Friday, December 13, 2013

Cliff Kincaid My radio guest Saturday morning 12-14-2013

Cliff Kincaid, Political Commentator
Cliff Kincaid phoned the other day.  We started discussing current world and Church affairs and decided to continue the conversation on the air which will be tomorrow morning, Saturday, December 14, 2013.  That will be 10 a.m. Eastern time, 9 a.m. Central Time, 9 a.m. Mountain time, and 7 a.m. Pacific time.  Cliff has concerns about the universalism of the "Mandela" factor which could be a huge step, Cliff says, in the direction of "global governance," "New World Order" and/or "World Federalism."  Cliff has also articulated some serious concerns about the apparent direction of the new papacy.  Please join us in the chatroom at chatroom.themicroeffect.com and/or website www.themicroeffect.com.  Call in with your questions to Cliff (or myself) by calling the toll free number of 888-747-1968.

Tune in and stay tuned!

CONSTANCE
Comments:
I hope many will join us in the morning. I had an extremely stressful week as a lawyer. Pray for me!

Constance
 
"I'm afraid that Pope Francis has failed to consider
carefully enough the likely consequences of letting
loose with his thoughts in a world that will applaud
being provided with such help in subverting the truth
it is his job to guard as inviolable and proclaim with
fidelity. For a long time he has been thinking these
things. Now he can say them to the whole world -
and he is self-indulgent enough to take advantage . . .
of the opportunity with as little care as he might unburden
himself with friends after a good dinner and plenty of wine."


moral theologian
Germain Grisez,
Inside the Vatican

As quoted in my issue of NEW OXFORD REVIEW which arrived today.

Haven't heard from Suzanne in a long time -- I'm interested in her feedback on this. Too many people I distrust are currently applauding the Pope? Is he spreading the Gospel or is he, as the New Oxford Review, suggests "tickling ears."

Constance
 
More from the current issue of NEW OXFORD REVIEW, a conservative Catholic intellectual publication:

Assuming the Pope has been quoted or paraphrased
accurately by Scalfari (and we have been given no
reason to doubt this particular line), Francis shows
little understanding of Catholic theology or its underpinning
moral philosophy. He makes no mention
of a "well-formed conscience" (as emphasized
by Bl. John Paul II) or conscience as "the capacity of
man to recognize the truth" (as Pope Benedict XVI
said) or the idea of conscience as "the journey of
man toward truth" (as Bl. John Henry Newman expressed
it). What Francis articulates in his interview
is a primary tenet of moral relativism.


Constance
 
More on point comments from New Oxford Review -- its conclusion about the public statements made lately by Pope Francis:

Bergoglio is no longer the archbishop of Buenos
Aires; he's the Supreme Pontiff, the Church's authoritative
teacher and Vicar of Christ. He should
confine his public pronouncements to the service
of the Petrine office as the principle of unity in the
Church, instead of endearing himself to the world
at the expense of the Church. Ambiguity and confusion
are best left to the moral relativists.


To New Oxford Review this month, my sentiments are "Amen, preach it brother!"

Constance
 
Speaking as a protestant, I find it good to see a Pope who is prepared to question tenets of Catholicism that may not be in the Bible or derivable from it (eg, priestly celibacy, marital contraception). I hope he does not cross the red line of questioning Catholicism's scriptural aspects. Let us support him in the former and oppose him in the latter and pray for him whatever.
 
Constance,
If you can take some time from your busy schedule, you should make it a point to read Tom Horn's book Exo Vaticana, not to mention his other books. Tom Horn is an excellent researcher. He may have quoted you recently somewhere?

http://www.raidersnewsupdate.com

Patrick


 
Not everyone is impressed with Tom Horn. Nephilim the result of angels mating with women, and it's from this genetic line that the antichrist will emanate?

And, that's only one problem:

http://fanaticforjesus.blogspot.com/2012/09/tom-horn-leading-blind-gullible.html
 
I agree that I disagree with some of Tom Horn's work. He might be right, however, for some of the wrong reasons on this Pope who seems to be expressing a sad form of casual contempt for orthodoxy.

Constance
 
I totally disagree with Tom Horn's Nephilim theory. If it had existed, that blood line would have clearly been wiped out by the Noahic Flood.

Constance
 
Constance,

Horn's position on the Nephilim is that if it happened once, it can happen(and will happen / has happened) again. I just don't believe it actually happened the first time (pre-Flood), nor was it, or is it even a possibility from a Biblical perspective.

I fully agree with you re: Horn's position on the Pope.
 
Dear Constance and Craig

This is Physicist. Normally when I contribute on subjects other than science I don't sign my comments, but I'd like to this time. It was also me at 4:32am urging my fellow protestants to pray (in good faith) for Pope Francis.

