Gen 6: 1-6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Some people believe that what took place in Genesis 6 was that fallen angels (sons of God) went into the daughters of men, had sex with them and produced giants.  The main source for this teaching comes from a book called “The book of Enoch”    We will show that the book of Enoch is not just contrary to the Bible, but is itself the work of men.

The Book of Enoch states

6.27: 2  And the Angels, the sons of Heaven, saw them and desired them. And they said to one another: “Come, let us choose for ourselves wives, from the children of men, and let us beget, for ourselves, children.”
And Semyaza, who was their leader, said to them:
“I fear that you may not wish this deed to be done and that I alone will pay for this great sin.”
And they all answered him, and said:
“Let us all swear an oath, and bind one-another with curses, so not to alter this plan, but to carry out this plan effectively.”

And these are the names of their leaders: Semyaza, who was their leader, Urakiba, Ramiel, Kokabiel, Tamiel, Ramiel, Daniel, Ezeqiel, Baraqiel, Asael, Armaros, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsiel, Satael, Turiel, Yomiel, Araziel.

These are the leaders of the two hundred Angels and of all the others with them.
And they took wives for themselves and everyone chose for himself one each. And they began to go into them and were promiscuous with them. And they taught them charms and spells, and they showed them the cutting of roots and trees.  And they became pregnant and bore large giants. And their height was three thousand cubits.

So in this chapter we have the names.  We have these fallen angels even swearing OATHS to corrupt mankind.  However was the fall of the angels a company decision or the work of one particular angel Lucifer?  Not one of these angelic names are ever found in scripture.  However several important facts should be obvious.

People 450-Feet Tall?

Are you really gullible enough to believe that fallen angels had physical intimacy with earthly women that produced offspring 450-feet tall?  I don’t think so!  We read in chapter 7:12-15 of the Book of Enoch

7:2-5  Whose stature was each three hundred cubits. These devoured all which the labor of men produced; until it became impossible to feed them; When they turned themselves against men, in order to devour them;  And began to injure birds, beasts, reptiles, and fishes, to eat their flesh one after another, and to drink their blood.  Then the earth reproved the unrighteous.

A “cubit” is 1.5 feet.  The ark which Noah built was 300 cubits long (Genesis 6:15).  Do you mean to tell me that some women had children who were as tall as the ark was long?   You’ve got to be joking!  Such foolish conjecture is a violation of the simplest teachings of the Bible.  In Genesis 6: we read, “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”  I think Pastor J. Vernon McGee interprets this Scripture exactly right…

It says, “There were giants in the earth in those days,” but it does not say they are the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men. It does say this about the offspring: “the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” These were not giant freaks they were men. The record here makes it very clear that the giants were in the earth before this took place, and it simply states that these men acquired for themselves a reputation.  No where does it say  that these men were the product of demonic experimentation.

The Bible makes it clear that:

  1. 1.       These giants were already on the earth when these sons of God went in to the daughters of men.  So how can they be the product of something that has not yet happened?
  2. 2.       We also know from scripture what was produced because of these relationships.   There were mighty men which were of old, men of renown.  Please note giants are not mentioned.

The Bibles verses run totally contrary to what the Book of Enoch teaches.

How could a woman give birth to a normal size baby that would then grow to be as tall as half the length of a football field?  ‘Com on, please be real.  Although the Bible does contain may miraculous and startling events (e.g., the flood), they are all explainable and have rationale.  Where are the skeletal remains of those 450-feet tall monsters?  It is clear that many unsaved scholars today are trying to discredit the Bible as a book of fables, which is what the Book of Enoch certainly is.  The Word of God is untouchable, unchangeable, and incorruptible

Book of Enoch also goes on to teach

 10.6-8 And so that, on the Great Day of Judgment, he may be hurled into the fire.
And restore the Earth which the Angels have ruined. And announce the restoration of the Earth. For I shall restore the Earth so that not all the sons of men shall be destroyed because of the knowledge which the Watchers made known and taught to their sons.
And the whole Earth has been ruined by the teaching of the works of Azazel; and against him write: ALL SIN
.”

 The Book of Enoch subscribes blame to the fallen angels for the ruin of mankind; however the Bible subscribes the blame to man for the fall of mankind.

 Gen 6: And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

 Notice what the Bible says here.  “MY SPIRIT SHALL NOT ALWAYS STRIVE WITH…… “ANGELS” who had fallen?  NO but with “MAN” WHY?    Was it not the angels which had sinned and messed about with Gods creation?  Was it not the fallen angels which went unto these women and married them?  It would seem to me that God was blaming the wrong crowd there or was he?

 GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart

Notice God does not lament the angels for the sin of mankind but man himself.  God also says “IT REPENTED THE LORD THAT HE HAD MADE MAN”  He does not say he repented because the fallen angels messed about with some DNA of mankind.

  THE RAPE OF GODS JUSTICE.

 If God decided to judge mankind over the wickedness of someone or something, you would have thought that he would at least get the finger pointed at the right crowd.   If man was wicked because of his genes then he cannot be held responsible for his actions.  Yet God makes man responsible for those actions.   Now if God decided to judge mankind simply because he has the wrong genes then he was to all intends and purposes guilty of ethnic cleansing.  But it also absolves man of personal responsibility for his actions and places the blame on God for destroying this world.  And the angels for messing about with his genes.  This is a demonic and wicked doctrine.  NO where in the Bible is this ever taught?  If God ethnically cleansed the earth, suddenly man has the right to ethnically cleanse who ever they want because God did it first.  Everyone gets the blame but man.  This is not what the Bible teaches.  God holds man responsible for his actions and not his genetics. 

