My not really a discussion with Nephilim pop-researcher Timothy Alberino

On his Twitter post, someone shared a link to Alberino’s site and noted that he, “did a 3 part movie length documentary called True Legends, worth checking out.” They also included a link to Dr. Judd Burton’s site.

We’re told, “Both are incredibly knowledgeable in their fields” yet, both teach un-biblical Nephilology. Thus, I replied, “Well, they are incredibly knowledgeable in the field of neo-theo-sci-fi-tall-tales since their Nephilology is not biblical.”

To that, Timothy Alberino replied, “Do you have a degree in Nephilology?”

I wasn’t aware that there was such a thing.

I replied, “Rather than being worldly and dismissing, why don’t we just have an iron sharpening iron live discussion on YouTube between brothers?”

Apparently, the answer was, “No.” And you will note that pop-Nephilologists do not appear on any platform of any sort where there’s a chance that their assertions might be challenged. The one and only exception of which I know is that Gary Wayne one time went on such a platform—when he debated me—and has never done so again (but has bad mouthed me to others).

Now, another post on Timothy Alberino’s Twitter contained a comment by a certain Micky “Fingers” Stratsberg who noted, “Listen. I’m a believer in the nephilim and giants and all of that, but come on man. Some of the stuff you say sounds nutty. Have you had a mental exam? Not being a jerk. I’m serious. I want to check out your material but i want to know you’re legit.”

I replied, “Here a test: if they believe in post-flood Nephilim, that they were VERY tall, & that Anakim were related to them then they’re not legit by definition &, BTW, that’s most neo-pop-researchers.”

Alberino replied, “Evidently, only you have a proper perspective on the Nephilim. I should just hang up my hat and defer to your superior knowledge.”

It’s tragically sad how post-flood “giant” Nephilologists hide away in safe spaces where their mere assertions are praised and they don’t even seem to be aware how to argue their

See my various books here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.

New book “The Great Nephilim Giants Debates”

Featuring Gary Wayne, T.J. Steadman, Rob Rowe, and Eric Rolon.

 

You can find it on Amazon—here—or other book sellers.

 

Transcripts and comments on debates/discussions with Gary Wayne, T.J. Steadman, Rob Rowe, and Eric Rolon on the mysteriously fascinating issue of Nephilim/Giants.

 

…when the scripture touches upon

literature from other culture,

it’s usually done in order to set it straight,

not to incorporate it into its theology…

—Ken Ammi

full-the-great-nephilim-giants-debates-paperback-2429710

See my various books here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.

Is the Devil the most powerful demon?

The following discussion took place due to the Quora site question which led to Charles Jackson’s answer to “Is the Devil the most powerful demon?”

 

He noted

Satan is not a demon. He is a fallen angel. Read Ezekiel 28 : 12 : 19 to learn more about him. The origins of Demons/Evil Spirits/Ghost is in Genesis 6 : 1 – 4. Another group of fallen angels called Watchers who’s job was to watch and assist early humans who had illicit sex with women and produced an offspring called Nephilim. These giants were bullies, evil, cannibals and caused havoc on the earth against humans. Their disembodied spirits are the Demons that are plaguing mankind. Their abode is the Abyss. Read Revelation 9 : 11. Satan is their leader and is over all the other fallen angels. Read Revelation 12 : 4.

 

I, Ken Ammi, replied

Satan is not a fallen Angel, he’s a Cherub.

 

Charles Jackson

Mr. Ken, Aren’t Cherubs are a higher order of angels?

 

Ken Ammi

Mr. Jackson, the main three categories of being in God’s court are Angels, Cherubim, and Seraphim.

They have different job titles, different job functions, and look different from one another.

Cherubs can’t be anywhere in the order of Angels since they are not Angles since they are not messengers.

I am aware of un-biblical categorizations such as “Cherubs are a higher order of angels” that are based on tradition, but that is a category error that violates the law of identity.

 

Charles Jackson

Mr. Ammi,,,,,,Cherub >> Shorten form of Cherbium. Read Ezekiel 28 : 14, it says: You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. This verse is talking about the Satan. Thanks! Please don’t take offense as this not my opinion, but from bible. What ever you write I take note of.

 

Ken Ammi

Mr. Jackson,,,,,,Indeed, that is why I noted that Satan is not an Angel but is a Cherub. You will find that such technical accuracy is important when, for example, you think about what topped the Ark of the Covenant, how Satan could “enter” Judas, etc. Check out my book on Satanology, if you are so inclined: https://www.amazon.com/What-Bible-About-Devil-Satan/dp/1790181674

 

 

 

That brought the discussion to and end as no more replies were forthcoming.