While I do believe that fallen angels have mated with women to produce ghastly hybrids (based on Genesis 6, on which I shall comment), there is no evidence in the Bible that the Antichrist endtime world dictator will be of this line. God knows, but He hasn't told us. That means that we don't need to know. And nobody else reliable could know. So this is conjecture, and useless conjecture at that.

The oldest parts of the Bible - early Genesis, and Job (who did his own sacrifices ie pre-Moses) - use the phrase "sons of God", and in Job at least the phrase means angels. So I do take Genesis 6 to means that fallen angels were having sex with human women and producing a race of perverted giants, which Genesis 6 calls the nephilim. This disgusting event is what caused God to send the Flood. Notice that Genesis 6:4 says that nephilim were also on earth AFTER the Flood and that they were the heroes of old. Now look at ancient pagan mythology - Zeus having sex with a woman to beget Heracles, and similar happenings in Norse and Hindu mythology. These are post-Flood tales or they would not have been preserved, so it happened occasionally afterwards too, just as verse 6:4 says.

I also believe that Genesis was compiled rather than written by Moses, although I accept that he wrote most of the rest of the Pentateuch (apart, obviously, from his death scene and interpolations like "the monument is still there to this day"). There is a key phrase in Genesis, "these are the TOLEDOTH of..." where TOLEDOTH mean, roughly, "generations". This phrase closes each subsection of Genesis, and the first set is the generations of the earth itself in what we now call chapter 1. Each subsection that is closed by this phrase contains backward references but no forward references, which is good inferential evidence that the subsections were written contemporary with the events they describe. The aptly named PJ Wiseman argued this in the mid-20th century, and also argued that each subsection was preserved on ancient stone tablets to which the collector of Genesis had access. This explains why there are two creation accounts (in Genesis 1&2) far more convincingly than the liberal 19th century "documentary hypothesis" of Julius Wellhausen asserting four sources for Genesis (Yahwist, Elohist, Priestly, Deuteronomist)put together in the time of the kings of Israel, effectively making much of the OT pious lies. Calling angels "sons of God" is in the oldest subsections only.

So there is every reason to believe that these horrific couplings went on. But conjecture about the relevance of this to the Antichrist is pointless.

 
Dear Constance,

I have been rather busy myself and have been trying to sneak online as much as possible.

My purpose here is not to necessarily applaude the Pope, but rather to defend him against those of his REAL Marxist enemies who seem to be trying to create a variation on the theme of "The Hitler's Pope Myth." Only now, instead of trying to portray the Pope as a Nazi, they are trying to portray Pope Francis as a Marxist.

For example, one very important thing that people are not aware of is the secret network Pope Francis organized when he was Father Bergoglio.

It is described among other places in a book entitled Bergoglio's List : Those Saved by Pope Francis; Stories Never Told.




By Staff Reporter on Friday, 13 September 2013

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/09/13/pope-ran-clandestine-network-to-save-suspected-dissidents-new-book-says/
______________________________

See also.....

http://protectthepope.com/?p=8169

_______________________________


The following is the kind of dysfunctional "capitalism" Pope Francis was referring to in his statements about "unfettered capitalism."


STATE CAPITALISM IN BRAZIL AND ARGENTINA

http://www.academia.edu/2419815/State_capitalism_in_Brazil_and_Argentina_chances_limits_and_contradictions
________________________________


Argentina's president vs capitalism

Counting the Cost finds out how an audacious move to nationalise Argentina's oil company has triggered a diplomatic row.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/countingthecost/2012/04/201241913515360986.html__
_________________________________

The following article was published on November 23, 2012. Father Bergoglio became Pope Francis in March 13, 2013. Is Pope Francis to be excoriated for simply echoing the predictions of our own US economist Nouriel Roubini????? If things do not change, that is the direction we are headed in as well!!!


Roubini warns Argentina is heading for a highly vulnerable “State capitalism”

Argentina is adopting measures that impact negatively on investors and consumers confidence warned US economist Nouriel Roubini who became world famous for having anticipated the international crisis of the sub-prime by Discount Buddy" (id="_GPLITA_0"mortgages and junk bonds.)


http://en.mercopress.com/2012/11/23/roubini-warns-argentina-is-heading-for-a-highly-vulnerable-state-capitalism
_________________________________


And here we are a little less than a year later.........

Argentine central bank admits 'serious loss of reserves', which stand at 30bn

The newly appointed head of Argentina's Central ( by Discount Buddy" id="_GPLITA_0"bank )Juan Carlos Fábrega admitted that in the last few months “loss of international reserves” has been serious, but “we are working to correct the situation”.

http://en.mercopress.com/2013/12/04/argentine-central-bank-admits-serious-loss-of-reserves-which-stand-at-30bn
________________________________

cont...

 
cont...

The very purpose of the U.S. Antitrust Law was to prevent monopolistic capitalism.

