Thursday , 31 July 2014
Part Seven: The Sons of Seth and Daughters of Cain Theory Refuted

Part Seven: The Sons of Seth and Daughters of Cain Theory Refuted

The Bible is replete with evidence that the sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 are fallen angels (demons). All of the ancient Jewish and Ante-Nicene Christian commentators believed the “sons of God” to be referring to demons (fallen angels).

 

Augustine of Hippo

The first, as far as we can see, to definitively deny the sons of God as being angels was Augustine of Hippo of the fifth century, approximately seventy five years after the drafting of the Nicene Creed. Augustine did much to spiritualize the history of the Bible and twist a simple straightforward reading of the Bible. His method of Bible interpretation made a profound impact and his legacy remains even to this day. Many centuries after Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, a doctor of the Catholic Church in the 13th century, quotes in his magnum opus, Summa Theologica, from Augustine’s work City of God (De Civ. Dei xv) concerning the sons of Seth:

Many persons affirm that they have had the experience, or have heard from such as have experienced it, that the Satyrs and Fauns, whom the common folk call incubi, have often presented themselves before women, and have sought and procured intercourse with them. Hence it is folly to deny it. But God’s holy angels could not fall in such fashion before the deluge. Hence by the sons of God are to be understood the sons of Seth, who were good; while by the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain. [i] Nor is it to be wondered at that giants should be born of them; for they were not all giants, albeit there were many more before than after the deluge. Still if some are occasionally begotten from demons, it is not from the seed of such demons, nor from their assumed bodies, but from the seed of men taken for the purpose; as when the demon assumes first the form of a woman, and afterwards of a man; just as they take the seed of other things for other generating purposes, as Augustine says (De Trin. iii), so that the person born is not the child of a demon, but of a man, [ii] (emphasis mine).

Just as Augustine fallaciously suggested the sons of God were the so called “godly line of Seth,” the daughters of men have been labeled as being from the “ungodly line of Cain”. Augustine says, “By the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain,” (Augustine as quoted in Summa Theologica, Aquinas). We must ask the important question – where in Scripture does it say such a thing? Augustine makes the claim above that Scripture designates those daughters as coming from the race of Cain, but just where do we see that? The answer is that we simply do not. It was first tentatively considered by Julius Africanus and then completely invented by Augustine and then repeated by all who would follow in his footsteps ever since. If the term “sons of God” refers to the “sons of Seth” as so many suggest, then why does the text not simply state it? Unfortunately neither Augustine nor Aquinas substantiates the claim. They simply presume their statement to be true and offer no biblical proof. Augustine states that “Scripture designates” that the daughters of men “sprang from the race of Cain”. But where in Scripture does it say that? Sadly, their unbiblical assertion has left its mark in the modern day creating a great deal of confusion regarding what the Bible literally teaches.

Calvin’s Interpretation

John Calvin in the 17th century carried on the tradition started by Augustine that the sons of God are in fact the sons of Seth. He states in his commentary:

The principle is to be kept in memory, that the world was then as if divided into two parts; because the family of Seth cherished the pure and lawful worship of God, from which the rest had fallen. Now, although all mankind had been formed for the worship of God, and therefore sincere religion ought everywhere to have reigned; yet since the greater part had prostituted itself, either to an entire contempt of God, or to depraved superstitions; it was fitting that the small portion which God had adopted, by special privilege, to himself, should remain separate from others. It was, therefore, base ingratitude in the posterity of Seth, to mingle themselves with the children of Cain, and with other profane races; because they voluntarily deprived themselves of the inestimable grace of God. For it was an intolerable profanation, to pervert, and to confound, the order appointed by God. It seems at first sight frivolous, that the sons of God should be so severely condemned, for having chosen for themselves beautiful wives from the daughters of men. But we must know first, that it is not a light crime to violate a distinction established by the Lord; secondly, that for the worshippers of God to be separated from profane nations, was a sacred appointment which ought reverently to have been observed, in order that a Church of God might exist upon earth; thirdly, that the disease was desperate, seeing that men rejected the remedy divinely prescribed for them. In short, Moses points it out as the most extreme disorder; when the sons of the pious, whom God had separated to himself from others, as a peculiar and hidden treasure, became degenerate, (emphasis mine). [iii]

Calvin rightly describes the world as being wicked, but he vainly asserts that the world had been “divided into two parts.” Where do we see such an idea in the Bible? He also introduces his deterministic philosophy of predestination by stating that apparently the sons of Seth were adopted by “special privilege.” His denial of who the sons of God truly were creates a tremendous amount of confusion that has clouded the interpretation of the text for potentially millions of people over the centuries. Furthermore, nowhere do we see that the daughters of men are from the so called ungodly line of Cain.

