Dr. David Livingston, PhD “evil line of Cain”

Dr. David Livingston, PhD’s article Who Were the Sons of God in Genesis 6.png

I am concluding considering Dr. David Livingston, PhD’s article “Who Were the Sons of God in Genesis 6?” which I will do in two segments followed by a review of the interesting discussions which occurred therefrom within the comments section—find all of my segments on this here.

My books that are relevant to this issue, on which I am offering a deal, are:

I am concluding considering Dr. David Livingston, PhD’s article “Who Were the Sons of God in Genesis 6?” which I will do in two segments followed by a review of the interesting discussions which occurred therefrom within the comments section—find all of my segments on this here.

My books that are relevant to this issue, on which I am offering a deal, are:
“On the Genesis 6 Affair’s Sons of God: Angels or Not?” subtitle “A survey of early Jewish and Christian commentaries including noted on giants and the Nephilim”
“What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology”
“What Does the Bible Say About Demons? A Styled Demonology”
“The Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries” which is subtitled “Over a Millennia’s Worth of Comments on Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Satan, the Devil, Demons, the Serpent and the Dragon.”

Dr.H.Davis chimed back in with yet another instance of cutting a verse/a thought in order to force is to say what he wants to emphasize “Our Savior said in heaven people ‘…neither marry nor are given in marriage but ARE AS the angels…’” yes, yet again cutting off the end which is that the statement is about Angels “in heaven.” But he, yet again, demands that “This means Angels do not marry and are sexless” and “No where are we told angels can have sex with women” unless, that is, this is what Genesis 6, Jude and 2 Peter 2 are telling us.

He then admits that the Bible presents Angels as being “seen as ‘men’ or ‘young men’” he cannot allow this to mean what it means (which is that this is what Angels are ontologically) so has to invent the idea that “it does not prove there have a physical body that can have sexual relations and produce offspring!”

And we are also back to the claim that “all reproduction is decreed by God Himself to be ‘after it’s kind’ including humans!” and humans are made a little lower than Angels who look just like human males so that we are of the same kind.

Dr. David Livingston, PhD’s article Who Were the Sons of God in Genesis 6.png

He also repeats the myth of an “evil line of Cain.” He then gets close but not close enough in stating that Genesis 6’s sons of God “could not be the sons of God mentioned in Job that Satan appeared and joined them as he was distinct from them as he was NOT a son or righteous angel as were those ‘sons.’” Satan is distinct because they are Angels but he is a Cherub.

He then claims “son is bene in Heb., and can be translated in different ways as hero, mighty one, solider,,king, powerful one, heir,strong one, son,etc.” which is certainly a unique claim, a faulty one, and one for which he provides no citations (because he could not). He then attempts to read this into Job wherein, he claims, “we could translate bene elohim Heb. as ‘mighty or powerful (ones) of God’” so he appears to be attempting to deny that Job chaps 1 and 2 refer to Angels—what of what will he do with chap 38?

Then then notes that “Gen.5 it shows righteous Seth’s descendants and names them” but fails to note that some of those names are the same as those in Cain’s lines: i.e., both line contain names with “el” in them referring to God (as in El-ohim).
He also points out that “Adam who was called the ‘son of God’ (so Seth’s line was called the ‘son/s of God’ by Luke” which is not only a non sequitur but he offers no quotation or citation from Luke to this effect: Adam is called a son of God within the context of his creation but no such thing is stated about Seth’s line.

And he also keep repeating things such as that “Angels that were Satan’s already(not the sons of God) had fallen before man was created and Satan was in the garden speaking to Eve” and the claim that “Adam and eve were told to ‘guard’ the garden and dress it.” When Genesis 3 relates the fall of the Cherub Satan and Genesis 6 relates the fall of Angels.

He also repeats that “NO proof angels can procreate at all in Scripture” unless we could Genesis 6, Jude and 2 Peter 2 and also repeats that Jesus “indicated…the angels were sexless and did not marry!”

He then states something accurate which is to ask “where does it say ‘giants’” but also “no where does it say these people were half angel” which it would not need to say since the implication would say it for the text. But he also notes, “They’ ‘were of old’ or BEFORE the union of the godly line of Seth and the ungodly line of Cain. It simply says there were giants then and later as well as’ of old’ or before !!! Gen.6:4”

This is because the text states that the Nephilim were “in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men” which seems like a simply grammatical issue which may be better understood as that the Nephilim were in the earth in those days; and also after that, as a result of when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men.” If such is not the case, Genesis 6 is relating a certain event but then throws in an oh yeah hey, by the way, these Nephilim guys about whom nothing has yet been said in the previous chapters were also around at the time—anyhow, back to our story.

l gould then tells Dr. Davis “You do greatly err” and claims “Micaiah saw the host of heaven standing with the Lord and one came out and suggested he would be a lying spirit to Ahab ie: a fallen angel.” Yet, that is a subjective conclusion since 1) Angels are not spirits, 2) all fallen Angels are incarcerated and 3) there are spirit beings (a different category of being than Angels) that this was such a one.

And this person basically sermonizes for a couple of pages worth of comment. Within that there is a point I have been making, over and over again, which is about “The false doctrine which exists here is this nonsense of the children of Seth and the children of Cain – invented by those who do not handle the scriptures through the Spirit of God but by their own human understanding.”

Danny commented, “I commented on this over a year ago” and by now “have gained some sense and now realize that this is all impossible. Angels never bred with women and produced mutant giant hybrids of any kind.” Yet, the reply was partially emotive, “crazy paranoid ideas…that sound too ridiculous to be true” but that which Danny subjective considers crazy, paranoid or ridiculous is irrelevant.

Danny is concerned with thing that make “all believers in Christ look stupid. In fact, in this day and age, simply believing in God, Adam and Eve, Noah’s Ark, etc. will get one laughed at and shunned. If one were to go on and on about angels coming down and breeding with human females to taint the human bloodline, well that would just be the cherry on top of the sundae, and then people would think Christians are all stupid, crazy, and paranoid and in need of medication.”
Well then, if we use corrupt, fallen and condemned culture’s pseudo-standard then Danny, we do we not throw away God, Adam and Eve, Noah’s Ark, etc.?

He seeks to buttress this by writing “There were never any skeletons of giants found” but to me this is not relevant since the Angels were not “giants” nor were the Nephilim. However, many will tell Danny that giant skeletons have been found and I would direct such people to Giant skeleton reports in old newspapers and especially Grading the giant human skeleton chart.

He then claims “in the bible, anyone who encounters angels usually describes bright light (like people who claim to see aliens, saying that see bright light UFOs)” which is not accurate of the Bible. He goes on to say “in the bible people are taken up into heaven or have out of body experiences, like UFOs abducting people and bringing them up to their ship” yet, such is very, very rare: perhaps Enoch, Elijah, a man mentioned by Paul and visions by Isaiah, John and perhaps one or two others.
Now, just in case, he does state, “I don’t believe in aliens either.”

He then refers to the movie Prometheus and even gets that wrong as he claims that it is about “aliens once came down and mated with women, and it produced giant offspring” but that is not the case: in that movie the aliens are taller than humans and engage in direct panspermia by having one of them introduce his DNA into a flow of water on the primordial Earth.

He also refers to “hybrids between Lions and Tigers and are GIANT” about which you can see 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. Here is my donate page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page. You can also use the “Share / Save” button below this post.