Elle,

With all due respect, I was not saying you were parleying with the devil, I was only pointing out that we are instructed not to do so as one example of de-focusing the devil. The Bible spends almost no time speaking of the devil or in glorifying his victories. Certainly the devil has had many victories on earth, but the Bible does not focus on them. Why? I believe that our focus should also not be upon the devil nor upon his strengths, his victories, etc.

You hold an unbiblical view of the Nephilim. I have not chosen to address it in this thread, because I have already addressed it with you in discussions we had many months ago. I did notice that you supported some of your views in this thread with the "Book of Jasher." That the book of Jasher is mentioned in the Bible is well-established fact. The modern day "Book of Jasher," however, was "translated" by Mormons in the 1800s. Remember, they are the ones that translated the Egyptian funeral messages into the "Book of Abraham," etc. with their "Urim and Thummim." No one really knows where they got their source manuscripts. I don't know how to say this gently, so I'll just say it: the "Book of Jasher" which we have today is a fraud. It is certainly not inspired, and I have personally found it to be in direct contradiction of the Bible in multiple places, including dates, events, and the spirit in which it is written. It is a novel which, perhaps, was hoped to bring in some money for someone. Like the Book of Mormon, it follows an old-English style of writing calculated to make the reader sense its ancient authenticity. The "Book of Jasher" reads much like the KJV, except that it has more of a "superman" comic style of recounting the events of history. If another thread does not already exist on this fraudulent book, perhaps we could create one to evaluate it objectively. In any case, it is not Scripture, it is not the same book that we find mentioned in the Bible, and anyone who puts his or her trust in it is placing confidence in quicksand.

(If an archeologist ever discovers the true book of Jasher, I'm open to seeing it and accepting it, provided that it is verified to agree with the Bible.)

More to the subject, the "nephilim" were simply those of large stature, like Adam and Eve were, and perhaps even larger. They were 100% human, and there is no such thing as a reproductive angel. Angels are not gifted with genitals, do not marry, and cannot procreate. They are not made of flesh as we are. We know this from both the Bible and from the writings of Mrs. White.

Think about it. In all of the inspired writings we have at our disposal, when have you ever heard of an "angelette" or a "baby angel?" When have we ever heard about "immature angels" or "angel families?" When have we heard about "mother angels" or "daddy angels?" We have not heard of these because they simply do not exist, nor have they ever existed.

Our planet has received a special gift. The ability to procreate, a symbol of God's own creative ability, is a gift which we have been given. "The prince of evil, though possessing all the wisdom and might of an angel fallen, has not power to create, or to give life" (EGW). "The words of Christ are too plain to be misunderstood. They should forever settle the question of marriages and births in the new earth. Neither those who shall be raised from the dead, nor those who shall be translated without seeing death, will marry or be given in marriage. They will be as the angels of God, members of the royal family." {MM 99.4}

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Elle, With all due respect, I was not saying you were parleying with the devil, I was only pointing out that we are instructed not to do so as one example of de-focusing the devil. The Bible spends almost no time speaking of the devil or in glorifying his victories. Certainly the devil has had many victories on earth, but the Bible does not focus on them. Why? I believe that our focus should also not be upon the devil nor upon his strengths, his victories, etc.

You hold an unbiblical view of the Nephilim. I have not chosen to address it in this thread, because I have already addressed it with you in discussions we had many months ago.

I did notice that you supported some of your views in this thread with the "Book of Jasher."

…Gen 32:3 “ Then Jacob sent messengers before him to his brother Esau in the land of Seir, the country of Edom.

After the brothers had reconciled, Esau returned to Seir (Gen. 33:16), where he obviously had settled during the time Jacob was with Laban. The book of Jasher 30:26 tells us the reason. Esau's flocks and herds were too great, and his herdsmen were disputing with the Canaanites. So Esau moved permanently to Seir, being allied with the Horites.

Isaac died 23 years later, and according to Jasher 47, his estate (wealth) was taken by Esau in exchange for the land of Canaan, which was given to Jacob. We are also told in Jasher 57 that after the death of Jacob and Esau, the sons of Esau had a falling out with the Horites. The Horites asked them to leave their territory, at which time, the sons of Esau wiped out the Horites and took Mount Seir for themselves as their inheritance (57:36).

Since the Bible does not record the circumstances by which Edom came to possess Mount Seir, we must rely upon the book of Jasher for that information.

That the book of Jasher is mentioned in the Bible is well-established fact. The modern day "Book of Jasher," however, was "translated" by Mormons in the 1800s. Remember, they are the ones that translated the Egyptian funeral messages into the "Book of Abraham," etc. with their "Urim and Thummim." No one really knows where they got their source manuscripts. I don't know how to say this gently, so I'll just say it: the "Book of Jasher" which we have today is a fraud.

It is certainly not inspired, and I have personally found it to be in direct contradiction of the Bible in multiple places, including dates, events, and the spirit in which it is written.

More to the subject, the "nephilim" were simply those of large stature, like Adam and Eve were, and perhaps even larger. They were 100% human, and there is no such thing as a reproductive angel.

Genesis 6:2 also says that these sons of God took “the daughters of men” as wives and produced children by them. The Hebrew word for “men” is awdawm, or Adam, which is the usual word for men or mankind. When the Bible refers to the man Adam himself, it says ha-awdawm, or “the (man) Adam.” The article “the” makes the term specific. Dr. Bullinger points out in The Companion Bible, Appendix 14,

“Adam, without the article, denotes man or mankind in general (Gen. 1:26; 2:5; 5:1). With the article, it denotes the man, Adam....”

With this in mind, let us read Genesis 6:1, 2,

1 Now it came about, when Adam [ha-awdawm] began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them [Adam and Eve, Gen. 1:27; 5:2] 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of Adam [ha-awdawm] were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose.