Calvin continues with his unbiblical prohibition of inter-class marriages. Notice that again he does not offer any biblical support for any of his positions. He does not seek to prove his point with Scripture but with opinion and conjecture. Having simply asserted his position, Calvin then ridicules the ‘sons of God as demons [m1] ‘ interpretation.

That ancient figment, concerning the intercourse of angels with women, is abundantly refuted by its own absurdity; and it is surprising that learned men should formerly have been fascinated by ravings so gross and prodigious. The opinion also of the Chaldean paraphrase is frigid; namely, that promiscuous marriages between the sons of nobles, and the daughters of plebeians, is condemned. Moses, then, does not distinguish the sons of God from the daughters of men, because they were of dissimilar nature, or of different origin; but because they were the sons of God by adoption, whom he had set apart for himself; while the rest remained in their original condition, (Calvin Commentary Genesis 6:1 emphasis mine).

We have already seen how “sons of God” is used in Scripture – furthermore that there were no human “sons of God” before the resurrection of Jesus. However Calvin introduces great confusion into the text by dogmatically declaring that God’s terms are very capricious and that they sometimes mean one thing in one context and quite another someplace else. The simple biblical definition, as we have seen, is that sons of God are direct creations of God. Calvin is unable to define sons of God because of bad exegesis.

Should anyone object, that they who had shamefully departed from the faith, and the obedience which God required, were unworthy to be accounted the sons of God; the answer is easy, that the honor is not ascribed to them, but to the grace of God, which had hitherto been conspicuous in their families. For when Scripture speaks of the sons of God, sometimes it has respect to eternal election, which extends only to the lawful heirs; sometimes to external vocations according to which many wolves are within the fold; and though in fact, they are strangers, yet they obtain the name of sons, until the Lord shall disown them. Yea, even by giving them a title so honorable, Moses reproves their ingratitude, because, leaving their heavenly Father, they prostituted themselves as deserters, (emphasis mine). [iv]

Now, to support his presuppositions, he must explain away the giants (Nephilim) that are introduced in Genesis 6:4 and are the result of the sons of God (or as he would say the sons of Seth) and the daughters of men (or as he would say the daughters of Cain).

Moses does not indeed say, that they were of extraordinary stature, but only that they were robust. Elsewhere, I acknowledge, the same word denotes vastness of stature, which was formidable to those who explored the land of Canaan, (Jos 13:33.) But Moses does not distinguish those of whom he speaks in this place, from other men, so much by the size of their bodies, as by their robberies and their lust of dominion, (emphasis mine). [v]

He downplays the fact that the fruit of the union between the sons of God and daughters of men were men of extraordinary size. He simply asserts that they were “great” in their evil. His interpretation is unfounded and he is not completely honest here for the word (Nephilim) used in both places is exactly the same. Calvin and numerous others turn to Genesis 4:26 in order to substantiate their case. Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary is very typical of those that leap to the conclusion that sons of God must be referring to the Sons of Seth.

Observe the different expressions: sons of God, and daughters of men. If you turn to Gen 4:26 you there discover that the children of Seth are said to call on the name of the Lord; including both sons and daughters; and hence, therefore, these are meant by the sons of God. [vi]

They suggest that this passage in some way proves that the term “sons of God” is really a hidden meaning for sons of Seth. Let’s take a look at the passage to see if their claims are valid.

 

The Millennium Chronicles

Seth and His Sons

Seth appears a total of seven times in both the Old Testament and the New Testament (NKJV). We get a brief glimpse of his life by stringing together all of the passages [vii] that speak of him.

And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth [...], and as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on the name of the LORD, (Genesis 4:25-26).

And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. Seth lived one hundred and five years, and begot Enosh. After he begot Enosh, Seth lived eight hundred and seven years, and had sons and daughters. So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died. (Genesis 5:3-4, 6-8).

