What are the Nephilim?

reply to post by BlackManINC


Very good post. Yes, it does seem to explain to us that these mutants of reptiles, the dinosaurs and mammals are not the result of thousand of years of evolution as some would believe, but direct pollution of the sacred DNA imparted by GOD in his design, by repulsive bestiality of the depraved fallen ones.

I hadn't thought about the point of this being an attempt to make sure that Jesus could not be born of an unadulterated human woman of pure bloodline. I had only thought of it in terms of Satan's jealousy over GOD's creation and wanting to recreate it in his own image. He can not directly create life from nothing as GOD can.
He can only subvert the creation, both human and animal with his own footprint.

But, now that I think of it, you are most likely correct that may have played a very big part in Satan's plan to try to thwart GOD's attempt to bring forth another perfect man in the place of Adam to be put to the same test.

For those who are not aware of what he stakes were, GOD will not grant immortality to beings which can not be destroyed by him should they prove to be like Satan, who can and will be, along with the other fallen ones at an appointed time.

The test of sovereignty and loyalty was a simple one, and could have involved anything.
GOD selected at random a very nice tree with appealing fruit and said do not eat of this tree as a symbol of
showing that GOD has the right to set out THE LAWS in the universe, even as applies to man.

It was simple thing really. It is the same thing almost any parent might do. You have a lovely antique doll that was your great grandmother's. You tell your children, here I give you all these toys as yours, but the doll, you
must not touch. This sets up boundaries and involves issues of trust and obedience which a parent must have and should expect of their offspring for more important matters down the road involving life and death that might come up. It is a principle involved. It is not to do with the fruit per se.
Some people do not understand the concept and think that it was GOD tempting them when it was no such thing.
Some people think it had to do with sex when it was no such thing. GOD had already told them to go forth, multiply and fill the Earth, to subdue it and make it into a beautiful garden paradise for all to enjoy.

Originally posted by PaperbackWriter
reply to post by BlackManINC

 

Very good post. Yes, it does seem to explain to us that these mutants of reptiles, the dinosaurs and mammals are not the result of thousand of years of evolution as some would believe, but direct pollution of the sacred DNA imparted by GOD in his design, by repulsive bestiality of the depraved fallen ones.

I hadn't thought about the point of this being an attempt to make sure that Jesus could not be born of an unadulterated human woman of pure bloodline. I had only thought of it in terms of Satan's jealousy over GOD's creation and wanting to recreate it in his own image. He can not directly create life from nothing as GOD can.
He can only subvert the creation, both human and animal with his own footprint.

But, now that I think of it, you are most likely correct that may have played a very big part in Satan's plan to try to thwart GOD's attempt to bring forth another perfect man in the place of Adam to be put to the same test.

For those who are not aware of what he stakes were, GOD will not grant immortality to beings which can not be destroyed by him should they prove to be like Satan, who can and will be, along with the other fallen ones at an appointed time.

The test of sovereignty and loyalty was a simple one, and could have involved anything.
GOD selected at random a very nice tree with appealing fruit and said do not eat of this tree as a symbol of
showing that GOD has the right to set out THE LAWS in the universe, even as applies to man.

It was simple thing really. It is the same thing almost any parent might do. You have a lovely antique doll that was your great grandmother's. You tell your children, here I give you all these toys as yours, but the doll, you
must not touch. This sets up boundaries and involves issues of trust and obedience which a parent must have and should expect of their offspring for more important matters down the road involving life and death that might come up. It is a principle involved. It is not to do with the fruit per se.
Some people do not understand the concept and think that it was GOD tempting them when it was no such thing.
Some people think it had to do with sex when it was no such thing. GOD had already told them to go forth, multiply and fill the Earth, to subdue it and make it into a beautiful garden paradise for all to enjoy.

Correct, but we should also keep in mind that while the dinosaurs might more or less be the result of what happened in Genesis 6, they too could have been created by God, as the verse below indicates. Keep in mind that the term dinosaur is a recent addition to our vocabulary as of 1841, before that, these things were generally referred to by virtually every culture on the planet including the Bible as dragons.

Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. - Job 40:15-19

This "Behemoth" can best be compared to the Brontosaurus, also called the Apatosaurus, one of the biggest dinosaurs to have ever existed, and we know that no living creature today has a tail anywhere near the size of a cedar tree:

reply to post by BlackManINC


Very interesting. But, I still maintain that yes, dinosaurs were dragons, and therefore most certainly offspring of Satan.

