Nephilim – Satan Bugs, Fallen Angels, Giants, and Demon Babies

Satan Bugs, Fallen Angels, Giants, and Demon Babies:

My conversation with two Seminary educated Bible Teachers  (Dr. H & Dr. M): Before giving up on the detailed dialogue go to the 5 points at the end.

ME:  Dr. H, why on earth and in heaven’s name would God use his Word to call “Sons of God” fallen angels that help to destroy the world-no way.  Sorry! As you suggested, just because a lot of Bible Teachers think so does not make it true!  Big name Bible teachers are a dime a dozen and to God they can be about as good as the really smart Pharisees!  I appreciate your understanding of the Word but please do not use your claim to grammatical knowledge to suggest a theology that runs counter to the good faith and heart of the Word and the Gospel.  By the way this fanciful type of thinking also feeds Scientology, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, and other cults because it gives more power and control of humans to angels and spirits – which they place in high order- equal to Jesus!  And by the way they claim to have “grammatical” knowledge that proves their points!  Hollywood also loves this kind of fanciful interpretation as it gives credence to “Satan bugs”, human “demon babies”, and “Giants”.

Dr. M, earlier you stated that you believe that demonic angels possessed the daughters of man. You didn’t state cohabitation!

Dr. M: Fallen angels cohabited with women and created a super race.
Me: So now you are changing what you said to Angie and I a couple of days ago. By the way “demonic possession” is also what Dr. Morris believes and taught in the class that I was in. Now concerning the cohabitation theory:  why would Jesus not address this issue in the Gospels?  Obviously this would also be a problem post flood! The problem prior to the flood, as Jesus stated, was the “wickedness of MAN”- NOT the evil angels, NOR MAN-ANGELS!

Dr. M: You misunderstood what I said last night. I said that angels cohabited with women, but some believe that they possessed men first. But I believe the majority view that the fallen angels (demons) appeared as men and had sex with the women. The super race offspring were the renowned evil men that roamed the earth. That super race had to be destroyed to protect the line of Christ.
Me: That also makes no sense!  So you think that “Sons of God” is a reference to Satanic man angels?  When does the Bible refer to the title “Sons of God” in a bad way?  “Sons of God” is never used to mean fallen angels.  Even if they become like men (which is only associated to good angels ) they would not be able to procreate without DNA!  That is one important reason why Dr. Morris (who is a decorated scientist, author, and Bible scholar) believes that it would have to be demon possession and NOT angelic procreation!

Dr. M: Fallen angels make perfect sense to me. Even though my view is the majority view, doesn’t make it right. Good theologians hold other views, mainly two other views. BTW, fallen angels could procreate as well as angels could eat solid food.
Me: they could eat, but there is no reference to procreation, (but Take Note of this – if you say that they are like humans in eating, then they would have to poop!  I seriously doubt that they are of real flesh because real flesh is full of sin.  Their “flesh” would be a glorified pure flesh and not of sinful human form and function- yet able to mimic aspects of human function!   Mike why on earth and in heaven would God use his Word to call “Sons of God” fallen angels that help to destroy the world?  No way!  Sorry, and as you suggested just because a lot of Bible Teachers think so does not make it true!  Same as Mt. Sinai being in Egypt deception! This is foolishness and again the majority of Christian apologists still believe in evolution (according to Kirby Anderson)! Frankly there is something really wrong with our seminary indoctrinated “church” of modern America!  Which means there are a bunch of bad teachers!

Dr. M: Why are those angels placed in the lowest hell (Tartarus), while the other fallen angels free to go about the country?
Me: 2Pet.2:4,  “For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but threw them into the lowest hell and imprisoned them in chains of deepest darkness, holding them for judgment,”- These angels were judged for “leaving their domain” and that has nothing to do with procreation. Note what 2 Pet 2:5, says:  That Noah and his sons were a “herald of righteousness”!   Yes, God clearly is focused on sin and “righteousness” not on a “demon seed”, nor on an angelic DNA epidemic!  What is important is what is NOT SAID. From beginning to end, God has been concerned with the heart of man and Satan’s attempt to seduce & destroy it!
SEARCH Google for one of the excellent sites that show how the “Sons of God” are connected to Seth, and the “Daughter of men” are related to Cain!  You like many others have grown too comfortable in your black box viewpoint!

Dr. M: The angels interpretation is from excellent literal exegesis. There is a lot that we can’t understand in Scripture like the Trinity, election, virgin birth, etc. You can take any of the three views that you most comfortable with, because they are all based on the Bible. It is not like salvation or evolution. I personally see the Angel view more sound and you see your view more sound. What is important is that you and I are pre-trib and creationists.

Me: If angels did indeed help cause the fall of the world, then I would think that Jesus and Peter and all the other writers of the NT would have warned the early church of the possibility of angels cohabiting with man in the future! The fact that it is not mentioned is a stark statement of reality. There would be a reason to warn! For prophecy would be severly affected, jsut as history was affected in the pre-flood era!  Sorry, but I do not go along with your logic!  All of this leads to conspiracy theories and really bad exegesis, and again it is more than just the matter of salvation - it Does affect how people think and act! Crazy stuff like this only arms bipolar people like my brother with serious non-Biblical thought, fears, suspicions, and just pure paranoid thinking! By the way this ridiculous type of thinking also feeds Scientology, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, and other cults because it gives more power and control of humans to angels and spirits – which they place in high order- equal to Jesus!