Here 130 years after creation, Adam has a son named Seth; then 105 years after that Seth had a son named Enosh. Thus we learn that a total of 235 years after creation men began to call upon the name of the Lord. The Hebrew term for Lord is YHWH which is the personal name of God. God told Moses: “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty [El Shaddai שַׁדָּ֑י אֵ֣ל], but by My name LORD [YHWH יְהוָה] I was not known to them,” (Exodus 6:3). Thus to think that this was the first time that humans began to worship the Lord is unfounded. Rather we simply read that they began to use his personal name at that point for some purpose. While it appears to have begun with a son of Seth, we should not infer that it was limited to that line. After all, the Hebrew text very literally says az hukhal likro beshem YHWH [בְּשֵׁ֥ם יְהוָֽה לִקְרֹ֖א הוּחַ֔ל אָ֣ז] “then was begun (the) calling by (with, in) the name YHWH” (translation mine). The term hukhal (הוּחַל) is the passive (hophal) of begin. The subject of the verb hukhal is “calling” (likro’ לִקְרֹא). The word “men” does not even appear in the text. Thus we see that apparently, up until that point, men were not invoking God by His proper name. It could be that they didn’t know it, though we cannot be sure. Nevertheless this reading of the verse does not in any way substantiate the notion that Seth’s sons were the sons of God. Another reading is possible which may clarify the passage.

 

A Possible Translation

Conversely, the verb hukhal (הוּחַל) comes from the root (חלל) the basic meaning is “to profane, defile, pollute, desecrate, begin” according to Brown Driver Briggs’ [viii] Lexicon of the Hebrew Bible. Thus, the alternative reading would be “then calling by the name of YHWH was profaned”. This alternative reading actually finds endorsement by the ancient Aramaic Targumim. Targum Onkelos interprets the passage as:

And to Sheth also was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. Then in his days the sons of men desisted [חָלוּ] (or forbore) from praying in the name of the Lord, (Genesis 4:26, Targum Onkelos, emphasis mine).

Targum Jonathan is similar though it amplifies that reading even more:

And to Sheth also was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. That was the generation in whose days they began to err [למטעי], and to make themselves idols, and surnamed their idols by the name of the Word of the Lord, (Genesis 4:26, Targum Jonathan, emphasis mine).

While neither “began” nor “profane” supports the sons of Seth theory, the latter would seem to make more sense in light of the entire story of the Bible. The divine name seems to have been known from the very beginning of creation. Adam was familiar with it because he heard the voice of the LORD (YHWH) God in the garden after he had sinned. Calling by the name of the Lord was until that time respected and honored but it was in the days of Enosh when calling by the name of the Lord was defiled. God then destroyed the world because of the continual wickedness. Noah retains knowledge of the name and then apparently at the tower of Babel the name is forgotten or lost. God chooses not to reveal His name again until Moses has the encounter at the burning bush.

 

The Sons of Seth Were Not Sons of God

Regardless of which reading we take, there is simply no evidence whatsoever to support the concept that Genesis 4:26 can be used to interpret the sons of God as the sons of Seth. There is no indication that Seth’s sons were somehow more godly than the rest of humanity. Furthermore, it must not be missed that Adam lived another 800 years after begetting Seth and that he had sons and daughters. Likewise “Seth lived eight hundred and seven years and had sons and daughters,” (Genesis 5:7). All of the sons and daughters of Seth as well as the sons and daughters of Cain were in fact sons (and daughters) of Adam. Technically speaking every human ever born on this planet is a son or daughter of Adam; the Hebrew language uses the term to mean “human”. Thus the text is driving home the point that there are two dissimilar groups: the daughters of Adam on the one hand and the sons of God on the other. To suggest that the daughters of men were actually the daughters of Cain is fanciful. Rather, the daughters of Adam are contrasted with the sons of God: the daughters of men were human and the sons of God were not.

The Millennium Chronicles

Furthermore, we can in no way infer that all of these sons and daughters remained so godly that they would be distinguished from the sons of Cain. After all, only eight people were saved out of the entire world. These sons of Seth must not have been so godly after all. Simply put, the sons of God do not refer to the lineage of Seth, but to direct creations of God, which before the redeeming work of Christ was limited to Adam himself and to angels. Therefore, the sons of God in Genesis six refers to fallen angels who had relations with human women.

Read More Articles Here.