UNITED STATES ANTITRUST LAW

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law
_____________________________

All I have to say regarding the people who are trying to portray the Pope as a "Marxist" on account of his comments about the dysfunctional sort of "capitalism" that he saw first hand in Argentina is that they do not seem to be well versed in the history of Argentina - or, for that matter, in the history of the United States.

Traditionally, the Catholic Church has tended to favor a MODERATE Capitalism which provided not only for a free market economy but also a social safety net for those who through no fault of their own found themselves economically down and out.

When all is said and done, it was the late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen who once asked rhetorically asked if there was any substantial difference between one regime in which the means of production were concentratd in the hands of a few "comissars," and another regime in which the means of production were concentrated in the hands of a few elite "capitalists" or fascists?

Because in either case, the means of production wind up being concentrated in the hands of an elite few while the plight of the poor remains the same - except in cases where people tragically feel themselves compelled to sell their consciences for bread.

When the Soviet Union was in its heyday, there was a sardonic joke making the rounds to the effect that "In Capitalism, the domination of man by man prevails, but in Socialism, it is just the other way around.

By the way, according to former Communist and radical David Horowitz, Marxists and socialists are just as much against Israel and the Jewish people as the Nazis were. Ergo, a "Stalin's Pope Myth" would serve the Socialist cause just as well as a "Hitler's Pope Myth." Especially since Marxists and socialists have changed their name to "Progressives.
 
P.S.

Papal critics of the left and of the right notwithstanding, the Popes have not only the right, but also the duty to deal with economic injustices and human rights violations wherever said justices and violations occur and in a manner appropriate to particular situations.

Just because the Marxists and their confreres have hijacked the words "social justice" and assigned them a new Marxist meaning (in true Gramscian style), this does not absolve Christians from the responsibility of exposing the Marxist/Socialist/Progressivist lies and doing all in their power to restore the true Christian meaning to the words "social justice" .......which is simply The Great Commandment as practiced in the world in which God has placed us.

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.


Matthew 22:36-40





 
On "being right but for the wrong reasons"....

Tom Horn, and many, many current writers in what could be called the "lunatic fringe" seem to be reflecting the rising New Age cultural belief system that has taken root through popular movies, books, TV shows, etc.

Joseph Campbell and Bill Moyers (both of whom are New Agey) had a program on PBS in the 80s called "The Power of Myth" which was a popular vehicle for introducing many New Age ideas into the culture. Acc. to Wikipedia:

"Campbell blends accounts of his own upbringing and experience with stories from many cultures and civilizations to present the reader with his most compelling thesis that modern society is going through a transition from the old mythologies and traditions to a new way of thinking where a global mythology will emerge." I think we are seeing the final stages of this transition, and hence, more and more people are believing the myths that have circulated around since mid last century, e.g., we are sprung from aliens, not God; aliens are real and are here and will help us through the difficult times ahead; etc.

Books like Tom Horn's Exo Vaticana are written among this current backdrop of accepting myth as fact, and use (or misuse) "scientific proof" to push the casual reader into believing something that isn't true.

The same can be said of popular conspiracy theories (or I guess they could be called "myths" as well) - if enough people believe them, they will be accepted as fact. And any who oppose such myth-facts will be looked upon with scorn and ridicule, or worse. Much worse. Such is the "Power of Myth", yes?

Another "myth" is that we won the Cold War. Nyquist deals with this myth quite ably, but I've beaten that horse enough here. Anyone wanting to read his latest myth-busting article (one of his best, IMO) on that topic can do so here:

http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/12/the-big-picture/
 
Susanna,

Your third comment at 9:40 is something I've had to really think about lately, and I think identifies the discomfort I've long felt about conservative critics on the Right who blast anyone who has had the "Marxist" label attached, rightly or wrongly. We can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I'm NOT saying that Marxism or Communism could possibly work, if only done the "right way". There is no right way of creating heaven on earth, which is at the heart of those ideologies.

But, as Christians, we must shine the light of heaven to all those around is in the dark, to draw all we can into the light of Jesus. If He is lifted up, He will draw those in the darkness unto Himself. One of the ways we lift up Jesus in this dark world is to provide for the needs of the poor and needy.

That Marxism, Communism and Statism are so widespread, is a sad commentary on how the Church has failed in that task, in spite of all the focus it receives among the megachurches. Now that the task of helping those in need has been relegated to the State, it will be nigh impossible to wrench it back, because the "benevolence" the State divvies out only gives it more power and legitimacy, which is craved by those evil men who have made their way into the halls of power. They want to be God, and so try to hinder and replace all true and valid workings of God through His people.

 
P.P.S.

Re: Assuming the Pope has been quoted or paraphrased
accurately by Scalfari (and we have been given no
reason to doubt this particular line), Francis shows
little understanding of Catholic theology or its underpinning
moral philosophy......