Me, later on:  This is much more than just an issue with the Nephilum or the noble men of valor which could easily have passed their DNA onward to Noah’s family through intermarriage.  After all this intermarriage did take place against God’s will.  That DNA surfaces again in the post flood era with the “giants” in the Promised land in the book of Numbers.  But this does not at all suggest that angels were involved in the process and it would be almost heretical to suggest that something other than sin was causing the “fall of mankind”!

Dr. M: I don’t understand why you are sounding so upset. You don’t understand the whole concept of the fallen angels. I studied all those theories in angelology classes at DTS. Even the men of Sodom wanted to have sex with the two angels that rescued Lot. Although I am positive that I am right, I have no problem with you having a different view. I want to bring people to Christ.

Me: I also want to bring people to Jesus Christ and Angie and I do this at our White Rock Lake Mission every Sunday!  The problem is there are a lot of crazy people out there who love your viewpoint- which is more science fantasy than reality!!   The Bible is trustworthy. Satan loves to change the meaning of the Word.  By the way, sin entered the world by one man not one angel! To push the sin of man to the side, in order to blame a select group of angels is stretching theology to the point of heresy!  Just because a group in Sodom wanted to “know ” the angels does not suggest nor indicate in any logical way that angels are capable of sex.   Angels do not have DNA –  HENCE CANNOT TRANSFER TRAITS….and yes, this is heresy!  By the way your good friend, Dr. Morris agrees with what I just stated above.  As a student of science, he says or argues the same point then goes on to say that it has to be demon possession.
For in demon possession there is no DNA TRANSFER.   If you studied Angelology then you should know that heresy concerning angels was a big problem in the early church!  So why was this Genesis 6 issue not addressed by Paul in Colossians? By the way I do not agree with Dr. Morris and his demon possession theory!

Me: Look I enjoy this discussion because it is to the Glory of God and His Word! But you and all leaders should realize that you may be setting a bad example to believers and to unbelievers!   The world loves twisting the Bible with Watcher Beings, vampire angels, and all kinds of super angels that are evil, yet have power over believers and unbelievers alike.  Making Sons of God into evil angels only empowers this fallacy. Another reason to get this right is all the other mythology built around the Bible such as the recent Noah movie, the Apocryphal texts, and the Kabalah – all of which distort the truth about angels. The literal meaning of “Sons of God” is either good angels or good people linked to God – not demons!  Remember Jesus said “as the days of Noah were, so shall be the coming of the Son of Man.”  A couple of more things to note is that St. Augustine also believed that God wanted to keep the family of Seth separate for obvious reasons (in the same way that He desires that believers today keep away from the world and from intermarriage with non-believers!) The heresy of that time (including the Catholic church and the Apocrypha) involved a  popular worldly thinking of angels mixing with men!   Note that even the NIV distinguishes Sons of God in Genesis from angels used in the book of JOB.
I hope and pray that this type of error is not being taught at DTS!

Dr. Morris has this all pinned on demon possession…but I still donate to ICR. I just think that anyone who teaches had better be very very sure that they teach the correct message…and if there is any doubt to present both sides without showing a bias towards the “angel concept”!

Other VERY IMPORTANT points to note: 1) God knows that beautiful women can easily deceive men: 25,000 Israelites died because of the Midianite women that seduced them.  This incident is linked to Balaam the prophet – who misused the gift God gave him.  2) The angels that followed Satan had already fallen and were no longer Sons of God.  3) This mixing of demons with man is all part of the “Serpent Seed” or “Satan Seed” teachings that generated movies like “Rosemary’s Baby” and the “Satan Bug” etc.  The “creatures” produced of this unholy seed would not be “in the image of God”, for they would no longer be totally human.  4)  If we look in the NT many demon possessed men were delivered of demons and were normal in size and became “saved” men. The “demoniac” for instance, was NOT A GIANT NOR WAS HE A PERSON IN CONTROL OF HIS SENSES  and Behavior and so would not “have been a man of valor or skill in fighting (as is stated in Genesis 6 concerning the Nephilim!   5)  When Jesus confronted the demoniac, it was clearly stated by LUKE that the demoniac was very violent and anti-social!  This crazed maniac was NOT interested in procreating, romance, and marriage! I would doubt that any “daughter of man would want to marry him!  Note that in Genesis 6 the giants are NOT STATED AS BEING SUPERNATURAL and crazy, but are just “mighty men who were of old, men of renown”. It does not even imply that these “giants” are MORE wicked or evil THAN THE REST! 6) Even though the Nephilim are mentioned after the flood this does not mean that they survived the flood, nor that a demonic spirit survived and then returned to haunt the earth!  The use of the word denotes “giants” and does not imply “sonship” -just as “son of wickedness” does not imply a familial trait.  These post flood Nephilim were not a result of the daughters of man cohabiting with the Sons of God.  There are many names in the Bible that are not fully explained but are descriptive in nature: such as the word used to explain the name of the animal whose skin was used to cover the tabernacle.  So called “experts” claim that the Hebrew name implies a sea creature like a dolphin – really!  These shepherds, slaves, and brick layers went fishing for dolphins!  Or another version calls them “badgers” which of course do not exist in the desert or wilderness of “Arabia”!  A logical careful examination would point to the “Arabian Oryx” which has a white hide (reflecting the sun’s heat) and may have looked like a sea creature in a desert mirage!