  The Bible also makes it clear that Noah was a preacher of righteousness.

 Gen 6: 9 These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man [and] perfect in his generations, [and] Noah walked with God

 Hebrews 11: 7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

Now if Noah was called a “just man”  “Perfect in his generation”  “Heir of righteousness” Now where in these two verses does it say he got saved because he was ethnically pure?  Did God choose Noah because he had the right DNA?  For God to save this man based upon his ethnic purity would in fact be racialism.  Sin would then be equated with ones cultural background.  What colour of skin we have or are your eyes blue rather than brown.  Or in this case as some would have us believe your height.  If you are over six feet tall then your mother had sex with a demon.  This is not just another gospel but it a gospel for idiots.  We do not even know what height Adam and Eve were.  Sin is the conscious act of a person to do wrong and that is what God will judge.

CAN ANGELS REPRODUCE?

1 Cor 15: 39-40   All flesh [is] not the same flesh: but [there is] one [kind of] flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, [and] another of birds. [There are] also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial [is] one, and the [glory] of the terrestrial [is] another.

Math 22: 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Whilst we cannot say for sure what emotions angels were created with, we can say that angels were never created to have sexual desires , and certainly not with  human physical beings.  Lets be honest why would God create a being to have sexual feelings when there is no marrying in heaven.  What was the sin of these angels ?  The Bible tells it was the sin of Pride and it was that pride that led Lucifer  ( Isa 14:12 -13) to deceive a third of the angelic host to fall.  Sex never came into the debate.

 Which means they were not created to bare children?  If they did then there would have to be an argument that there are female angels and both the males and the females could reproduce.  There are no such teachings anywhere to suggest that piece of lunacy.  It would also suggest that if we are to be the same as the angels in heaven then we would still have the ability to reproduce as humans which we don’t.  That’s why there is neither MARRYING NOR GIVING IN MARRIAGE.

 Gen 1: 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, AFTER THEIR KIND, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.

 Gen 1: 25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good

 HERE WE HAVE A DIVINE PRINCIPLE ESTABLISHED FROM THE BEGINNING.  THAT EVERY CREATURE WOULD REPRODUCE AFTER ITS OWN KIND.  

 So we would expect a dog to breed with a horse or an evil spirit to breed with a human.

 The idea that angels even having the ability to reproduce should stagger the imagination let alone stretch fantasy beyond any credible legitimacy.

 Some have tried to argue that these fallen angels messed about with mans DNA, simply because man can do it today. However the Bible or even the Book of Enoch does not even suggests that this event even took place.  It says that the “Sons of God went unto the daughter of men and took wives “.   All that is implied is a sexual union.  Sex does not transmit to tampering with Genes.  As we see in 1 Cor 15: 39-40   the flesh of one being is different from another.  There is no way a spirit being even if he made himself visible could have a sexual encounter with a human physical being and reproduce semen in order to fertilise an egg.  Some have said that angels can eat and yes we do have an instance in scripture where angels might have indeed eaten a meal.  But eating is not the same as fertilising.

WHY would a fallen rebellious angel even contemplate taking “A WIFE”.  Some have suggested that this simply meant they had a relationship rather than actual marriage.  But this again seems strange.  These creatures cursed themselves into defiling mankind, so why would they have time to be committed to a relationship?  Is this not a human physical aspect?  Are we to believe that these fallen angels decide to be committed to their wives? 

Math 19: 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Gen 2: 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

This attraction to the opposite sex is a God given, but NO where does it say it was given to angels.

Hebrews 1: 14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?  That is their purpose and function.  This is what they were created to do.

Once we bin the book of Enoch which is where it should be the Bible makes all things clear.  But in case there is any doubt.

The Book of Enoch Teaches Heresy!

To the Biblically ignorant reader, the Book of Enoch might have an appeal; but to a believer grounded in the Scriptures, the Book of Enoch is packed full of heresy.  For example:

We read in chapter 40 of the Book of Enoch

1 And after that I saw thousands of thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand, I saw a multitude
2 beyond number and reckoning, who stood before the Lord of Spirits. And on the four sides of the Lord of Spirits I saw four presences, different from those that sleep not, and I learnt their names: for the angel that went with me made known to me their names, and showed me all the hidden things.
3 And I heard the voices of those four presences as they uttered praises before the Lord of glory.
4 The first voice blesses the Lord of Spirits for ever and ever.
5 And the second voice I heard blessing
6 the Elect One and the elect ones who hang upon the Lord of Spirits. And the third voice I heard pray and intercede for those who dwell on the earth and supplicate in the name of the Lord of Spirits.
7 And I heard the fourth voice fending off the Satans and forbidding them to come before the Lord
8 of Spirits to accuse them who dwell on the earth.  

( SATAN IS ONE BEING NOT MANY)

After that I asked the angel of peace who went with me, who showed me everything that is hidden: ‘Who are these four presences which I have
9 seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel.’
10 And these are the four angels of the Lord of Spirits and the four voices I heard in those days.

The Bible never mentions an angel named Phanuel, let alone an angel who is set over the repentance of those who inherit eternal life.  What blasphemy!  That statement in itself contradicts everything the Word of God teaches.  We read in 1st Timothy 2:5 that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Mediator between God and men, not some angel named Phanuel… “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”  Repentance is strictly between a man and Jesus Christ alone.  Only Jesus died for our sins, and shed His blood to pay for them (1st Peter 1:18-19); therefore, we must be diligent to guard and defend against LIARS and imposters who would lead people to believe otherwise.  1 John 2:22 clearly indicts all Christ-deniers as LIARS, guilty before God. 

