In this second episode, Doug and Rob go back to the beginning and discuss the initial incursion of angels, then debate whether or not there was a second incursion and end with a quick run down of the Genesis 14 War of giants (sorry, Rob’s Internet connection was not very good this time). Be sure to watch this episode before joining us this Friday at 11pm EST at http://www.nowyouseetv.org
Video Source
40 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Part of your argument was that the angels that sinned were so afraid of the judgement that they had from the Book of Enoch that they would not do it again. But if that was the case then how could they do genetic manipulations also after the flood, wouldn't that hold the same judgement,
by the way I believe the sons of God in genesis were heavenly beings not the children of Seth.
couldn't men of old simply be a reference to the men of that time that became legends mighty men of renowned in history. Looking back from Moses time referring to that time?
Just wondering
a question I was wondering is where did Goliath come from if not some genetic or angelic tampering? he was after the flood so wouldn't that verse in genesis 6 be related to where we see the races of Giants after the flood? i have heard others imply that the fallen angels hid some of the giant s ( their offspring ) under the earth of above it and then came back in the earth after the flood or up from the deep underground caverns after the flood and that is why david had to kill the remnant of the giants. But this is all speculation, Interesting but hard to prove, as many things in this issue are
dear rob skiba,
i have a very important comment for you… well, more like a concern. please consider it sincerely. do not view it as an attack but rather as a snapshot of yourself (im sure you will appreciate the photography analogy).
allow me to repeat some of your own words back to you. will you find it offensive to have your own words that you recorded and shared publicly repeated to you? i hope not.
you said "you cannot get a heliocentric globe from the scriptures… the bible is a flat earth book" you also said "i believe in flat earth %80". therefore you are saying publicly that you believe in biblical scripture %80. if you avoid an emotional reaction right now it will prevent you from becoming defensive and youll see the truth in your own admitted %80 belief in scripture. the question that arises is why?
the answer is… you believe in scripture %80 because you are working backwards with your superintelligent mind. your intellect is obviously very powerful, and this can be dangerous. you admitted that when you were first challenged to prove the heliocentric earth model you employed scientific research first, and you admitted that should have been the second thing you did. you admitted you should have went to scripture first to prove the heliocentric model. since that initial research into heliocentric vs. flat earth, you HAVE done extensive scriptural research on the subject, which is commendable by the way, and you have publicly shared your findings that flat earth is scriptural and heliocentric is not… yet you still say you only believe in flat earth %80. the reason why is because you are trying to use science to prove scripture when you should use scripture to prove science. you are working backwards. basically what youre saying is that even though you have found scripture proves flat earth, its not enough to make you believe it until you can justify it %100 through modern conventional science. i admonish you to work the other way around and fix a firm belief in scripture first, and then only believe in the conventional science that matches with scripture.
what you are doing is dangerous because you are showing others to only believe in scripture %100 if you can back scripture up with science %100, but if you can only back scripture up with science %80 then believe in scripture %80. if you soften your heart to my comment you will see the truth in it, you will sense my true concern, and you will see the danger of your path. if you do not softwn your heart you will argue with my comment, ignore it, or delete.
Hey Rob, Doug. Good topic. You know what stands out to me when the bible mentions the sons of God going into the daughters of men…any other time the bible is referencing people mating, the bible uses the term he knew her, or he laid with her. But when the bible mentioned the incursion with the sons of God, it said the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men. I think maybe this could have been seed planting into women versus the "traditional" natural way of human reproduction.