First of all, Scalfari is the atheist founder of Repubblica. That alone should have raise a red flag!

Another rthe fact hat Scalfari neither taped the interview nor took notes!

Shame on New Oxford Review for not raising them!!!!

**************************

Pope's words in interview may not have been his own, Scalfari says

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/popes-words-in-interview-may-not-have-been-his-own-scalfari-says/
______________________________

The following is from the National Catholic Register - a Catholic News Service of EWTN.

Daily News

Scalfari Confesses: Pope’s Words in Interview May Not Have Been His Own (14778)

The author of the controversial Pope Francis interview in La Repubblica said he wrote the Pope’s answers ‘with my own words.’
by ANDREA GAGLIARDUCCI/CNA 11/22/2013

https://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/scalfari-confesses-popes-words-in-interview-may-not-have-been-his-own/

__________________________

Scalfari Interview Taken Down from Vatican Website

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/scalfari-interview-taken-down-from-vatican-website
_____________________________
 
Physicist,

Respectfully, I’ll stand on my disagreement. I’m aware that the term “sons of God” many times refers to angels in the OT; however, the term is also applied to human rulers (cf. Psalm 82; cf John 10:34-35). Certainly, the most popular view of Gen 6 is that fallen angels mated with “the daughters of men”, yet there have been other interpretations. I quoted from the Beale / Carlson work Commentary of the New Testament Use of the Old Testament in another thread on here; so, I’ll copy and paste a portion of it now:

Carson notes that there are three main understandings of Gen 6:1-4:

1) the “sons of God” really were fallen angels which mated with human women; 2) the “sons of God” were kings, judges, etc. who indulged in polygamy, taking many women as they wanted, abusing their power; 3) they were from the line of Seth who married ungodly women [p 1070].

There is no doubt much support for #1; however, Jesus Himself said that angels do not marry. And while angels are certainly portrayed as males in Scripture, this does not mean they were actually sexual beings:

http://www.gotquestions.org/angels-male-female.html

In fact, given that there are no female angels mentioned in Scripture, I’d conjecture and say that angels are not really gendered, i.e., they lack the required ‘equipment’, so to speak.

I think a better explanation for Gen 6, though this is admittedly relatively new and in the minority at present, follows:

A few scholars have suggested the possibility that the first and second interpretations might be combined; that is, human rulers (the second interpretation) who claimed some sort of divine status might still fit the requirement of some kind of “angelic” encroachment (the first interpretation) if they were viewed as somehow demon possessed [p 1071; emphasis added].

Some appeal to Jude and 2 Peter, however, if you look closely at the contexts of both the 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6 you’ll see that there is no explicit reference to Gen 6:1-4. Here’s Carson again:

Crossing the species line is central to Jub. 5 [book of Jubilees]; that is not explicit in either Jude or 2 Peter. Jude is interested in the inevitability of the judgment of these “angels,” whoever they are, rather than in the precise nature of their sin [p 1072].
 
"Campbell blends accounts of his own upbringing and experience with stories from many cultures and civilizations to present the reader with his most compelling thesis that modern society is going through a transition from the old mythologies and traditions to a new way of thinking where a global mythology will emerge."

yeah, maybe the culture is doing that, but it is not a good thing and it is due in a large measure to Campbell's own efforts.

on Catholic economics, this is a good article about distributism, which while hijacked by fascist Catholic Traditionalists and Monarchists, has nothing to do with any of that.

It rejects both communism fascism and monopoly capitalism, and prefers a situation where individuals own most of the property and businesses not huge corporations etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism
 
I just noticed that in clicking on the hyperlink provided in the previous comment and taking advantage of the "LOOK INSIDE!" function, one can view the entire comments by Carson using "nephilim" as keyword.
 
Marko 12:04 P.M.

Well said, my friend.

I will even go further and quote C.S. Lewis who nailed it in the following comments he made in 1940where he warned against the advent of a “pseudo-theology” of the extreme Left and Right:

“Fascism and Communism, like all other evils, are potent because of the good they contain or imitate. (Diabolus simius Dei.) And of course, their occasion is the failure of those who left humanity starved of that particular good.

One of the things we must guard against is the penetration of both into Christianity.

Mark my words: you will frequently see both a Leftist and a Rightist pseudo-theology developing – the abomination will stand where it ought not.”



(C. S. Lewis, letter of January 17, 1940, in C. S. Lewis, The Collected Letters of C. S. Lewis)

One such "pseudo-theology" that has been in our faces for some time now is none other than the New Age Movement
 
Here's a link to a previous discussion on here re: nephilim. After clicking, just a 'control f' search function, using "nephilim" to access it:

http://cumbey.blogspot.com/2013/05/dennis-cuddys-new-book-power-elite-and.html
 
Craig,

To me the evidence that decisively tips the interpretation of Genesis 6 to the fallen-angels-mating-with-women view is the abundance of 'gods' doing exactly that in pagan myths from all over the world. Certainly angels do not marry; what is described is an illicit nonmarital sexual relationship - illicit for many reasons. I also don't see in other interpretations anything sufficiently terrible for God to send the Flood as judgement. But we can agree cordially in Christ to disagree about this.