The ONLY logical conclusion:

Then what do we have here in verse 4? As I see it, Genesis is a book of genealogies—it is a book of the families. The sons of God are the godly line who has come down from Adam through Seth, and the daughters of men belong to the line of Cain. What you have here now is an intermingling and intermarriage of these two lines, until finally the entire line is totally corrupted (well, not totally; there is one exception). That is the picture that is presented to us here.

SOURCE: McGee, J. Vernon, Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers) 2000, c1981.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Minister Dante Fortson says:

    This article is way off and avoids much of the truth surrounding the Book of Enoch. While I agree that 450ft. giants are a stretch and not likely, the part about angels having sex with women is consistent with all historical accounts from every culture on earth. The gods, Kachina, star men, angels, fairies, and now E.T. were said to abduct women for the purpose of creating unnatural offspring.

    Parts of the Book appear in the Septuagint (LXX – Greek version) in 165 BC, which means the book has been around for a while. Jude quotes from part of Enoch and Peter also references the angels being bound in Tartarus, which is also found in the Book of Enoch.

    While the book itself was not written by Enoch it does reflect the ORIGINAL belief concerning the flood. Unfortunately people like J. Vernon McGee have watered it down to be unrecognizable. This article displays a clear lack of research on his part.

  2. The problem here is where in scripture are we to go looking for extra biblical revelation. Revelation which is at odds with scripture. It tries to add to the word of God and change. The Bible makes it clear if anyone even an angel from heaven presents another gospel he is ananthama. The book of Enoch is another gospel. The Book of Enoch is not in the Bible for good reason its unbiblical, unscriptural and unreadable.

  3. Minister Dante Fortson says:

    You make a good point, but when do we draw the extrabiblical line? Columbus? Anything in history we don’t agree with? I don’t think it adds to scripture at all since it does not claim to be scripture. It claims to be historical making it equal to Josephus or anyone else we Christians love to quote.

    The idea that angels had sex with humans is IGNORED by the church. The Greeks, Romans, Hindus, Russians, Germans, Native Americans, Meso Americans, Africans, Babylonians etc.. all have stories of beings having sex with human women and creating hybrids… now in modern time we have people claiming E.T. doing the exact same thing every ancient culture said.

    Either everyone is lying or the Church is missing something. Let me also correct something else. The KJV is not THEE Bible… there are plenty of Bibles out. The Ethopian Bible has 81 books and predates the KJV. The Septuagint from which the KJV was translated ocntained at least 78. The Vulgate was also used in translation of the KJV and it has about 9 or so books that don’t appear in the KJV. Up until the 1800’s some KJVs still contained many of the now Apocryphal books.

    Before the KJV we had the Geneava, Matthew, and The Big Bible, all of which contained more than 66 books. You are correct that the Bible says not to add to the word of God, but it also says not to take away from the word of God. If the Bible mentions Egypt am I going against the Bible for studying Egypt? Likewise, Genesis 6:1-4 says the sons of God had children with the daughters of men. If we do some research we find out it wasn’t until after 100AD that people started teaching it as the sons of Seth and daughters of Cain. That’s an outright lie since you can open your Bible and see that neither Cain nor Seth are mentioned in Chapter 6 of Genesis.

    Historically it has been taught as angels. Enoch is mostly oral traditions but it gives details of what happened in those days. Like it or not, stories of supernatural beings taking mortal women is a common theme. Read Matthew 24:36-39 then read Genesis 6… then do some study on modern UFO abduction cases. Something is snatching up people of their choosing. People aren’t just making up the exact same stories.

  4. The issue before us is very simple- Is God a God of Justice or injustice. Until that question is made clear in our minds it is impossible to answer the rest. The Bible makes it clear that God is a just God. His judgements are exact, precise and righteous. However man fundamental nature rejects that justice. He does not want to accept the blame or responsibility for his sin. Ever sin Adam and Eve stumbled and fell everyone else gets the blame for mans sinfulness. Nothing to date has change. Adam blamed God and Eve blamed the snake. Today we blame the fallen angels for our woes. Suddenly is not me mate its the other guy. This teaching is just another version of William Branham serpent seed teaching. The snake had sex with Eve and that produced Cain suddenly now its all the fallen angels fault. But notice God does not blame the fallen angels. When Cain slew his brother who got blamed? Was it some deviant angel or was the blamed placed at Cain’s feet, He was responsible. Now at no time does God present the argument that Cain was a victim of some deviant angel. God holds the sinner responsible for his actions. Now even criminals today try and argue that because they have a certain gene they are not responsible for their crimes, but are victims. But God holds man responsible for his actions. Not angels or God or even a ancestor.

    Change this for a second. A woman is raped by some deviant and a child is born out of wedlock. The child grows up. Now is the child a victim or the guilty one. If a judge was to prosecute this young man for the sins perpetrated upon his mother the cry of injustice was shout loud and clear. The child and his mother were innocent. The case would be thrown out. Yet by embracing this doctrine we proclaim that God the judge of all men is also an unjust criminal for throwing the guilt of fallen angels at the innocent victims of fallen angels. Now we can only reconcile Gods justice with the fact that man and man alone were the perpetrators of the wickedness.

  5. First let us dispense with genetic manipulation as neither the Book of Enoch or the Bible mentions genetics. If such a tale was to be believed then it would not be necessary for fallen angels to take to themselves wives. Such a commitment would be unnecessary. The issue is sex not genes.

    In genesis we are told that a man shall leave his mother and father and cleave to his wife. That commitment Biblical style. Now why would fallen rebellious angels obey Gods word and take to themselves WIVES?