He is specifically equated with this aspect of his mutation of GOD's creation.

Originally posted by PaperbackWriter
reply to post by BlackManINC

 

Very interesting. But, I still maintain that yes, dinosaurs were dragons, and therefore most certainly offspring of Satan.

He is specifically equated with this aspect of his mutation of GOD's creation.

Well again, its possible, but these are just different terms referring to the same thing, and while they were by and large called dragons, that wasn't the only term that was used by a few cultures, which is the basic problem with the whole theory.

According to the book of Enoch, the giants, because their DNA was not species restricted, experimented with anything big enough to copulate with.
It is interesting to note that most plant eating Dinosaurs are 4 legged and most meat eaters are 2 legged.
Sure explains the stupid arms on the Rex.

reply to post by winterkill


I hadn't thought of that, but you know, you have a point!

The fallen ones had even less restrictions and could copulate by shapeshifting into any form for the
experiment of sex and what the "cross" would produce.

I know that we have been handed down stories of the centaurs and minotaurs and all sorts of man-beasts
thought by many to be mythological beings. Yet but were very likely the antedeluvian stories handed down of
the grotesque creatures that the Nephilim and their giant offspring were creating to ruin the Earth.

The shape shifting was not necessary, it was just cross breeding. Giant bangs alligator, what do you get? Giant bangs cow, horse etc. The problem with the Nephilim, was what they began teaching mankind. All sorts of stuff was given to them before they could handle it, including Azazel teaching them of war.
These teachings caused as much damage as the giants and abominations.
Here's the last part of the scroll of Adam restored, which matches Chapter 6 of Genesis verses 6-8:

39 And Ruler of all so declared ," Wipe away what joined the Adam, which
developed among (man) what they had learned, (from me) to create. That mounted
the face (of) the ground, that (of) Adam, unto to herd unto to producers (of) mass
offspring and unto what flies the celestials. As so the (teachings) preceded death to
manifest, as so (they) sped up (the) finish.
v40 And Noah (from) that came forth to bestow, to out pour, so to come after Ruler
of all.
thechronicleproject.org...

This section shows how the teachings really screwed things up, and now matches with the book of Enoch.
If you check the same section in the bible, you'll notice it talks of God getting ready to destroy everyone on the Earth. Here, he's destroying what was left of the bad guys.

Odd how the bible translation always makes him out to be the bad guy.
I wonder if that's accidental?

reply to post by winterkill


Well, it makes me wonder is this Enoch the son of Cain?
You know because Genesis credits the descendents of Cain with discoveries in metalurgy, musical instruments,
and all sorts of new knowledge. Is this not the same new knowledge that came from the fallen ones?

Could Cain's wife have even been a fallen one taken on a female role?

What always puzzled me was there were so few people at the beginning was it really necessary for them to repeat names?

Why would the descendents of Seth have named a son after the son of Cain of all people.
Likewise Lamech. There are a few others but, it's been awhile since I made a list of the duplicate
names from each genealogical line.

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

 

The return of the Nephilim refers to a cloning rebirth. The theory goes that scientists have viable dna of some of the original Nephilim, and will use it to bring them back. Far-fetched? You bet. But that's one theory.

The other theory is that the Nephilim genetics made it through the flood(and are still here today) in the form of one or more of Noah's sons and daughter-in-laws. "Descendants" of the Nephilim again show up in many places later in the bible. Starting with Moses sending the spies across the Jordan river. (Which is a topic all its own. Much to discuss there.)

Those with residual dna of the Nephilim today sometimes are born with traits of the Nephilim. Height of course, but sometimes double rows of teeth, and six fingers/toes.

Check out Tom Horn's articles on the Nephilim. He is the most knowledgeable on them I know of other than Steve Quayle. But be forewarned, they both come from a Christian slant.

None of Noha's sons or daughters even Noha himself had no fallen angel dna the bible says that Noha was perfect in all his ways. The word perfect there is used to describe what a animal offering had to be perect no sopt or blimish. I other words they were not poluted by giant dna. Chuck Misler does a great study on the subject.