Physicist

 
"Traditionally, the Catholic Church has tended to favor a MODERATE Capitalism which provided not only for a free market economy but also a social safety net for those who through no fault of their own found themselves economically down and out."

Dear Susanna: The big question is whether the safety net should be run by the State or be left to private charity. Our entire system is so far from the Mosaic system, in which a man who worked his land should not starve, that it is difficult to find guidance there. There are obvious problems either way: the risk of people starving and the disincentivisation of work.

This comment is simply to raise the issue, not to contribute to the debate about Pope Francis or Catholic doctrine.

 
Dear Anonymous 5:32

Re:The big question is whether the safety net should be run by the State or be left to private charity. Our entire system is so far from the Mosaic system, in which a man who worked his land should not starve, that it is difficult to find guidance there. There are obvious problems either way: the risk of people starving and the disincentivisation of work.

**************************

That is not only the big question, but it is also a question for which there are no easy answers.

In the Mosaic system which began as a theocracy, farmers were required to leave whatever they failed to gather on the first reaping so that impoverished women could glean the fields.

GLEANING
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleaning

Here in the city where I live, certain grocery stores and restaurants donate their leftover breads to the Loaves and Fishes Soup Kitchen.

FOOD RESCUE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_rescue


 
8 Robotic companies acquired by Google in last 6 months. Humans to become obsolete.

http://intellihub.com/2013/12/14/8-robotics-companies-acquired-by-google-in-last-6-months-humans-to-become-obsolete/
 
BRAVO, Susanna!!!

Thank you for your excellent (as always) input regarding Pope Francis.
 
Many thanks to all the commentators, Marko, Craig, and particularly to Susanna for her, as usual, brilliant and insightful contributions.

Constance
 
Littlesis is a grassroots watchdog network connecting the dots between the world's most powerful people and organizations.

We bring transparency to influential social networks by tracking the key relationships of politicians, business leaders, lobbyists, financiers, and their affiliated institutions. We help answer questions such as:

Who do the wealthiest Americans donate their money to?
Where did White House officials work before they were appointed?
Which lobbyists are married to politicians? Who do they lobby for?

All of this information is public, but scattered. We bring it together in one place. Our data derives from government filings, news articles, and other reputable sources. Some data sets are updated automatically; the rest is filled in by our user community. More Features

http://littlesis.org/
 
Susanna,

If Francis is molded by socio political forces, then perhaps he is not molded by the Holy Trinity? It could just be perhaps, that the whole history of popery is nothing more than a branch of spiritual babylon. Our humble Savior Yahushua who on bended knee washed the feet of others. Yet the popes accepts the praises of men, who, on bended knee, kiss his unholy ring! To anyone who has received salvation from the ONLY mediator between YHVH and man, Yahushua, this form of worship of a mere man, should be viewed as a sickening perversion! To say the least! Yet as i read this latest tread of comments i see a cheer leading section for the apologist of this mystery religion! I dont know if i should be more concerned with the New Age movement or the socio political religiosity of the cheer leading section here on this blog?
 
Constance,

The Bible says there would be Nephilim on the earth before and AFTER the flood, so it's not Tom Horn whose saying this. It's in Genesis 6.

Patrick


 
Here's another link about the Biblical support for Nephilim:

http://www.michaelsheiser.com

He's a scholar in ancient bible language, so might be worth examining with an open mind. I understand it's very difficult for people to move from their position, so some may not be able to really study this with an open mind.

Patrick
 
Patrick,

If you are referring to Gen 6:4 with the phrase "...and also afterward...", it would require a bit of reading into the text to support your understanding that there'd be Nephilim post-Flood. The most natural reading seems to be that the Nephilim were around in those days, i.e. in those specific days the narrator relates (concurrent with the narration), as well as those days "afterward", yet still pre-Flood, since the Flood was to wipe out all of mankind save Noah and some of his relatives. The narrator is speaking of some length of time, condensing it rather than specifying the duration. [I don't think I'm expressing my thoughts very well here...I hope you get my point.]

However, Nephilim are recorded in Numbers 13:33, but they are specifically identified as the Anakites - nothing in the text remotely suggesting these were angel/human hybrids.
 
The following link covers a good many of the issues associated with the Gen 6:1-8 text:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v2/n1/who-were-the-nephilim

The author/s of the above have this to say:

In Genesis 6:4, the phrase “men of renown” uses the Hebrew word iysh. This term is used consistently as “man” or descendants of Adam—even Adam used it of himself in Genesis 2:23, yet it is never used of fallen angel, demons, or of Satan. It was used for some unfallen angels when they took the form of a man, though. If the Nephilim were crossbreeds between men and fallen angels, then why did the Bible use the term men (iysh) as opposed to something that would lead us to believe they were not fully men?
If we follow the context of iysh into the following verses in Genesis 6, we find:

◾Verse 4: Nephilim are men of renown
◾Verse 5: wickedness of man great
◾Verse 6: God sorry He made man on earth
◾Verse 7: Blot out man from earth
◾Verse 8/9: Noah found favor with God and was a righteous man

The context reveals that Noah was compared with and amongst the men being discussed in Genesis 6, yet unlike them he was righteous (Genesis 6:9). There is no mention of Noah being fully human and other men being half-breeds, but merely that he was righteous among them. Having Noah be righteous among his generations is slight support for the view that sees the sons of God as human.

cont:
 
cont:

One early argument against this angelic view was that angels didn’t marry in heaven according to Jesus (Matthew 22:30). This has been responded to many times and it is rightly pointed out that this is referring to angels in heaven, not fallen angels. So, the option was left open that fallen angels may very well do this. However, a new problem now arises. Moses points out that the sons of God took wives (ishshah wife/women) (Genesis 6:2). Never once have I found a verse in the Bible where wife, wives, husband, husbands, or marriage was anything other than between a human male and female. If these were marriages between fallen angels and women, then it opens up the possibility of marriages that are not limited to man and woman, when the Bible is clear on this subject.

An argument in response is that ishshah could merely be used for women, not wives, and doesn’t necessarily mean they were married, but rather taken for sexual purposes outside of marriage, possibly forcibly. In light of some of these criticisms, this popular view may not be the best one, though many great scholars hold to it and it should be at least respected. I encourage deeper study in both the view and the responses as I am only touching the surface.

Perhaps the most devastating argument against this view came from Jesus Himself, though. We have no instance in Scripture where fallen angels ever materialized as previously stated. This is significant because Christ offered proof of His resurrection when the disciples questioned Him:

Luke 24:37–43
But they were startled and frightened and thought that they were seeing a spirit. And He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” And when He had said this, He showed them His hands and His feet. While they still could not believe it because of their joy and amazement, He said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave Him a piece of a broiled fish; and He took it and ate it before them. (emphasis added)

If fallen angels or demons, which are spirit, could materialize, then this calls into question the entire resurrection of Christ. Christ says spirits do not have flesh and bones, so it would seem these entities can’t make physical bodies for themselves.
 
Craig,

If you are interested you can have a look at Dr.Heiser's extensive coverage of this. He does a better job than I could, so I am not going to try to compete with him or convince you. He addresses all the points you bring up.

Those who have minds open will look without prejudice. I only posted for those who might be interested to hear what a biblical scholar has to say and consider without preconceptions. I find that people's preconceptions sometimes prevent them from looking at evidence with unbiased eyes. It's not my job to persuade anyone of anything. I'm simply sharing information.
Patrick
 
materialization - when people have touched materialized spirits, they do not feel like normal flesh and blood and bone.

sons of God - given that this term has been applied to the righteous humans, it has been suggested by Fr. Seraphim Rose that this referred to the family of Seth, that they were closer to God in righteousness and also in a symbolic sort of sense physically, living just outside the garden in Eden while Cain and his crew were living much farther away.

In this case, the incident referred to intermarriage between these two peoples, both human.

Complicating the issue is the Two Seed heresy which begins harmless enough in terms of just bad vs. good cultures derived from bad vs. good progenitors and their influence.

However it doesn't stop there. Supposedly Eve conceived Cain from satan and such people think "I have gotten a man from the Lord" refers to canaanite baal="lord" but the word in Hebrew is YHWH which rules that out.

The variant two seed heresy is the nephilim nonsense. Herescope.com has excellent articles refuting this.

But if fallen angels were involved, that doesn't mean the results were literal hybrids. One can bear a child to someone without it being physically that person's child, as when Rachel and Leah competing dragged their maid servants into the game, had Jacob impregnate them, and had the girls give birth on the knees of the mistress, so the child was AS IF theirs, a kind of adoption or ascription.

A similar thing is seen when Naomi suckled Ruth's son adopting him, the same people who said "a son is born to Ruth" then said "a son is born to Naomi," which erased the Moabite blood legally. (Otherwise David would not have been Israelite let alone king. ergo the book of Ruth.)

Now, if some genetic engineering was done with non human but non angel DNA involving these women married to the angels, the results would have been metaphorically the sons and daughters of such fallen angels, but not literally so.

And I suspect these are the ancestors of the "aliens" of today, those that are physical that is. See my book A POSSIBLE HISTORY OF LIFE ON MARS, which would have all "aliens" actually descended from Adam, but transgenic animal, reptile, insect, bird DNA. Modified human.
 
Susanna, not only were farmers REQUIRED to leave stuff to be gleaned, and forbidden to go twice over fruit trees, and forbidden to harvest the edges of fields, so that the poor and strangers could eat of them,

they were also REQUIRED to give the third year's tithe to the poor, and they were REQUIRED to make a public accounting showing they had in fact done so.

Enforcement and penalties would be involved here, or else the rules would be empty pronouncements.

So indeed there was a kind of primitive welfare state going on here.

Also all debts were to be cancelled on the seventh and 50th years, and land outside of a city could not once sold remain sold forever, but on the 50th year would return to the original owner or his or her family.
 
Physicist,
( re your 5:20 comment )
I've recently had my whole view of history
rather jarred and not for the first time or
likely the last but I'll just refer you to a Ken Johnson, Th.D. and his books but specifically the one called
"Ancient Post Flood History". What an edifying piece of work it is. In fact I think I'll read it again.
What really amazes me is that all the pagan gods,
all of them, from all the various cultures on earth,
were once just human people conquering and ruling over tribes, etc and eventually dying and being immortalized by time and people running their mouths and imaginations over the years.
But I shouldn't paraphrase Mr Johnson too much.
My point is that he really pulls history together
for me in a big way, including the whole Nephilim
question.
 
1:05 am Thank you for the link to littlesis.org. It was new to me. There are some who wait for others to find information and there are others who work on their own.

For those who are working on their own, let me add other sources.

1. You can do a google search putting in Cumbey and what you are looking for. If she wrote about it, it will come up.
2. www.discoverthenetworks.org/
3. http://dirtdiggersdigest.org/index-of-information-sources
4. http://www.openthebooks.com/
5. http://www.culteducation.com/sg_newage.html and http://www.culteducation.com/sg_alpha.html

If someone has additions to the list, please let us know.


 
http://gopthedailydose.com/2013/12/15/world-leader-stands-morality/
 
Re concerns on new Pope -- He just replaced Cardinal Burke with less conservative one on a powerful Vatican committee, per the New York Times today. This is not considered a good sign per conservatives.

Constance
 
As regards the Nephilim theories -- and that's all they are -- my Bible says "all men are one blood."

The Nephilim theories just don't reconcile with that IMHO.

Constance
 
Constance,

Which nephilim theories? Genesis 6 involved angelic miscegenation; or that it still went on after the flood; or that it still goes on today; or that the Antichrist is a nephilim? Each of these is stronger than the previous and some of us believe some of them but not all. And indeed all men are one blood but, as Hamlet asked, what is a man?

 
This comment has been removed by the author.
 
Hamlet spoke in terms of psychology, not biology. a hybrid is still a human if it is fertile breeding to the human. Angelic miscegenation was probably sterile, the children born probably the result of transgenic experiments part of the sudden increase in technology type knowledge in those days, and the wickedness and violence that filled the earth.

The latter was the stated reason for The Flood, transgenics and angelic miscegenation just a blip.

ONLY Noah was righteous or if you prefer the genetic misinterpretation ONLY Noah was purebred. Not his wife, not his sons, not their wives.

We all by the plain reading of Scripture, if you limit perfect to genetics, are hybrids to some extent. "kinsman redeemer" is about an economic based marriage on the one hand in OT law, and about who has first priority to get a relative out of slavery on the other in OT law. Not relevant to the issues of salvation except as one of many many analogies.
 
"not only were farmers REQUIRED to leave stuff to be gleaned [in Mosaic Law], and forbidden to go twice over fruit trees, and forbidden to harvest the edges of fields, so that the poor and strangers could eat of them, they were also REQUIRED to give the third year's tithe to the poor, and they were REQUIRED to make a public accounting showing they had in fact done so. Enforcement and penalties would be involved here, or else the rules would be empty pronouncements... So indeed there was a kind of primitive welfare state going on here."

Yes, but Mosaic Law did not specify criteria for who qualified for poor relief, meaning it was left to the community, ie its elders and priests. In other words it was decided with a measure of personal discretion. This meant that nobody could turn up and demand "Gimme" in the way that disincentivises work in many Western nations today.

 
"they were also REQUIRED to give the third year's tithe to the poor, and they were REQUIRED to make a public accounting showing they had in fact done so."

Interesting, where's that please?

 
Boy! I'm sure the following comment made by Pope Francis today (12/17/13) will delight the New Age crowd.

Read the entire article at:

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/santa-marta-30672/

...“But what is God's family name? We are, each of us. He takes our names as His last name. 'I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Pedro, of Marietta, of Armony, Marisa, of Simon, of them all! He takes His surname from ours. We are, each of us, the name of God.” "He is our God - he added - He has made history with us took our name from His surname,” "allowed us to write history.” "We write this story of grace and sin, and He follows us.” This, he reiterated, "is the humility of God, God's patience, love of God. He is ours!"

