fiction writer, the theory that demons were mating with humans really appeals to my soul, but what I find more reasonable and in context with Genesis 6 description of our behavior, 500 year old 1st generation children of Adam were finding 13 to 16 year old girls more fun than their 500 year old wife. Here is where genetics fit the phenomena. The introduction of the purer genes with 25 generations or more later led to genetic variations like giantism and perhaps a group of more robust men than those who married within their generation. (This would be like introducing a wolf parent to a family of poodles. The resulting offspring would tend to be more robust!) The lust for young women resulted in a breakdown in marriage and the family and culminated in the violent society of Noah's time.
Finally, Peter, Jude and John in Revelations mention the Doctrine of Balaam. Balaam contacted God through divination. His character remained unchanged because he did not seek to internalize God's Word, which is what changes our hearts (James 1 "the word of truth). He had no desire to obey God, or he would have moved in with Israel and learned God's law. The Doctrine of Balaam is that you can move God by your faith to get what you want. This kind of mysticism is prevelent today in word of faith ministries, prosperity teaching and traditional monastacism. Quite frankly, I wish there were genetic limitations on this behavior! It really has not slowed down much, since human kind has been dominated by the same spirit of antichrist and the same lies as from the beginning. However, it will be as in the days of Noah just before Christ returns: a violent place where people will be married and given in marriage (and often, if you read it as I do! The Lord employed a healthy dose of justified sarchasm in Matthew 24) and filled with spiritual wiickedness and deceit. What has changed is that Christ has died for our sins, we have the complete revelation of Him in the Bible and we have the indwelling Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth.
|
Re: Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/05/06 02:02:24 PM |
Age 46, MN |
Can it be "proved" that the sons of God were angels? Perhaps not. However, I believe that this is the strongest interpretation. This was the accepted and predominant interpretation by both Jewish and early Christian scholars. Luther hated mysticism and held to the view that the "sons of God" were the line of Seth. Others have said that they were the sons of the "noble rulers." Neither of these explanations tell us how these would produce giants, including the Anakim and Goliath killed by King David. I have studied the other major interpretations and consider them weaker than the predominant Jewish view that was held at the time of Christ. They believed that the reference to the sons of God referred to angels. The paradigm that I am proposing is also leading to the conclusion that mysticism is not something that God has sanctioned. I agree with Luther in his opposition to freestyle spirituality and this paradigm is one scriptural reason why.
|
Re: Re: Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/05/06 09:28:25 AM |
Age 38, MO |
I love how your going over all of this. I think it would help so much if our pastors would preach more on these kinds of things from The Word. It would help people understand why they need to stay away from all this new mystical stuff entering our churches. Thanks for the lesson. kim
|
Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/04/06 08:38:21 PM |
Age 29, MN |
I would agree that people are going too far to have an encounter with God through mystical practices. However, I don't believe it can be proved that the 'sons of God' were angels, and I am not sure that the idea of spirtual beings mating with humans is a biblically sound idea. I can't say I know why the patriarchs and certain people in the Bible had direct encounters with God, and it doesn't seem to happen today, but I think trying to explain why is speculation.
BJM
|
Re: Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/04/06 05:49:59 PM |
Age 46, MN |
Mark,
According to my understanding of Scriptures, God knew Adam would sin before He made Adam and Jesus was foreknown as our savior before the foundation of the world. God did not make a mistake in creating Adam, but He had already foreknown that Adam would sin and prepared His answer in the death of His Son, the seed of the woman.
I am claiming that Moses and the Patriarchs were not mystics but men that saw God. Here is what the scriptures state:
Gen 32:30 So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved.
Ex 33:11 Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend.
Deut 34:10 Since that time no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,
Regarding the future concerning our glorified bodies Paul states in 1 Co 13:12 "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face.
My whole premise is not that God's communication with us depends upon genetics, but that God communicates with us with certainty objectively, tangibly - and does not force us to seek subjective mystical experiences to discover truth. He gives us His promises and revelation of Himself objectively. We do not need to seek them in mystical experiences. Ultimately, the consummate revelation of God is given to us by a man that men could touch and hold. This man gave us the very words of God; and these words are certain.
