The L. A. Marzulli un-biblical pop-Nephilology YouTube channel posted a vid titled The Giants of Kandahar!!
The Kandahar giant tall-tale is just an internet hoax based on some anonymous guys making vague claims about generic regions and sold to us by two guys who make a living by selling un-biblical tall-tales to Christians: LA Marzulli and the plagiarist and evolutionist Steven Quayle.
A discussion ensued when a certain @cweed76 commented
Nephilim were men. MEN of Old MEN of renowned. Sons of God are believers Romans 8:14 is one of many scriptures that explains who the Sons of God are. God has never called an angel His son Hebrews 1:5 Angels do not marry Matthew 22:30. Nephilim were giant as in leaders, Kings. They were Godless fallen MEN of old MEN of renowned. Warriors. Although giants did exist in The Bible, none of them were angel hybrids, they were all human.
I, @kenammi355, replied
Well, the Bible refers to humans are men, to Angels as men, to Nephilim as men, to God as man, etc.
As for, “Sons of God are believers Romans 8:14 is one of many scriptures that explains who the Sons of God are” but that’s myopic and you jumped from a Hebrew context to a Greek one from millennia later.
Job 38:7, as one example, shows us that “sons of God” can refer to non-human beings (which the LXX has as “Angelos”).
As for, “God has never called an angel His son Hebrews 1:5”: you’re taking that out of context since it’s not about Angelology, it’s about Jesus. Ergo, God never called an Angel His son in the way that He calls Jesus His Son since Jesus is unique and authoritative. Or, do you deny that Christians are God’s sons since, after all, Jesus is God’s only begotten Son?
Why do you assert, “Angels do not marry” and cite, “Matthew 22:30” when that verse states no such thing?
As for, “giant as in leaders…giants did exist,” 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?
@cweed76
God has never called an angel man nor has He ever called an angle His son. Hebrews 1:5. Also in Job, you all tend to think Sons of God are angels just because they presented themselves before God, meanwhile, nothing in that scripture indicates anyone was in Heaven and Christians present themselves before God all of the time. What do you think prayer is? You present yourself before God every time you pray. You don’t have to be in Heaven to present yourself before God.
Show me one scripture where God refers to an angel as His son.
It is not I who is taking things out of context. It is those who so badly want angel sex to be a real thing. It’s NOT! Never has been and never will.
Angels are angels fallen or not. Angel sex comes from Serpent seed doctrine and is Luciferian.
I’ve never denied Christians are sons. That’s exactly my point. Romans clearly states who Sons of God are. And there are many scriptures that state it.
Matthew 22:30 says right in front of your eyes we will be like the angles.
“For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are as the angels of God in Heaven.” It says right there that angles do not marry nor are given in marriage.
Angels don’t marry nor have sex sorry but maybe stop reading The Book of Enoch, it’s nothing but Jewish fables and mysticism and is filled with heresy.
@kenammi355
You asserted, “God has never called an angel man.”
As just one example, Genesis 18 has two “men” being identified as Angels in chap 19: that’s very, very, very common.
You asserted, “nor has He ever called an angle His son. Hebrews 1:5. Also in Job, you all tend to think Sons of God are angels just because they presented themselves before God…”
You can take that up with whoever “all” are but I will just, one again since you ignored it and moved the goalpost, note that Job 38:7, as one example, shows us that “sons of God” can refer to non-human beings (which the LXX has as “Angelos”).
Jude and 2 Peter 2 combined refer to a sin of Angels, place that sin to pre-flood days and correlate it to sexual sin which occurred after the Angels, “left their first estate,” after which they were incarcerated, and there’s only a one-time fall/sin of Angels in the Bible.
The original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christians commentators, starting in BC days, was the “Angel view” as I proved in my book, “On the Genesis 6 Affair’s Sons of God: Angels or Not? A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim.”
As for Heb 1, you merely ignored what I noted.
As for, “meanwhile, nothing in that scripture indicates anyone was in Heaven…”
That’s one of the oddest assertions I’ve ever encountered: ever heard of “Out Father who art in heaven”?
“Show me one scripture where God refers to an angel as His son” Genesis 6 and Psalm 82, off the top of my head.
It’s simply and demonstrably evident that it’s not the case that, “Angel sex comes from Serpent seed doctrine” if for no other reason that the first view, again, was the original, traditional, and majority view but the latter is historically virtually unknown.
In fact, I wrote a five volume set of books debunking the serpent seed view, search Amazon for “Ken Ammi” it’s the “Cain As Serpent Seed of Satan” series.
So, you admit that Christians are “sons of God” even though Jesus is God’s only begotten Son. Likewise, Angels are His sons even if they are not His sons in the self-same manner as Jesus is.
It’s odd that you quoted a verse but then told me that it states what it doesn’t state.
You vaguely, generically, in an all-encompassing manner asserted, “angles do not marry nor are given in marriage.”
Yet, Jesus was very specific and He included a qualifying term that you cut off from His complete thought, “angels of God in Heaven” ergo, the loyal ones which is why those who did marry are considered sinners, having “left their first estate” in order to do, as Jude put it.
Such is why I had already asked you, “Why do you assert, ‘Angels do not marry’ and cite, ‘Matthew 22:30’ when that verse states no such thing?” which you can now see is the case.
As for, “maybe stop reading The Book of Enoch” please don’t play mind reader: 1 Enoch is Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah, see my book, “In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch.”
@cweed76
No where in The Bible does it say Jesus died for angels Sins. You’re adding to scripture. Angels don’t have salvation for sin.
@kenammi355
Since you ignored 100% of what I wrote I realize that I’m wasting my time since you idolize your man-made tradition: so, please repent. As for your pseudo-reply, it has utterly nothing to do with anything I wrote so it stinks of arguing-just-to-argue desperation.
That brought the discussion to an end as no more replies were forthcoming.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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 and/or on my Twitter/X page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.
Leave a Reply