[viii] Brown Driver Briggs (BDB) Hebrew English Lexicon provides the following definition. The most common definition is “1. to profane, defile, pollute, desecrate, begin”. BDB then goes on to give the various forms of how the root is used in each of the binyanim (verbal paradigms). In the a. (Niphal) it means to: 1. to profane oneself, defile oneself, pollute oneself; b. ritually; c. sexually; 1. to be polluted, be defiled; d. (Piel): 1. to profane, make common, defile, pollute; 2. to violate the honour of, dishonour; 3. to violate (a covenant); 4. to treat as common; e. (Pual) to profane (name of God); f. (Hiphil): 1. to let be profaned; 2. to begin; g. (Hophal) to be begun (emphasis mine). The Hophal is simply the passive of the Hiphil – therefore, if the Hiphil occasionally means to let be profaned then the one occurrence of the Hophal might also be translated as profaned rather than begin.

augustine of hippo Daughters of Cain deluge genesis 6 giants history of the bible sons of eSth Sons of God thomas aquinas

About Doug Hamp

  • http://www.tsl.org Noblesensei

    The nephilim were the original giants created by union of earth women and the 200 fallen angels that fell through ‘lust’ as accurately described in the Book of Enoch, who were drowned in the flood, but some did survive the Great Flood. These were the 15+ to 36 feet tall giants; then, when, these mated amongst themselves, they created the under size 15 feet tall giants called the raphiem. Just Google photos of giants on YouTube.com and judge for yourself. Sadly, this news piece leaves out this vital info….

  • Markdp67

    I hate to break it to those who believe the torah,bible or koran. These creation stories were copied from ancient Sumerians, from over 2000 years earlier.
    The so-called book of Daniel was written/copied around 500BCE. Just the knowledge of “mixing” of the elements tells the reader what era in which it was written. Daniel was not privy to bronze if he is porported to live in approx 1500BCE, or earlier.
    The story of Babel is clearly mistranslated. The “gods” came down to destroy the launch pad that can be clearly found in Lebenon today. These 1000 ton slabs of granite later became the temple of Jupiter.
    The attempt of “satan” to cut off the seedline of a messiah is also a fairytale. Have you ever wondered why the forgeries called the New Testament try so hard to link Joseph to the bloodine of David? I think the forgers in Mathew attempts to link 14 ancestors to David. And Mark attempts to link 43 ancestors to David.
    Then when you read more into the forgeries. You find that Christ (Jesus) was CONCIEVED through an angel, not Joseph. Why do the forgers of the New Testament attempt, in vain no less, to link Christ (Jesus) to David? When you can honestly answer these questions. You will begin to see how the Babylonian Mystery became what is called Christianity today.
    Mankind must break free of these superstious stories and contol paradighms!

    • Hisalone

      And I hate… well, no actually I take great pleasure in telling you that you are misinformed.  There IS no evidence to back up your claims;  these are merely Your ideas and conclusions.  
      The elements are not ‘mixed’ in Daniel as a careful study will quickly tell you.  There are many desertions written on this subject conveying ample provable evidence to bake up their claims.
      Your information regarding the tower of Babel is from who – the gods themselves??  The men of earth were building a portal to heaven – yes a door for the occult.  No surprise or new information there sorry.
      I wonder who you are and what qualifies you to decide that the Bible is a forgery?  You have offered no evidence other than your own assertions based on your own summations of a book you clearly don’t understand.
      Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit as the Bible clearly states.
      Your questions are not really questions are they?!, but your own beliefs which are stated without credence.
      As for me, I know and love and serve YHWH, Having met Him, and knowing countless others who also have had the privilege of knowing Him personally, your puny arguments don’t amount to anything even close to a rebuttal of the truth He has revealed in His Holy Word – For HIS People.  Clearly not you – yet.
       I do not give up hope for you Markp67, and pray that the scales will drop form your eyes and you will see the truth before it is too late.
      BTW, I find it laughable that you believe you have more freedom without Jesus than we do with Him. It aint true! :) 

      • Hisalone

        Sorry – *back* up their claims. (4th line)

  • Arslanzaheer

    Every religion has its own belief. According to ISLAM the population of the creatures other than the humans and the creatures we can see (animals) is two times more than us. Now if i talk about these giants, ADAM and EVE were the biggest humans alive. Its said that MOSES was feet tall .Slowly the humans gained or actually lost the height. And here we are now.
    And as far as the SATAN is concerned according to the teachings of ISLAM when a baby is born along with him are born an angel and a demon. The demon persuades him to do sins while the angel reminds him of the difference between good and bad. And thats how things are done.