 

See my various books here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.

“A conversation about the Bible’s account of Giants on Earth!  Nephilim giants did exist before the Flood”

On his Facebook page, a certain Jerry Locklair posted a notification about:

A conversation about the Bible’s account of Giants on Earth!  Nephilim giants did exist before the Flood of Noah.  Was the Giant that David killed with his sling and rock, a Nephilim also, created after the Great Flood of Noah’s time?  Those who know the Scriptures, please respond.

Darrell E. Smith responded:

We have evidence from all over the world…but because of scientists clinging to the debunked theory of evolution(DNA and Microbiology debunked it in the mid 1980’s)…hundreds of giant skeletons were destroyed. The largest destruction of giant skeletons came in 1910 when The Smithsonian hired a new curator(an evolutionist) who had all their collection of giant bones and skeletons destroyed. Evolution wrongly teaches that man was small and got larger over 2 million years. Lol. We know better than that…and The Smithsonian had proof. However…the Old newspaper articles from the late 1800’s and early 1900’s still tell of the excavations of these giant skeletons…all over the US and the world.

I, as True Freethinker, had to spoil the fun with questions and facts:

Darrell E. Smith “all over the world” is a bit of a vague citation.

What makes you assert “hundreds of giant skeletons were destroyed”?

What the citation for the specific assert of 1910?

Regarding “Old newspaper articles” have you double checked them?

In any case considering the reference to “the Bible’s account of Giants”: The key questions are: What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles? What’s your and Jerry’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”? Do those two usages agree?

I have to ask because they certain don’t agree.

“Nephilim giants” biblically contextually reads as “Nephilim Nephilim.”

As for “Was the Giant that David killed with his sling and rock, a Nephilim also, created after the Great Flood of Noah’s time?” no, he was a Repha, not a Nephil, and most reliably just shy of 7 ft.

Darrell E. Smith

Actually I never said Goliath was a Nephilim…and his stature according to scriptural accounts was just over 9 feet. If you care to do research about the Smithsonian…you will find that one of its employees at the time of the bone disposal kept some of the records and a few of the bones. The fact that these giant bones have indeed been found “all over the world” is not a disputed fact…except in the minds of evolutionists.

Jerry Locklair

True Freethinker, reread what I wrote! I’m asking questions about giants, after the flood! I never said they are the same kind of giants as the pre flood giants!

True Freethinker

Darrell E. Smith I was just grouping together your comment with the post’s comment.

When you refer to Goliath’s “stature,” whatever that has anything to do with anything, “according to scriptural accounts” it’s ironic that you refer to accounts, plural, since you’re myopically appealing to the Masoretic text but the earlier LXX and the earlier Dead Sea Scrolls and even the earlier Josephus all have him at just shy of 7 ft and so that’s the preponderance of the earliest data.

When I ask people about their assertions about the Smithsonian I get the same vague non-quotation and non-citation you offered.

Likewise with following up my noting, “‘all over the world’ is a bit of a vague citation” by doubling down with, “giant bones have indeed been found ‘all over the world’”

Tracy Jayne

I’m Genesis 6, I’ve been taught that the the term,”sons of God” refers to those of the lineage of Jesus and the term, “daughters of men” refers to women who were not of the lineage of Jesus. It was not God’s plan for the sons of God to marry with unbelievers but they did and that is why evil proliferated before the flood. He urges us Christians today as well not to marry an unbeliever.

This passage is not about angels and humans getting together, it’s about believers and nonbelievers. The confusion comes from the book of Enoch which is not a part of the cannon of the protestant Bible.

Darrell E. Smith

Tracy Jayne I agree…but this does not negate the Nephilim…and The Bible’s statement that “There were giants in the earth in those days”.

True Freethinker

Tracy Jayne Job 38:7 allow for understanding “sons of God” to refer to non-human beings—which the LXX has as “Angelos.”

Jude and 2 Peter 2 combined set the sin of Angels to pre-flood days and correlate it to sexual sin.

Such is how the overwhelming majority of Jews and Christians understood it from BC days well into centuries into AD days.

Until, that is, someone decided to tell a myth such as that, “This passage is not about angels and humans getting together.”

1 Enoch is Bible contradicting folklore from millennia after the Torah.

Tracy Jayne

Darrell E. Smith Have you seen Shaquil O’Neil in person?

Tracy Jayne

True Freethinker Don’t agree with you, respectfully.