    Mat 24:38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

    Now shows that what took place then is the same today. However it is not sexual union with demons which the Bible declares but the sin of mankind. You are attempting to absolve man from his wickedness. Now you mention ET and alien abduction. However many of these memories arise from people who are placed under hypnosis and regression therapy. These methods have produced many false and faulty false memory syndromes, anything from memories of childhood abuse to past lives. Today such memories are highly questioned. As for the church missing something? When has popularity been the basis of right and wrong? Jesus became unpopular and if the biggest religion was automatically right then we would all be crying Allah. Truth is the plum line not popularity or pagan superstition. Truth as explained in the Bible. Extra Biblical revelation must first pass the test of scripture. If the Bible says it is wanting then it is rejected

    Another problem is that there are only two heads of mankind. Adam and Jesus. At no time are we to ever believe that some fallen demon is a third head of mankind. While satan is the prince of this world he is not the physical or spiritual head of mankind. Now if there was ever a possibility that mans nature was the product of a deviant angel it would mean that man is incapable of being redeemed. For there is no redemption for fallen nature of angels. That would rob John 3: 16 of any validity because Gods love would be for some but not all.

  6. Concerning Matthew 24:36-39 another aspect of this is that today we see homosexuals taking to themselves wives of other men. Which is clearly against Biblical teachings

  7. Minister Dante Fortson says:

    Part 1 of Minister Dante Fortson reply.

    Actually you’re wrong. The word “tamiym” is a Hebrew word used in Genesis 6 in reference to Noah being perfect. If you use a Strong’s Concordance or do any real research you’ll find that “tamiym” ONLY refers to physical appearance. The sacrificial lamb had to be “tamiym” which is not a moral statement. When the Bible calls Noah “just” it is a reference to his character. So yes, genetics are mentioned.
    Let’s take it a step further. If you keep reading Genesis 6, “all flesh” was corrupt. Read 1 Corinthians 15 and Paul defines the 5 types of flesh. Since the Genesis 6 text says ALL flesh, I take it at face value that it included animals as well. So how do animals become morally corrupt? They don’t.
    You just answered your own question. They are fallen and rebellious against God. Satan tampered with mankind in the garden, so why would they suddenly stop once man had fallen?

    Actually you’re wrong. The word “tamiym” is a Hebrew word used in Genesis 6 in reference to Noah being perfect. If you use a Strong’s Concordance or do any real research you’ll find that “tamiym” ONLY refers to physical appearance. The sacrificial lamb had to be “tamiym” which is not a moral statement. When the Bible calls Noah “just” it is a reference to his character. So yes, genetics are mentioned.

    Let’s take it a step further. If you keep reading Genesis 6, “all flesh” was corrupt. Read 1 Corinthians 15 and Paul defines the 5 types of flesh. Since the Genesis 6 text says ALL flesh, I take it at face value that it included animals as well. So how do animals become morally corrupt? They don’t.

  8. Now Dante in order to do your full reply justice we will take each point and probably do a seperate article to deal with the issue which you have thrown up. However lets briefly deal with this point.

    Apparently you believe that Noah was saved because he had the “RIGHT APPEARANCE” He had the “RIGHT GENETICS” so what happens if you are a dwarf, or say a handicapped child or even Downs child , Are you saying that they cannot be saved because they have the wrong genetics? Are you saying their mothers have had relations with demons? Are you saying that these people will not be raised from the dead? What a BIGOT you are. What sort of God do you serve? Certainly not the God of the Bible. Whom do you bow down to?
    The word tamiym certainly refers to physical appearance but you fail to answer the obvious testimony by God in two occasions. In both those occasions physical appearance has nothing to do with salvation, To imply it is would present a God who is a bigoted as you are.

    Gen 6: 9 These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah was a JUST MAN [and] PERFECT IN HIS GENERATIONS, [and] NOAH WALKED WITH GOD.

    Now if appearance was all that was required then walking with God would have no merit to it. The word “JUST” would have no merit to it either. The word JUST implies 1) just, lawful, righteous

    The word “PERFECT”does indeed imply a wholesome appearance BUT it also has a wider usage.

    Joshua 24: 14 Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve him in sincerity8549 and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the LORD.

    Here the same word is used for “SINCERITY”

    2 SAM 22: 24 I was also upright8549 before him, and have kept myself from mine iniquity
    Here we have the same word being translated “UPRIGHT”

    Ps 18: 23 was also upright8549 before him, and I kept myself from mine iniquity.
    Again the word is translated “UPRIGHT””

    Ps 37: 18 The LORD knoweth the days of the upright8549: and their inheritance shall be for ever

    In Noahs case his walk with God was UPRIGHT SINCERE before God. This was speaking of his character and not his looks

    At no time in these verse does genetics come into the discussion. Noah was righteous because he walked with God by faith. His DNA had nothing to do with walking with God. That is totally absurd. At no time was anyone ever saved because he had the right looks. Tottaly Rubbish.

  9. As to this “ALL FLESH” buisness the actual verse says

    n 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted HIS way upon the earth.

    If you are suggesting as the Book of Enoch mentions that all animals were sexualy molested by demons, then why did God allow these animals onto the ark. There is no doubt that with the fall of Adam, who is this worlds physical and spiritual head had changed the world physically and moraly. Man made his own decision on this matter and Adam and Eve fell into sin. That had reprocusion right accross the spectrum.

    Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

    Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed [is] the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat [of] it all the days of thy life;

    Gen 3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

    Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou [art], and unto dust shalt thou return.

    The world at that point changed because of the curse.

  10. Minister Dante Fortson says:

    Let’s not go overboard here. Noah’s situation was specific to Noah’s time. There was a genetic corruption and Noah’s family was not corrupted by these angels. It has nothing to do with someone being handicapped at all. If we are going to discuss these matters let’s not exaggerate the situation out of context. The Bible says Noah was morally (just) and physically/genetically perfect (tamiym) in his generation.