Originally posted by guitarplayer

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

 

The return of the Nephilim refers to a cloning rebirth. The theory goes that scientists have viable dna of some of the original Nephilim, and will use it to bring them back. Far-fetched? You bet. But that's one theory.

The other theory is that the Nephilim genetics made it through the flood(and are still here today) in the form of one or more of Noah's sons and daughter-in-laws. "Descendants" of the Nephilim again show up in many places later in the bible. Starting with Moses sending the spies across the Jordan river. (Which is a topic all its own. Much to discuss there.)

Those with residual dna of the Nephilim today sometimes are born with traits of the Nephilim. Height of course, but sometimes double rows of teeth, and six fingers/toes.

Check out Tom Horn's articles on the Nephilim. He is the most knowledgeable on them I know of other than Steve Quayle. But be forewarned, they both come from a Christian slant.

None of Noha's sons or daughters even Noha himself had no fallen angel dna the bible says that Noha was perfect in all his ways. The word perfect there is used to describe what a animal offering had to be perect no sopt or blimish. I other words they were not poluted by giant dna. Chuck Misler does a great study on the subject.

thx you so much for posting this ~! I couldn't remember the name and been trying to figure it out for years.. 5 to be exact ! LOL

I heard this man and I followed how he came to know the truth about this subject and it's right there in black and white...I've read the story prolly 100 times+ over 30 years and never saw it .. but it's right there, plain as day. I fully believe this is the TRUE story of Noah .. !! To this very day !

Follow this line of study and the pieces begin to fit together of earth's giants found ...

reply to post by guitarplayer

None of Noha's sons or daughters even Noha himself had no fallen angel dna the bible says that Noha was perfect in all his ways. The word perfect there is used to describe what a animal offering had to be perect no sopt or blimish. I other words they were not poluted by giant dna. Chuck Misler does a great study on the subject.

I would not argue against what you state as one theory. From a biblical standpoint, "Noah was perfect in his generations". And the word perfect there does seem to signify what you state it does from my own studies. But it doesn't say the wives of the sons of Noah were perfect in theirs. Although one might surmise that. It could be seen another way.

Still, I made a mistake when I put "sons" in my original post. I appreciate the correction on that.

What are the Nephilim?

Studying history, ancient history, and trying to make sense of all the "Name Changes" is quite the complication that muddy's the research waters. When doing simple math we are taught to break down equations into its common denominator. Can this method be applied to history? Yes!

We find many instances where one individual is names differently throughout all the ages and tongs, but yet we know its the same person, by their characteristics. attributes..

You break down these attributes into mindsets, that being the common denominator. When you center your research comparing these "Mindsets" you can then start to get the frame of mind of all the original players. And it all seems to go directly to the Sumerian cuneiform writings and the history they share.

Once you get a working knowledge of these stories you find a segment of that population known as the Igigi. It is written that these gods (subset) revolted against the original gods because of, basically, slavery and cruel working conditions (Forced labor in building Pyramids?). It is said these gods were tall in stature, which translates to they could be formidable, but yet large enough to do the labor. The revolt was concluded when the gods agreed to make a worker to replace the Igigi. Hence, the origins of our species, the smaller human being, who was quite easy to master over.

I had noticed many Sumerian reliefs that depict not only the original gods (Rare), but very large human beings in the roles of master. Where did the igigi go? Were they offered ruler-ship over the new creation? Might it have been a bargaining chip associated with the truce? Were they also involved in the "Creation" process that brought these new slaves into being? The fallen ones that defiled themselves with the daughters of man?

We become even more confused, after the flood, when all mention of the gods and the igigi are stricken from history and a new story supplanted. The names really begin to change after that. The gods were transformed into one, "Lord God", and new creation stories are circulated. We all became indoctrinated into this new "Psychological Operation" of control. The Bible did not use the word "Igigi", it used the word "Giant".

The names have always changed, but the mindsets have not. Follow them, they are far more reliable.

In as far as who Jesus was, and where he was from, he did leave a few things slip as to the true nature of slavery. The question then becomes, was he, a Giant, or, Igigi.? Or, both... Judas, told us....

The Nephilim are the children of humans and the fallen angles known collectively as the Watchers, and we're likely the ancient false gods and demigods of ancient times while thr Watchers themselves were likely the ancient titans and gods of ancient culture. They were likely a large part of why God flooded the Earth.