Darrell E. Smith

Tracy Jane and Freethinker, It is a distinct possibility that all Antedeluvians were Giants…considering the earth’s very different conditions…with people living to be over 900 years old. We know there was 50% more oxygen and greater air pressure which would have pressurized both oxygen and Co2 to fauna and flora. This is why we find fossil remains of insects that are ten times their normal size.

True Freethinker

Tracy Jayne Are you asserting that he’s not fully human?

True Freethinker

Darrell E. Smith But if “all Antedeluvians were Giants” then none of them were giants. The key questions are:

What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles?

What’s your usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?

Do those two usages agree?

Darrell E. Smith

True Freethinker Lol!

True Freethinker

Darrell E. Smith Fascinatingly, I’ve asked those key questions to dozens upon dozens upon dozens of people who go on and on and on about “giants” and literally zero have replied to them. That’s part of why Nephilology has become the cesspool of un-biblical neo-theo sci-fi tall-tales which it is.

Darrell E. Smith

True Freethinker I just look at the bone evidence…and know they existed. I have no way of determining their origin. When Christ returns I will ask him.

True Freethinker

Darrell E. Smith But you look for “bone evidence” of people who’s bones you don’t know what they looked like.

Darrell E. Smith

True Freethinker That is true…which is why I said: “I just look at the bone evidence and know they existed…even though I don’t know their origin”. That would include “what they look like”.

True Freethinker

Oh, I see. Origin would be ontology, looked like would be morphology but, no worries. That still gets us to that we wouldn’t know their bones even if we were looking right at them. And, of course, the answer to, “a Nephilim also, created after the Great Flood of Noah’s time?” is no.

Phil BeePositive Burrell

Goliath was a descendant of the off spring of sons of GOD and daughters of woman..

True Freethinker

Phil BeePositive Burrell There’s literally zero reliable indication of that and only one single sentence in its favor that was spoken by unreliable guys who presented an evil report and were rebuked by God. Also, now you have to invent a way to have God fail since He clearly would have missed a loophole and the flood was much of a waste.

Phil BeePositive Burrell

True..OK if you say so..

True Freethinker

Phil BeePositive Burrell I don’t say so: it’s literally in the Bible : just read the narratives of Num 13 and 14. And yes, post-flood Nephilologists have to invent a way to have God fail since He clearly would have missed a loophole and the flood was much of a waste.

Olga Flemen Kievitt

There were people on the earth long before Adam. When God turned the earth upside down there were people and animals . Plenty of reference to that in the bible. Yes there were giants. Why does it tell us in Genisis to REPLENISH the earth 🌎 if it had never been plenished before. The answers are all there in the bible

True Freethinker

Olga Flemen Kievitt If there is “Plenty of reference to that in the bible” I’m surprised you didn’t offer any—except, I suppose one single word “REPLENISH” which you appeal to misread because it contains the letters “RE” but back when that word was used it didn’t mean to re-do, re-fill, or anything like that. Please don’t assert an entire all-encompassing theory on two English letters.

And well, that ended the discussions with these individuals.

See my various books here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.

The Orthodox Church on Angels

Herein, I will be appealing to three resources: Orthodox Wiki, Orthodox Info, and St. Anne’s Orthodox Church.

Two of them note, “The word angel means ‘messenger’ and this word expresses the nature of angelic service to the human race” and “The word ‘angel’ means ‘messenger’ and this word expresses the nature of angelic service to the human race.” Moreover, “the word angel means ‘messenger’ and implies service to God and to mankind” and “messengers or heralds of the will of God, guides for people and the servants of their salvation” and “Angels are the messengers and deliver only that which God reveals” and “execute God’s will, functioning as our guardians, and as messengers of God” and “angels are a reflection of God’s glory and exist to serve as God’s messengers.”

As we shall see, these simple statements will actually become very important in terms of categorization, in terms of the law of identity.

This is because, “Angels are organized into several orders, or Angelic Choirs” and “Before the visible world was created God had created the angelic orders.”

We are told, “The most influential of these classifications was that put forward by pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (not to be confused with Dionysius the Areopagite, who was baptized by Saint Paul and lived in the first century, and from whom pseudo-Dionysius took his name) in the fourth or fifth century in his book The Celestial Hierarchy.”

Note that this is a pseudo source and one that dates to circa the late fifth and early sixth century AD: some half millennia after Jesus’ time.

We are specifically told that pseudo-Dionysius, “interpolated several ambiguous passages from the New Testament, specifically Ephesians 6:12 and Colossians 1:16” so let us read those, “we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” and “by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.”

Thus, “ambiguous” was a key qualifier since we are Paul does not specify to whom he was referring no who belongs in which category.