    You are making about something other than what it is, which has nothing to do with racism or discrimination. So save the false witness and accusations of bigotry because once again you’ve failed to do any research, this time on me. These hybrids were abominations. I’ll point something else out to you that is very watered down in English.

    “And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart” – Genesis 6:6

    What the Hebrew conveys is that God felt sorrow that he had made man and it hurt His heart to the point that it was physically painful. What could be so bad that Moses would convey that God felt physical pain over what was happening? I’ll get to that.

    Let’s deal with the corruption going on solely from the Bible.

    “And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” – Genesis 6:12

  11. How stupid do you think you look with this ?

    God felt sorry for mankind , it grieved his heart. So what does he do. He wipes the lot out. Man was innocent yet God condemnes the victims. Utter rubbish.

    Gen 6:6-7 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

    Gods judgement was because man was sinful.

    Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. Gen 6:13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

    God lays the blame directly at the door of where it belongs. …..MAN> MY spirit will not always strive … with who? Angels or man? MAN> Why are Angels not mentioned here? They appear to be the main cause of all this? Man is guilty before a holy God.

    Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

    NOAH found grace. Grace has nothing to do with some DNA.

  12. Minister Dante Fortson says:

    You’re obviously not reading what I wrote. These were not human. They were hybrids that were destroying actual humans. Noah was perfect in his generation, which is obviously something special referring to the fact that not everyone was physically perfect. He wiped out everything to SAVE mankind.

    So if I sound stupid, so does the book of Revelation where God continues to wipe people out until the return of Christ.

    By the way, I’m just quoting what the Hebrew actually says and the English doesn’t convey. So if it’s rubbish, take it up with God, unless of course you don’t believe the Bible. I can tell you hold onto tradition more than the actual word of God. When you become intelligent and are actually ready to research what the word of God says vs. what people believe is in it, then you’ll be cured of your ignorance. You go on and keep believing the fairy tale you’ve been told by false teachers. The truth is stranger than fiction.

  13. OH I have read what you have written but I am not impressed by what you have said. You have not proven your case. Such things as “they were not humans” “Hybrids” Come on how stupid do you think people are. You have not shown or proven how angels were even capable of having sex. The only proof you have offered up is the Book of Enoch, which is so foolish that no one with any sense would believe in. Angels having sex with cows and producing elephants camels and donkeys. Which you then say God destroyed but these animals are around today. So are you saying he failed to destroy these hybrids. Then it is suggested that NOAH and company physically BEGAT all the animals we see today. The fact the Noah was commanded to take on board and save these animal (hybrids) from destruction. You dont make any sense. The evidence does not support your stance.

  14. What you have is a pet theory which you have then twisted any facts you can get a hold of mythical, or delusional to try and prove your pet theories. Just to remind my readers what you have said “I don’t hold Enoch to be scripture so it’s not really something I worry about.” Otherwise the truth is not something you really bother about. If you did you would have major concerns about what that book said. You hold to it because it appears to prove your pet theory. However having looked at the book myself it almost unbelievable how anyone would hope to prove anything from such delusional drivel. I have taken each point you have tried to state and disproven it.

  15. You have said .”Let’s not go overboard here. Noah’s situation was specific to Noah’s time. There was a genetic corruption and Noah’s family was not corrupted by these angels.” YET YOUR WHOLE ET ALIEN ABDUCTION comment makes it a present situation. Which makes the whole debate all about genetics. Faith and walking with God had and has nothing to do with anything. Noah could have been the worst person on the planet, but as long as he had the right DNA he got onto the ark. That is not scripture.

  16. Minister Dante Fortson says:

    Your last statement is 100% FALSE. Noah found GRACE. That’s what we, as Christians, have through Christ. The destruction of the world was as a result of tampering with genetics. The preservation of Noah has everything to do with Grace.

    My ET comment is based on not being ignorant and burying my head in the sand like MOST Christians do, especially Christian leaders. The know nothing about the subject and don’t care enough to find out, which is why so many people are believing in shows like Ancient Aliens. People like you are helping them push the anti-God/pro-alien message.

    The facts are these: people have been reporting experiences with supernatural beings from the sky since Babylon. People have reported being abducted by supernatural beings from the sky since Noah’s time. These same supernatural beings seek worship, thus they pose as the gods or in modern times “our alien creators”. People define these beings based on their cultural understanding but it’s the same exact story. Either it’s coincidence or it’s not. Feel free to hold on to the absolutely FALSE and non-Biblical Line of Seth interpretation. A huge twisting of scripture is needed to uphold that flimsy interpretation of scripture. I wrote an entire chapter in my book, going verse by verse and point by point dissecting how un-Biblical that view is. Feel free to give it a read:

    Noah’s entire situation has everything to do with our time. Matthew 24:37 is 100% clear, direct from the mouth of Jesus. “As the days of Noah were, so shall the coming of the son of man be.” That includes everything from a remnant being saved by grace to the sons of God returning and ABDUCTING anyone they choose. I’ll say this as well. Is it a coincidence that hybrids were a major part of Noah’s time and our current society is pursuing the creation of hybrids? Feel free to watch this BBC video about our recent progress in hybrid creation. Whether you believe or not or like it or not, the angel view of Genesis 6 is 100% fact.

  17. The fact that man has the ability to alter animal and human DNA has absolutly no relavance to fallen angels messing about with peoples DNA in Noahs time. Such a theology would in fact change the righteous judgement of God on a rebelious world to an injustice. God would then be seen as lashing out his wrath upon the innocent victims of such crimes. NO such theology exists in scripture.