K. Jentoft
|
Re: Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/04/06 05:34:02 PM |
Age 42, KY |
The Nephilim were the result of the attempt by Satan via his minions (fallen angels) to corrupt the blood-line of Adam to prevent the Messiah (Yeshua) from being born. In fact, the inhabitance of Gath were all nephilim, including the most famous son of Gath - Goliath. But before David fought Goliath, Caleb fought nephilim by the thousands, as the "Giants" the Anakim of Hebron as they are known in Joshua 14:15) they referred to in Exodus were nephilim.
Just in case you were wondering.
Mark
|
Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/04/06 02:15:06 PM |
Age 42, KY |
With all due respect, I disagree with your theory that our distance from YHVH was due to genetics. According to your theory, regardless of how carefully the descendants of Adam & Eve followed YHVH's laws or how much faith they had, we would have eventually been seperated from YHVH due to our DNA! Or in other words, YHVH made a boo-boo in designing us, or He intentionally designed us to drift away from His prescence, via genetics. I am sorry, but I find this absurd and I don't see the biblical backing for such a theory. I do believe that YHVH did alter our genetic make-up as WE choose to depart from His prescence and ways, so that we wouldn't live beyond 120 years old, and the Bible supports this statement. As you correctly pointed out, back in Exodus, when Israel was being lead in the wilderness, the Jewish people said they didn't want to have direct communication with YHVH anymore, thus Moses was the intermediary between YHVH and the people. But Moses never actually looked upon YHVH, as if he had, he would have died... according to scriptures.
In gregards to whom Jacob wrestled with, since the Son is only part of the God-head that actually took human form, I would say it was Yeshua, as we now know Him, that Jacob actually wrestled with, and not Avinu, the Father.
As for referring to man's relationship with YHVH as being "mysticism", you likening the interaction between YHVH and man in the Torah to the occult or pagan religions' interaction with their gods & goddesses. In today's English language, when we use the term 'mysticism'in relation with religion, it is associated, predominately with the occult. Thus by referencing early Old Testament(Torah) relationships with YHVH, as you have in this article, is it almost as if you are attempting to degrade these relationships, and when you add your assertion that it genetics that has determined our ability or rather inability to interact with YHVH and Yeshua, then you in fact limiting ability of the Omnipotent Creator of the Universe to being unable to communicate to His children. This certainly doesn't line up with scripture!
I am sorry, but inconclusion I find your whole premise that our relationship with YHVH and Yeshua, throughout the Bible all depends on genetics - one's distance from the original source, Adam and Eve, really doesn't hold up to the full counsel of the Bible. And while it can be technically correct to refer to the interaction with YHVH and Yeshua, as "mysticism", the fact that the most commonly used definition for the word "mysticism", is in reference to matters of the occult, I feel that for the most part, your article at the very least insensitive in your choice of terminology and for many, demeaning and insulting to both Jews and Christians (Messiannic Gentiles).
Just IMHO
Mark
|
Re: Tangible Mysticism Part 1
| Posted On: 10/04/06 10:04:02 AM |
Age 55, MO |
It's good to know that there are others who believe the Bible when it talks about the Nephilim, and how they came about. I first heard this concept from Chuck Missler (www.khouse.org).
I had read it but never really understood that fallen angels could have actual physical intercourse with women, until I had heard Chuck Missler speak on the subject. Only then did it make sense.
There are plenty of pastors who disagree with this idea. They mention the passage where Jesus states that in heaven we will be as the angels, neither marrying or given in marriage. Those who dont believe chapter 6 of Genesis is talking about fallen angels use this passage to refute the angel view that angels can't have intercourse; but Jesus didn't say that angels can't have intercourse, just that they don't. There's no telling what mischief fallen angels can get into.
It does answer a lot of questions about why everyone was destroyed in the flood of Noah, less Noah's wife, sons and daughter-in-laws. Noah preached for 120 years while building the arc, but none accepted the message. This had always been very hard for me to understand.
I have often wondered why God doesnt speak to us as he did those select few individuals of the Old Testament times; I now beginning to understand.
My dad's favorite saying was "sometimes you need to be hit on the head with a 2x4 before you get it". Well, I guess I just got hit.
I look forward to reading part two.
Thank you,
God Bless,
Ron Graham
|
|
|
|
|