Adam and Eve had both sons and daughters. Adam’s daughters were beautiful, and these angels took them as wives. Verse 4 says that they had children by them. Ultimately, the earth was so corrupted by this genetic mixture that God sent the flood to destroy them. Only Noah was found to be “perfect in his genealogy” (Gen. 6:9, literal).

They are not made of flesh as we are. We know this from both the Bible and from the writings of Mrs. White.

Angels are not gifted with genitals

??? Point to me where I focused on the devil. Your side-tracking on the discussion. We were talking about the Nephilim by which Rick brought up the question. Not me. I only shared with him what I knew up to now about it.
My view on the Nephilim being offsprings of the angels that left their abode crossed with daughters of men has more biblical support then your view. The only difference between my view and your view, is your view is the view of the Church and you have lots of support.
I did not. What I quoted was the view of Stephen Jones. And his view is totally supported with the Bible. He used the book of Jasher only once and it was not to support his position of the Nephilim. Here’s the quote
From this, I see you did not read the study at all and only looked for something to discredit my view that you didn’t agree from the beginning. It’s ok to not agree with someone’s view, however, it’s not ok to pretend you read something and bring false judgment on someone. The rule of bringing any judgment on anyone, is you need to do a thorough investigation first and pray for proper discernment and give a true judgment that resonate from above. If you didn’t want to do the thorough investigation, then it's wise to reframe from saying anything.
I am aware that lots of copies of the book of Jasher is tempered with. However, there is one copy that is not and Stephen Jones and another who is SDA has examine thoroughly and it does not contradict the Bible. I have read the large part of it, and up to now I have not come across anything contradicting the Bible either, nor came across the allegation you made against it.

It is not an inspirational book like the Bible and it shouldn’t be read in that way, however, it serves as a historical source. This is the way Stephen Jones always uses that book when he seldom has to refer to it.
Your judgment is based on reading tempered books of Jasher. I have the good copy which I will provide it in the discussion you opened on the topic when I'll have time. That way everyone can read it if they want and see for themselves. Again, if you are to make a true judgment that is approve from above, the Lord expects us to do a thorough investigation. So I’ll be looking forward to read your comments of your thorough investigation of the version I got here.
You are twisting the text to say something the Bible doesn’t say and is very specific saying that the product of this crossing produced GIANTS(Nephilim) not just simply bigger people. They were much bigger than the average height of the people of those days which means they were bigger than Adam and Eve or any of their children. And after the flood, the descendants of the Nephilim where bigger than the people in their days. And the Israelites were very afraid of these giants after they spied on the land.

The logic that the “sons of God” were Seth children doesn’t justify how the offsprings became giants. Cain’s or Seth’s children genetic makeup were all the same.

BTW. the Bible is very specific and it says that the "sons of God" took the "daughters of Adam" and not the offsprings of Seth.

Maybe from EGW, but not the Bible. The Bible has recorded angels appearing as man(human flesh) multiple times.
How do you know? Have you seen an angels manifested in human flesh and checked? We know that they have eaten with Abraham and Lot. Now does angels have stomachs? How were they able to eat? And where did the food go?

We also have as Biblical source the follwoing :

Jude 6 And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day.

"Jude then relates the fallen angels to Sodom and Gomorrah, where the people “indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh” (Jude 7). The term “strange flesh” simply means foreign flesh—that is, in the Biblical sense, forbidden sexual relations or marriages. The angels were not allowed to marry the daughters of men, even as the men of Sodom were not allowed to marry other men in homosexual unions"

I really meant to direct the question on the Nephilim within SOP and Scripture, as I know what direction some people have taken this, I should have been less open ended in my question. You can blame it on me........

Very good post Elle, as Adventist, any verses pf 'fallen angels' being held in restraint or 'prison' sounds like the Greek myths of Hades, so its difficult for us and we tend to shy away or try to spiritualize, or evem turn a blind eye to some parts of the Bible which we cant make fit. Thus the dilemna with these verses from Peter....

I really meant to direct the question on the Nephilim within SOP and Scripture, as I know what direction some people have taken this, I should have been less open ended in my question. You can blame it on me........

Scriptures were always used instead of one incidence where I quote Stephen Jones which he used the book of Jasher to see why Essau came to the land of Seir. Besides that, all his references were Biblical. I always heavily use the Bible(KJV) and look up the Greek and Hebrew origin words many time to make sure we have the real original say of the text. It is true that I don't quote the SOP by which I believe EGW and James didn't want us to use her writings as authority.

You've done nothing wrong Rick and you don't need to take the blame for what has happened. There's nothing wrong with this discussion and the way it turned. That's the nature of discussions and good in dept studies; we don't know where the Lord will lead it. I have been here on this forum for 4 years and GC knows me and many others quite well. We've been in many discussion.

I appreciate the gesture though Rick.

On my first post in this discussion you said the following :

This blind eye that you refered to is a serious problem in our church. It is a product of heart idols. We all have some and Jesus works to expose them for they are very settle. If we become aware of them, then they won't be as powerful to distort scriptures and the true gospel message.

However, we are indeed a Laodicean Church in all aspects. And blindness is one of her characteristics. I have lightly address this issue in these discussions here and here.

It would need to be further address as this is making us not able to hear Jesus and even recognize His voice which makes us totally unable to follow Him.

Agitate, agitate, agitate! The subjects which we present to the world must be to us a living reality. It is important that in defending the doctrines which we consider fundamental articles of faith, we should never allow ourselves to employ arguments that are not wholly sound. These may avail to silence an opposer, but they do not honor the truth. We should present sound arguments, that will not only silence our opponents, but will bear the closest and most searching scrutiny. . . . {CW 40.3}