    • Arslanzaheer

      MOSES was 9 feet tall.

      • http://www.tsl.org Noblesensei

        If he was, he was definitely NOT a nephilim, an evil giant, union of woman and fallen angel, that were destroyed by the Great Flood….humans were just tall back then, just as King Arthur was reported to be 9 ft. tall.

      • https://profiles.google.com/doughamp Doug Hamp

        Where do you get the nine feet tall measurement? Sounds like you are making things up.

  • Look in the Mirror

    How about reading the book “The Real Devil”. Do a google search. It’s free and wakes you up to the reality.

  • Anonymous

    It would be correct to say all humans (hu–spirit) are from Adam. It would be incorrect to state all bipeds on earth are human. Adam had a racial makeup and it would be against like for like, kind for kind and seed for seed which God authored, to suggest that all races came from Adam.

  • Anonymous

    I find a lot of people interchange the word jew or jewish for Hebrew and also to describe the other tribes of the House of Israel. This is incorrect. Daniel was Hebrew and Judean. The remaining 10 tribes never referred to themselves as jews.

  • Tracey

    …”that are kept in chains of darkness reserved for judgment”… If this is in fact the case, why and how do we see the continuation of these giants even after the flood in the time of Joshua and so on? And recurring again in the end times? Are these ‘angels/demons/sons of God continuing to fall and mingle with women on a regular basis?

    • Loren

      When Lucifer rebelled against the Godhead, he convinced and/or coerced 1/3 of the “angels” to follow his lead. And war broke out in the heavens. Of that portion of Creation that was devastated by the war, God restored during the Six Days. And on the Sixth Day, the Godhead created Mankind – Adam and Eve.

      God’s Plan A for Mankind was always to rule and reign, as priests and kings, along with His Only Begotten Son, over ALL Creation – including over Lucifer and all under his dominion.

      As Mankind was meant to be the direct seed line of the Godhead, it became Lucifer/Satan’s primary mission to despoil that seed line – and certainly, after Adam and Eve had sinned, for the purpose of preventing the Messiah (Jesus – Lucifer’s former best friend, now Satan’s worst enemy) from coming forth through the seed of the woman.

      If the Messiah could be prevented from coming forth into our realm, then there would be no salvation for Mankind – and God’s seed line would die and remain dead.

      But there was a secondary purpose in Lucifer/Satan’s plans to despoil Mankind, and that was, if he couldn’t prevent the Messiah from coming forth, then if the “fallen angels” could inhabit fit human extensions to where they could be regarded as “Mankind”, then God could not judge them as “fallen angels”, but consider them as possible recipients of salvation through Christ along with regular Mankind.

      How repugnant that would be! That dirty, vile, darker than dark fallen angels, who hijacked human DNA form and life – the Godhead’s direct seed line DNA “image and likeness” – be given the same consideration unto salvation through Christ Jesus! When Lucifer/Satan and the fallen angels were the reason for all the chaos and confusion, without form and void, mess (Gen 1:2) in the first place!

      Out of the 1/3 of the angels that rebelled, not all of them “came down unto the daughters of men” during the pre-Flood era. But for those who did, they were judged during the Flood, and bound in “chains of darkness”.

      The Flood also wiped out the Nephilim and other human-alien hybrids, as well as human-animal hybrids, alien-animal hybrids, and all other perverse “life forms” that had been brought forth. Also wiped out were those who were considered “good persons”, but who refused to pay heed to Noah’s warnings.

      The Flood was world-wide. Since then, there has never again been a world-wide flood. There have been massive regional floods and local floods, but never again a world-wide flood.

      There are some researchers who believe that some of the fallen “watchers” and their “Nephilim” offspring escaped the Flood by taking up residence deep in the Earth (much like the Deep Underground Military Bases and other type underground shelters of today), only to re-emerge after the Flood receded and the Earth dried out, and once again proceeded to corrupt Mankind’s DNA.

      This theory is possible, but how probable (likely) is open for debate, because when the “fountains of the deep” broke forth in the run up to the Flood and during, this implies massive earthquakes and earth changes, even deep underground changes, powerful enough to destroy underground shelters.

      However, there is another theory that is based solidly on Scripture, but is most often overlooked as an explanation. And that is ..

      the Tower of Babel.

      The first 9 verses of chapter 11 in Genesis (9-11!) tell of a short but telling story of an important segment of Mankind’s history.