    2Pe 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth [person], a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the UNGODLY;

    Scripture makes it clear that Gods judgement was on the “UNGODLY”

    If God saved Noah because he had better DNA than others then he would have been saved based on his genes. So preaching righteousness would have absolutly nothing to do with Noah moral stance. In fact it makes a mockery to preach righteousness to people who were only victims of fallen angels.

    Gen 6:13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is FILLED WITH VIOLENCE through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

    Gen 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all FLESH HAD CORRUPTED HIS WAY upon the earth.

    If you look at these verse it does not say anywhere that angels were responsible for gene alteration. it makes it clear that man was responsible for the things he did. God was justified in judging the world for its sins.

    Hbr 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

    It makes it clear that Noah was saved because he was moved by faith. What relavance would that have if it was a matter of DNA rather than faith.

    Lets put it another way. A man comes alone a gives you a good upper cut with his fist and sends you to hospital. Who would be the victim and who would be the criminal? Would the police arrest you or the criminal who threw a puch at you. Clearly the man who threw the punch. Yet you would have everyone believe that God (Police) would arrest and punish the victim.

    Mr Fortson you would turn the Bible into a joke with God being displayed as evil and the wickedness of mankind excused.

  18. You’re still failing to see the bigger picture. Is it a purely human agenda or technology or is it satanically influenced? It’s people like you that make the Devil and fallen angels cartoonish as if they sit on people’s shoulders whispering bad ideas. Angels are real. They materialize, just like they do in the Bible. You are the one making the Bible into a joke. Read any book from any culture.

    Let’s take the minotaur story for example. People say it’s mythology, yet in the video above, they have created a cow/human hybrid. Do you deny that through that act they have corrupted both human and animal DNA? I’m sure you didn’t bother to do a shred of research on Somatic Parahumans in which DNA is corrupted through injections. Either you are blind or just plain ignoring what is right in front of your face.

    You probably also read the NIV, and in that case I feel sorry for you. Some people don’t actually believe the spiritual war is real. Read Ephesians 6. Our war is not with flesh and blood, it’s with SUPERNATURAL enemies. People blame the Devil and his angels and demons for all the bad stuff, but what makes you think they can’t influence a technology that threatens to corrupt all flesh, just as it did in the days of Noah?

    If it was only the Bible saying it, we could say it’s a difference in interpretation, but when you look at 500 cultures from history, each with different religions, politics, social, and economic situations; slaves and free men, philosophers and those unschooled, and they all agree, only a complete moron would not investigate what they are saying.

    You have completely ignored everything I said about Noah more than once. God didn’t have to save anyone. NOAH FOUND GRACE. Noah was JUST (moral reference in Hebrew) and PERFECT (physical reference in Hebrew – Tamyim). Please pick up a Bible and a Strong’s and use it. Stop relying on Traditional interpretation of scripture. Christ tells us this in Mark 7. Traditions of men make the word of God to no effect.

    The fact is, you cannot fully understand why people are suddenly obsessed with aliens and UFOs in our modern times if you don’t understand that the fallen angels were doing the exact same thing before the flood. It’s either coincidence or it’s not. Open your eyes for God sake. Before the flood, people were being taken by supernatural beings for the purpose of creating hybrids. Read any abduction story you want and it’s the exact same scenario as Genesis 6. The abductors take women of their choosing. Men are taken too. In the Book of Enoch, men and animals are taken. In the Greek texts the “gods” would take men and women to sleep with. If all this was a joke or a hoax, there would be no reason that every single society to ever exist would tell the same story in the same detail every time.

    Do some research on tribes that don’t have contact with the modern world. They have entire cultures built around beings from the sky giving them knowledge of the stars, and these same visitors sleeping with women and creating hybrids.

    Jesus also said the last days would be like the days of Lot… what happened in the days of Lot. The men of the city were attracted to the angels and attempted to forcefully rape them. I don’t know if it was possible to rape angels, but why would lot go outside and offer his daughters if it was completely impossible to do anything to the angels? The fact is, neither you nor I know everything there is to know about human genetics and if you say you do you’re lying. How can you say angels are not capable of having sex if you’ve never met one and have no clue about angel physiology? Every culture on earth says the exact opposite of your entire pet Seth theory. It’s false and non-Biblical.

  19. I personnaly dont need to go elsehwere to find God truth other than the Bible. The scripture is clear on this matter. Mr Fortson you seem to be running after everything but the scriptures to build your theology on.

    You somehow have a belief that angels can have sex and yet scripture tells us quite clearly thay cant.

    Mar 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

    If there is no marriage in heaven nor given in marriage then there is no need for sex or reproducing. The reason these vile people wanted the angels was not because they recognised them as angels, but because they looked handsome and pure. Wickedness always wants to corrupt what is pure and clean.There is absolutly NO evidence that angels reproduce with female angels in heaven.

    No ones doubt that wicked spirits are decieving people and the whole UFOlogy is just one big deception of the enemy. But there no theology of these spirits messing about with DNA. Are you saying that someone whose DNA has been messed about with cannot be saved. Because your theology almost borders on it. Why would
    these spirits mess about with DNA anyway?

    2Cr 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

    Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

    These are the methods which satan and his spirits used. There is nothing here that even hints at changing a persons DNA. In simple terms they dont have to mess about with anything. If people are already decieved then they have absolutly no reason to mess about with any DNA.

    Again you would seem to place Gods wrath on the victim of some angelic crime rather than recognising that God wrath is righteously placed on the sinfulness of man. Man is a sinner because he sins. Man is soley responsible for his own unrighteousness. Therefore we cannot simply make wicked spirits the scape goats for every sin man commits.