Now, pseudo-Dionysius developed these categorization:

First Hierarchy: Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones

Second Hierarchy: Powers, Dominions, Principalities

Third Hierarchy: Virtues, Archangels, Angels

How Seraphim and Cherubim got added to the mix is certainly mysterious but they surely belong therein, somewhere.

Now, the Bible only reveals a fall or sin or casting out of Angels (1/3 of them—Rev 12:4) and something will become very important: one Cherub.

Note that Paul referred to how “we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against…” which tells us that at least some of the rulers, authorities, cosmic powers, spiritual are malevolent—or, became that way. Again, who these are is un-elucidated.

Not only is this mostly based on pseudo-Dionysius from half a millennia after Jesus’s time but, “The idea of there being ten initial Angelic hosts is taken from Judaism, this number possessing a very deep significance in Jewish mysticism, being the numeric value…” but keep in mind that this does not refer to the Old Testament religion but to Rabbinic Judaism.

Thus, we are told, “one should be a bit cautious about taking pseudo-Dionysius’ model too concretely, as he is the only source we have for such a classification system. The author himself was a fairly early advocate of apophatic theology” and “many have accused the writer of wavering somewhere in between Orthodoxy and Neoplatonism.”

We are told, “When Adam was expelled from paradise after his fall, one of the cherubim with a flaming sword was set to guard the gates of Eden (Gen. 3:24)”: it was actually two Cherubim—and we will see that there was a good reason for this—or so it seems.

We are told, “By their nature, angels are active spirits…They are incorporeal spirits…Angels are the most perfect spirits…incorporeal spirits…being incorporeal spirits, are capable to the highest degree spiritual development…The Apostle Paul writes: ‘Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?’ (Heb. 1:14).”

This is a very, very common view and it is a very, very unbiblical view—but a very technical one that must be handled carefully.

The term “incorporeal spirits” is actually a very important one. Many would think that it is redundant since, by definition, spirits are incorporeal. Yet, while a spirit, proper, is incorporeal (Luke 24:39), spirits can take on a corpus. For example, God breathed into the mud/dust/soil man the spirit of life and he became a living soul: body, spirit, and soul. God is spirit, proper, but incarnated.

But Angles are described as looking like human males, the perform physical acts, and there is no indication that such is not their nature, no indication they shapeshift/morph, take on bodies when need be, etc.

But what about Heb. 1:14? Well, that was quoting Psalm 104:4. Now, what is interesting is that in both Hebrew and Greek one word can refers to/mean spirit of breath/wind: ruach and pneuma, respectively. The context of the Psalm is correlations natural phenomena thus, that statement is to be translated (as many have done) as that they are winds rather than spirits. Since the Psalm should read winds then so should Hebrews when it quotes it—I went over this in detail in my book What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology.

While there are some spirits, proper, God created a physical/material realm and just because Angles, et al., have access to realms/dimensions to which humans have not access (whilst alive, anyhow) does not mean that those realms/dimensions are not physical/material—even if exhibiting characteristics of physicality/materiality that are unusual to us humans.

We are told, “They are incorporeal spirits, and because they belong to the invisible world” but Jesus was very physical when He resurrected and yet, could literally chose to stop interacting with the visible world when He wanted: He would become invisible—or, disappear (Luke 24:31).

Also noted is that, “St. John of Damascus writes: ‘When it is the will of God that angels should appear to those who are worthy, they do not appear as they are in their essence, but, transformed, take on such an appearance as to be visible to physical eyes’” which is an assertion.

Also, “In the book of Tobit,” an apocryphal or deuteron canonical text, “the angel accompanying Tobit and his son says of himself: ‘All these days I was visible to you, but I neither ate nor drank, this only appeared to your eyes’ (Tobit 12:19).”

Thus, we either establish our entire Angelology upon this one single statement or we base it on what I noted about how Angels are described (many times) and what is not said about them.

Now, “St. John of Damascus also writes: ‘An angel can only be called incorporeal and non-material in comparison with us. For in comparison with God, Who alone is beyond compare, everything seems coarse and material, only the divinity is totally non-material -and incorporeal.’”

That is closer to my view which is that Angels are ontologically like or much like Jesus is post-resurrection: physical/material enough to be touched, seen, eat, etc. yet, with access to other realms/dimensions so that He seems to walk through a closed door, can become invisible/disappear, etc. As we are told about humans, “Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels” (Psalm 8:5).

Now, getting back to the issue of categorization, we are told, “St. Cyril of Jerusalem writes: ‘…there are various degrees of perfections and therefore various ranks or a hierarchy of the heavenly powers. Thus Holy Scripture calls some angels and others archangels (I Thess. 4:16, Jude v. 9).”

Indeed, when it comes to Angels, proper, “Holy Scripture calls some angels and others archangels”—actually, not “others,” plural, “archangels” since only Michael is referred to as such (in fact, it is an issue whether there could be more than one arch).

We are told, “St. Dionysius the Areopagite, divides the world of the angels into nine ranks,” so this source was not detailed and accurate enough to note that it was actually “pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (not to be confused with Dionysius the Areopagite…”

Also, “St. Gregory the Dialogist writes: ‘We accept the existence of nine ranks of angels, because from the evidence of the Word of God we know about angels, archangels, powers, authorities, principalities, dominions, thrones, cherubim and seraphim. The existence of angels and archangels is witnessed throughout Holy Scripture; it is principally the books of the Prophets which mention cherubim and seraphim.”

Now, I referred to “Angels, proper” since, sure, “Holy Scripture calls some angels and others archangels” when, that is, Angels are actually being referenced. Dividing “the angels into nine ranks” means that Cherubim and Seraphim do not belong therein.

If the Orthodox Church wants to insist in specifying nine ranks they will need to stop referring to nine ranks of Angels since some therein are not Angles, by definition.

Recall that we were told (and not the emphasis added for emphasis), “The word angel means ‘messenger’…means ‘messenger’…angelic service to the human race…means ‘messenger’ and implies service to God and to mankind…guides for peoplemessengersour guardians, and as messengers…serve as God’s messengers.”

Angels, Cherubim, and Seraphim 1) have different job titles, 2) different job functions, and 3) look different from one another thus, they are three separately distinct categories of being and ergo, it is a category error which violates the law of identity to lump them all together.

In fact, why assert that Cherubim and Seraphim are kinds of Angles rather than asserting that Angles and Seraphim are kinds of Cherubim or that Angles and Cherubim are kinds of Seraphim? See, it is an arbitrary mis-categorization.

For example, Angels are, “messenger…messenger…messenger…messengers…messengers…messengers,” as we were told, but Cherubim and Seraphim are not messengers.

Moreover, we were told they are in “service to the human race…service…to mankind…guides for people…our guardians” but there is no indication that Cherubim and Seraphim do any such things.

As for rulers, authorities, cosmic powers, spiritual forces, thrones, dominions, etc., we are told, “some Fathers of the Church express their personal opinion that the division of angels into nine ranks covers only those names and ranks which have been revealed to us in this present life; others will be revealed in the world to come.”

We are told, “In Holy Scripture we find the names of some of the highest angels. There are two such names in the canonical books, ‘Michael’ (‘Who is like unto God?’ Dan. 10:13; 12:1; Jude v. 9; Rev. 12:7-8) and ‘Gabriel’ (‘Man of God’ Dan. 8:16; 9:21; Luke 1:19-26)” but they missed one or two. “They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit. His name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek he is called Apollyon” (Rev 9:11) and one that is a maybe, “a great star fell from heaven…The name of the star is Wormwood” (Rev 8:10)—and I said “maybe” since star can sometimes refer to Angels, “I saw a star fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit” (Rev 9:1).

Note that this source rightly ignored Lucifer aka Satan aka Devil aka etc. I say rightly because the fact is that he is not an Angel but is a Cherub. Now, I noted that Cherubim do not deliver messages but this one actually does yet, not from God: try as he may to pretend they are from God, “Satan disguises himself as an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14): he disguises himself as an Angel, a messenger, and as one of light, from God.

This takes us back to the Cherubim guarding (being guardians is their job function, unlike Angels) guarding the way into the Garden of Eden: a Cherub had caused a ruckus therein, so two were stationed: 2 vs. 1.

Lastly, one source includes a “Prayer to our Guardian Angel.” While there are guardian Angels (again, see my book for details on every points I have made herein) in the Bible there is prayer to God and prayer to false gods—period, full stop.

Thus, it should be at least concerning when someone comes along later on with a tradition about doing something no one in the Bible seems to have realized they could do. This also potentially opens the door for Angles that are not our guardians—fallen/sinful/cast out ones who became demons—to answer our prayer, in a manner of speaking.

For more info, see the aforementioned What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology as well as the book wherein I deal with Cherubim and Seraphim What Does the Bible Say About Various Paranormal Entities? A Styled Paranormology and also The Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries: Over a Millennia’s Worth of Comments on Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Satan, the Devil, Demons, the Serpent and the Dragon.

As a side note of a related issue, see Orthodox Priest Lawrence Farley writing “Of Giants and Grasshoppers.”

See my various books here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.

You can comment here or on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.