      The Tower of Babel is often confused as occurring during the Empire of Babylon (of Daniel’s day). Or perhaps, earlier during the time of Sumeria and Mesopotamia. But the Tower of Babel most definitely occurred much earlier than those empires of latter years.

      The most telling verse within those 9 verses of Genesis chapter 11 is the 6th verse (which ties in with the 6th chapter of Genesis) :

      “And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.”

      The people of the “Tower of Babel” era were not primitive nomads. Nor were they of the advanced Empire of Babylon, nor of the preceding advanced Sumeria and Mesopotamia.

      The people of the Tower of Babel era were on the threshold of unlimited capability and power – ANYTHING within their imaginations. This is talking about a technologically advanced civilization! Perhaps moreso than we today!

      Neither Sumeria, nor Mesopotamia, nor the Empire of Babylon were technologically advanced to the degree that ANYTHING within their imaginations was possible! Nor were all the peoples of all these various empires “one” with a one-world language, nor with a one-world government, nor led by a one-world ruler.

      But the Tower of Babel era was just that: a one-world people, a one-world language, and a one-world government, headed by the anti-christ of his day: Nimrod!

      What we are witnessing today is the re-emergence of the Tower of Babel and the utilization of the ancient Tower Technologies, in order to open the dimensional gateways, in order for Lucifer/Satan and his hordes to re-wage their ancient “war in the heavens” against the Godhead.

      We know that Jesus said, “As in the days of Noah”. Much/most of what Jesus said and did has not been passed on down to us today. So he may have also said – pure conjecture at this point of course – “As in the days of the Tower of Babel”.

      Picture Nimrod and his top advisors and scientists re-activating the pre-Flood Nephilim DNA, injecting the alien DNA into their own, becoming “fit extensions”
      for direct demon co-possession in human host bodies (getting massively “juiced up”), as well as once again for more of the fallen angel “watchers” to “come down unto the daughters of men and beget giants”.

      It would only be natural for Nimrod and his corrupted society to desire to recapture what used to be in pre-Flood times – when men and women could live “like gods”! And once the technology for doing so was developed, it became possible to do so .. and much more.

      When God came down and destroyed the Tower, confused the one-world language, and punished the people, He had already promised to not wipe out everything/everyone by a universal flood again. Yet, the devastation was immense on a world scale. Even so, some of the alien-Nephilim seed survived.

      And so we finally catch up to this alien-Nephilim seed in the time of Moses and Joshua. And most likely, as the fossil record has shown, there were other habitations of giants around the world during the time of Moses and Joshua.

      The desires and plans of Lucifer/Satan and the fallen angels to corrupt Mankind – the direct seed line DNA “image and likeness” of the Godhead – has been an ongoing assault pre-Flood and post-Flood, and even into our own times.

      And it is about to be unleashed upon Mankind once again without restraint. Only those who are covered by, and adhere to, the Blood of Jesus will survive this last days assault against Mankind (Rev 12:11).

      Unless those days be cut short ..

  • Tamara

    Thank you, Doug. I have been studying this subject for over 20 years and your work is very helpful to me.

    God bless,

    Tamara

    • Arthur

      But the problem with Doug’s work is that it is both Biblically and logically flawed in many ways. I will be addressing these specific flaws in my Youtube series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaoEfOwFAwk

  • Chris

    I certainly agree with your conclusion that the sons of God were fallen angels and not the sons of Seth. However, I’d like you to consider the study below. Fallen angels and demons are not the same thing exactly. Demons are the spirits of the offspring of the fallen angels and women. You can find evidence of this view in the writings of the early church. Please consider the study below. It is in three parts which are linked at the top of the page, just over half way down the list.

    Enjoy, and good article!

    http://www.biblestudying.net/angels-demons1.html

  • Michael James Stone

    Praise the Lord Doug, looks good.

    A little curious on use of w in yud hey vav hey, was that for common readership? And when you said “ALL” in sentence 2, is that also for readership? (smile) I’m not nitpicking just observations from an editor at one time and writer.

    I am praying for your book and success and that you keep your students on their toes as they do you.

    Blessings Bro,
    Michael

    • http://douglashamp.com Doug Hamp

      Hi Michael, I used “YHWH” because it is the common usage. I realize that the actual pronunciation is a “v” sound – but it is hard to change everyone :) – thanks for the other issue. I will work on that.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: