Angels reproducing with humans possible? - Page 66

shazeep · #**651** 04-17-2015, 08:29 AM

yes, yes; i naturally assume that my 'knowledge' is vastly superior to yours, also; being mine. I think we have different definitions of "mythology," to start with. Would you agree that (at least) the beginning of Genesis is "mythology?"

But regardless, you might address the assertion if you disagree with it, in some particular? What is it you disagree with?

mfblume · #**652** 04-17-2015, 08:31 AM

The strongest argument against the angel view is the context of the flow of thought concerning man, as well as Christ saying angels do not reproduce. Twist away, but that fact stands.

mfblume · #**653** 04-17-2015, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquila

Angels are capable of many things that we do not know. Remember, in a single night, a single angel slaughtered a hundred and eighty-five thousand in the Assyrian camp.

That's only one Holy Angel.

Imagine what just small contingency of angels could do if they rebelled and chose to wreak havoc on planet earth.

Jesus plainly said angels are incapable of reproduction. Stressing "of heaven" is very weak, imo. The concept of angels only stems from fleshly fascination, I think.

shazeep · #**654** 04-17-2015, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

The strongest argument against the angel view is the context of the flow of thought concerning man, as well as Christ saying angels do not reproduce. Twist away, but that fact stands.

well, you can say "twist," but i am just reading Scripture. "Daughters of men" is plainly "_______ ha Adam." (i forget the word for daughters)

mfblume · #**655** 04-17-2015, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazeep

well, you can say "twist," but i am just reading Scripture. "Daughters of men" is plainly "_______ ha Adam." (i forget the word for daughters)

But I cannot see how THAT can override the simple statement angels do not reproduce and the overall context. And the alternate reading of the statement when Enos was born, as well. Fallen man focuses on their lineage from flesh. Those serving God consider themselves His children.

shazeep · #**656** 04-17-2015, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

Jesus plainly said angels are incapable of reproduction. Stressing "of heaven" is very weak, imo. The concept of angels only stems from fleshly fascination, I think.

well, you have a translation that suggests "incapable," when a better word might be "proscribed" or "prohibited" or something.

shazeep · #**657** 04-17-2015, 08:44 AM

@ "angels don't reproduce," a different concept is obviously being discussed, and them not reproducing is meant in the context of they don't marry. I don't speak to the dead, either; because it is proscribed for me to do so by God--doesn't mean i can't do it.

mfblume · #**658** 04-17-2015, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazeep

well, you have a translation that suggests "incapable," when a better word might be "proscribed" or "prohibited" or something.

No offense, but that is illogical. Why would God restrict an ability after having created them with the ability?

Praxeas · #**659** 04-17-2015, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

The strongest argument against the angel view is the context of the flow of thought concerning man, as well as Christ saying angels do not reproduce. Twist away, but that fact stands.

Actually I thought the context was the strongest argument AGAINST Sons of God being Human.

I made that argument earlier and gave reasons why from the context and grammar

Praxeas · #**660** 04-17-2015, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mfblume

Jesus plainly said angels are incapable of reproduction. Stressing "of heaven" is very weak, imo. The concept of angels only stems from fleshly fascination, I think.

Jesus did not say they are incapable. He said they don't marry. Being incapable and abstaining are not the same things

And yes Jesus does say "In heaven"...to be differentiated from those not "in heaven"