  20. Actually you’re wrong again. I don’t have to build theology on anything but the Bible. When facts all fall in place, that’s just how it is whether you like it or agree or not. The Bible doesn’t tell us to ignore anything. There is a huge difference between THEOLOGY and HISTORY. Seems as if you can’t separate the two. Tell me where in the Bible you can find Columbus coming to America. Where in the Bible does it talk about the day to day life of people living in China. The Bible only covers the history of the Hebrews. It does not cover every historical event of every culture in the world. People like you seem to confuse historical context with scripture.

    HISTORY from other cultures point to beings from the sky posing as gods. Are you really naive enough to think that only the Hebrews and people from the Bible had encounters with angels? John even stated that not all of Jesus’ miracles are recorded in the Bible and He was only 32-34 years old. So if it doesn’t even record the entire history of Jesus, how can we expect it to include the entire history of the world?

    That’s a foolish way of thinking. The fact is, I had my own experiences before getting into ministry. That is what pointed me to the Bible for answers. You’re too blind to see it, but feel free to keep deceiving people and yourself. Build your theology on traditions of men that has no Biblical support whatsoever. Those of us with open eyes have been talking about hybrids and the UFO obsession since the 90s and now it’s right in front of everyone’s face. We were all doing this based on Genesis 6, Daniel 2:43, Matthew 24:37, 2 Peter 2, Jude, and Revelation 12. I’ve consistently provided scripture and you’ve consistently ignored it and told OUTRIGHT LIES, claiming that I’m not using the Bible. Of the two of us, you aren’t using it and have not provided a single Biblical reference of the phrase “b’nai ha Elohim” being used to refer to anything but angels. The phrase is use ONLY 5 times in the Old Testament.

    2 times in Genesis 6:1-4
    1 Time in Job 1
    1 Time in Job 2
    1 Time in Job 38

    All of them refer to angels. Please show me using only the Bible and a Strong’s in just one place where the phrase “b’nai ha Elohim” is used to refer to anything but angels. Use the Bible or admit to being a liar about it, plain and simple. If you fail to do so, everyone reading this will clearly see that it is you that is basing your false theology on everything except the Bible.

  21. Mr Fortson you have a problem with the Bible dont you. There is a big difference between using the Bible to support your strange and increasingly strange beliefs and abiding by what the Bible teaches. You seem to have absolutly no undertsanding about what has been stated. If someone is mad because he was made that way, then the person is not the criminal but the victim. Yet you would have GOD judge the victim as the criminal. In any legal court the prosecution and conviction of such a person would be injustice. Yet you would have people believe that God is not just a GOD of injustice, but he is also a helpless GOD unable to stop demons from messing about with mankinds DNA. Your theology is not Christian by anyones comparison but New Age.

    Just because the world has an obsession for UFOs does not mean as a Christian I should as well. Your premise for the most part lies outside of scripture, Drawing on any number of New Age Ideas and placing them almost on an equal par with scripture. The whole UFO premise is itself a deception by the enemy for the very reasons you have given. Many abuctions so called, only come to light under hypnosis. A few years ago saw a number of cases come to light such “PAST LIFE REGRESSION”. This also saw cases also known as “FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME” where children under hypnosis recalled being molested by a single parent. This dubious practice has sinced been debunked as false memories and have no basis in real life.

    Yet hard line ufologist continue to hold to some of these memories as being fact. However even upon examination there is no evidence that their DNA has been altered, or that they were even physically operated on. There is no evidence that anyone has had their DNA altered to produce some form of “hybrid ” human. Can you even name one person who is a hybrid human!!!!!. Hybrid of what!!!!

    You seem to continue with some sort of bizzare belief that mans sin is someone elses fault rather than the result of someones own sinfull nature.

    Simply put I believe that you have an obsession with fallen angels which has blinded you to the obvious.

  22. Actually it is you that seems to have the problem with the Bible, thus your lack of scripture to support your non-Biblical view. As stated before, use scripture to back your pet theory or admit it’s not Biblical. And as you just proved, there are no scripture to support your view at all.

    Nothing about what I’ve posted is strange. The Bible is clear that angels took human women in the days of Noah. Pagan stories are clear that the “gods” (fallen angels) took human women. Modern stories are clear that “aliens” are taking human women. But I guess you’re the only one that knows everything there is to know about what fallen angels are doing at all times. Everyone else all throughout history is just making it up.

    The Bible is clear that flesh was corrupted. People have been talking about the return of hybrids for thousands of years and all anyone has to do is turn on the news and see that is exactly what’s happening. It’s reality, but you’re too blind to see that. You’d rather believe some fairy tale about Seth and Cain. I hope people reading this see that you have not used scripture once, frankly because you HATE God’s word and the truth in it. Anyone that won’t quote from the Bible is an antichrist and a deceiver, especially when they make the claim (probably falsely) to be a Christian. I sincerely have my doubts about your belief in Christ and the Bible. If I’m wrong, prove it by posting scripture and not opinion.

    This is my last response, but I’ll be praying that you come to know Christ and that your “ministry” (if you can call it that) begins to actually use the Bible in it’s teaching. Mark 7 and Proverbs 18:13. Not that you’ll use your Bible to read them, but those apply to you.

  23. Mr Fortson It would seem clear that you are under conviction over this. You have failed to impress anyone. You dependence on extra biblical sources, extra biblical fairy tales of UFO’s, and most importance a clear lack of understanding of Gods nature and character, is staggering to say the least.