Did you catch the line, "We are, each of the us, the name of God" ?

Susanna may like Pope Francis, but he leads me to believe Fr. Fulton Sheen, the messages of La Salette (back in the 1800+'s), and today's Jack Van Impe are correct -- we've got trouble sitting in Peter's chair!
 
Anonymous said...
Boy! I'm sure the following comment made by Pope Francis today (12/17/13) will delight the New Age crowd.

Read the entire article at:

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/santa-marta-30672/

...“But what is God's family name? We are, each of us. He takes our names as His last name. 'I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Pedro, of Marietta, of Armony, Marisa, of Simon, of them all! He takes His surname from ours. We are, each of us, the name of God.” "He is our God - he added - He has made history with us took our name from His surname,” "allowed us to write history.” "We write this story of grace and sin, and He follows us.” This, he reiterated, "is the humility of God, God's patience, love of God. He is ours!"

Did you catch the line, "We are, each of the us, the name of God" ?

Susanna may like Pope Francis, but he leads me to believe Fr. Fulton Sheen, the messages of La Salette (back in the 1800+'s), and today's Jack Van Impe are correct -- we've got trouble sitting in Peter's chair!

4:19 PM
 
"Anonymous said...
"they were also REQUIRED to give the third year's tithe to the poor, and they were REQUIRED to make a public accounting showing they had in fact done so."

Interesting, where's that please?

12:58 PM"

Deut. 14:28, 29 Also Deut. 26:12-15, where a formal reporting of having accomplished these orders is described also.

http://davidagrant.blogspot.com/2008/09/malachi-3.html

discusses the general ignorance about and lack of teaching about this tithe for the poor.
 

Anonymous 4:19 and 5:18

Re:
Susanna may like Pope Francis, but he leads me to believe Fr. Fulton Sheen, the messages of La Salette (back in the 1800+'s), and today's Jack Van Impe are correct -- we've got trouble sitting in Peter's chair!


It is not a matter of whether or not I happen to "like" Pope Francis. Nor is it my intention to engage in religious polemics here concerning the validity of the Petrine charism.

My "liking" the Pope or "not liking" him is not the same thing as my not wanting to see him or any other person calumniated.

By the way, the version of the "Secret of LaSalette" which was published by the Bishop of Lecce which stated "Rome Will Lose The Faith And Become The Seat Of Antichrist" was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books when the Index was still in force. It was never part of the approved "Secret of LaSalette" the Bishop of Lecce's meddling notwithstanding.

http://jloughnan.tripod.com/salchronol.htm

http://jloughnan.tripod.com/sal_decr.htm
________________________________

As for the late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, I have never seen anything that would indicate that he was critical of any validly reigning pope.

What Archbishop DID say was the following:

“Father O’Connor quotes from Holy Scripture, the stunning prophecies of St. Vincent Ferrer, Pope St. Pius X, St. Francis of Assisi, St. John Eudes, Sr. Lucy of Fatima, Pope Pius XII and Bishop Fulton J. Sheen. Father explains how God will and is punishing the world for sin, and that the Fathers of the Church all wrote that the False Prophet would be a Catholic Bishop who will become an invalid anti-pope while the real Pope dies a cruel death in exile. (REIGN OF THE FALSE PROPHET. Catholic Treasures. Audio ITEM #20104.
http://www.catholictreasures.com/cartdescrip/20104.html 03/02/09)

_________________________________

If you are a Bible - believing Christian, I don't understand why you would be citing LaSalette ( which even Catholics are not required to believe) or Jack Van Impe's unbiblical theology.
________________________________

Here is the Catholic World Report's article on the La Stampa interview.

Pope Francis addresses Marxism charges, women cardinals in La Stampa interview

December 15, 2013 09:22 EST

By Catherine Harmon

http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Blog/2784/pope_francis_addresses_marxism_charges_women_cardinals_in_ila_stampai_interviewii.aspx#.UrHAgDYo51M

_______________________________

I really do not understand why anyone would assume that a capitalist economy is always necessarily a free market economy.

The dysfunctional "capitalist" economy that Pope Francis witnessed first hand during the Juan Peron regime and the Peronist regimes of Peron's successors, could hardly be regarded as a "free market" economy.


 
Dear Constance,

Regarding Bishop Burke, I don't know whether or not this factors into the equation, but when he was Bishop of St Louis, Missouri, Archbishop Burke dug in his heels over the control of finances at St. Stanislaus Kostka Church, a Polish congregation in St. Louis, in a saga played up in national and international headlines.

St. Louis Archdiocese, Breakaway Parish End Legal Fight (4299)

Result: a community’s official split from the Catholic Church.


by CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY 02/20/2013
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/st.-louis-archdiocese-breakaway-parish-end-legal-fight
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]