    No one doubt that angels can appear in human form, but NO where can that be deduced that they can have sex or even have the capability of even desiring to enter into marriage. If we were to see a repeat then we would expect to see demons walking down the isles to be married. Have you seen any marriages recently of women to demons? Mr and Mrs unclean spirit residing in some two bedroom house, obviously not! Yet we are told that the sons of God entered into marriages with these women.

    Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them WIVES of all which they chose.

    The Hebrew word used here ‘ishshah and translated as wife 425 times through out the Bible

    HERE ARE FIVE WELL RESPECTED OPINIONS OF BIBLE BELIEVING TEACHERS

    JOHN WESLEY
    Gen 6:2 The sons of God – Those who were called by the name of the Lord, and called upon that name, married the daughters of men – Those that were profane, and strangers to God. The posterity of Seth did not keep to themselves as they ought, but intermingled with the race of Cain: they took them wives of all that they chose – They chose only by the eye: They saw that they were fair – Which was all they looked at.

    HENRY
    Gen 6:1-2
    (Gen_6:2): The sons of God (that is, the professors of religion, who were called by the name of the Lord, and called upon that name), married the daughters of men, that is, those that were profane, and strangers to God and godliness. The posterity of Seth did not keep by themselves, as they ought to have done, both for the preservation of their own purity and in detestation of the apostasy. They intermingled themselves with the excommunicated race of Cain: They took them wives of all that they chose. But what was amiss in these marriages? (1.) They chose only by the eye: They saw that they were fair, which was all they looked at. (2.) They followed the choice which their own corrupt affections made: they took all that they chose, without advice and consideration. But, (3.) That which proved of such bad consequence to them was that they married strange wives, were unequally yoked with unbelievers, 2Co_6:14. This was forbidden to Israel, Deu_7:3, Deu_7:4. It was the unhappy occasion of Solomon’s apostasy (1Ki_11:1-4), and was of bad consequence to the Jews after their return out of Babylon, Ezr_9:1, Ezr_9:2. Note, Professors of religion, in marrying both themselves and their children, should make conscience of keeping within the bounds of profession. The bad will sooner debauch the good than the good reform the bad. Those that profess themselves the children of God must not marry without his consent, which they have not if they join in affinity with his enemies.

    GILL
    Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair,…. Or “good” (k), not in a moral but natural sense; goodly to look upon, of a beautiful aspect; and they looked upon, and only regarded their external beauty, and lusted after them: those “sons of God” were not angels either good or bad, as many have thought, since they are incorporeal beings, and cannot be affected with fleshly lusts, or marry and be given in marriage, or generate and be generated;

    GENEVA
    Gen 6:2 That the (a) sons of God saw the daughters (b) of men that they [were] (c) fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

    (a) The children of the godly who began to degenerate.

    (b) Those that had wicked parents, as if from Cain.

    (c) Having more respect for their beauty and worldly considerations than for their manners and godliness.

    JAMIESON-FAUSSET-BROWN BIBLE COMMENTARY
    2. the sons of God saw the daughters of men-By the former is meant the family of Seth, who were professedly religious; by the latter, the descendants of apostate Cain. Mixed marriages between parties of opposite principles and practice were necessarily sources of extensive corruption. The women, religious themselves, would as wives and mothers exert an influence fatal to the existence of religion in their household, and consequently the people of that later age sank to the lowest depravity.

    They all agree with my stance on this matter.

  24. Tyrone says:

    Dear UC Ministries,

    My Dad use to tell me and often, “Do not argue with an idiot as it will be impossible to tell who the idiot is having done this!”
    I have change my Dad’s saying to, “Never argue with an idiot as he will beat you senseless with experience!”

    Tyrone

  25. I believe this is among the such a lot vital information for me. And i’m glad studying your article. However should commentary on few normal issues, The site style is perfect, the articles is really nice : D. Good task, cheers

  26. abey says:

    The Son of God , Jesus was born on earth as man seeded by the Power of the Holy Spirit born of a Woman according to the law. Like wise if an angel were come as man to mix & even breed then it cam be done only by the two Criteria 1) Seeded by the power of the Holy Spirit 2) Born of a woman. Now to the Sons of God the words “Saw” ” Chose” does not give any indication of angels born as men but Men themselves, to the Sons of God can be referring only to the Godly line of Seth & the daughters of men refer to the ungodly line of Cain by this mixture caused the corruptions eventually to the Judgement. Now the words of St. Jude is of the manner – The angels who left their abode(not to the will of God , teaching men things that ought not to have been taught) were reserved for Judgement just as the people of Sodom were reserved for the same is but mentioning the seriousness of their respective crimes & does not suggest an interbreeding. This same error of the mixing is the same error of Israel falling away by mixing in marriage with the heathen, to their gods(fallen angels) the greatest of whom was Solomon. In both of these errors there is seen at its core sexual corruptions. The notion that the fallen angels sexually mingled with women is but pagan stories & myths.
    Now to the NT Rom. 8:19 mention the awaited manifestation(revelation) of the Sons of God. These are the Elect of God sealed with His name/ the remnant seed of the Woman, with the lamb itself as the first/ The first fruits of the Lamb, led by the lamb eventually to the salvation of man. That what is to be noted of these are that are not defiled by Women unlike the previous two stated, meaning averse to any form of sexual corruption, the core of which is Sodom.
    To the sons of God mentioned in Job refer to the Elohim(The sons of God in heaven. one of whom(Archangel Michael) wrestled with the patriarch Jacob thus introducing the word Israel meaning the inheritance of God. To conclude Physically all man are the children Adam & Eve & the sons of God refer to the spiritual even the words of Jesus unto the scribes & Pharisees “Ye are of your father the devil” meaning spiritual children

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s