Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 3,101 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,284,194
Pageviews Today: 1,991,191Threads Today: 677Posts Today: 12,203
03:13 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?

 
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Yeshua was a God in the form of a man, but STILL A MAN, that came to fulfill a mission.


God WITH US!
 Quoting: S.O.S.


yes, and that is the context of His words when He states that He is the son of man (or the Son of man)

He is saying that He was born of a woman.
He also says He and the Father are one.

there are two things being said.

but, in the context of Son of man, it is about being of the Adamic line, born of a woman, and not born of angels/women.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
This sounds like some kind of contradiction at first glance, but in fact there is no contradiction. An examination of Scripture reveals that the phrase "Son of Man" carries broad significance.

First of all, even if the phrase “Son of Man” is a reference to Jesus' humanity, it is not a denial of His deity. By becoming a man, Jesus did not cease being God. The incarnation of Christ did not involve the subtraction of deity, but the addition of humanity. Jesus clearly claimed to be God on many occasions (Matthew 16:16,17; John 8:58; 10:30). But in addition to being divine, He was also human (see Philippians 2:6-8). He had two natures (divine and human) conjoined in one person.

Further, Scripture indicates that Jesus was not denying His deity by referring to Himself as the Son of Man. In fact, it is highly revealing that the term “Son of Man” is used in Scripture in contexts of Christ's deity. For example, the Bible says that only God can forgive sins (Isaiah 43:25; Mark 2:7). But as the “Son of Man,” Jesus had the power to forgive sins (Mark 2:10). Likewise, Christ will return to Earth as the “Son of Man” in clouds of glory to reign on Earth (Matthew 26:63-64). In this passage, Jesus is citing Daniel 7:13 where the Messiah is described as the "Ancient of Days," a phrase used to indicate His deity (cf. Daniel 7:9).

Further, when Jesus was asked by the high priest whether He was the “Son of God” (Matthew 26:63), He responded affirmatively, declaring that He was the “Son of Man” who would come in power and great glory (verse 64). This indicated that Jesus Himself used the phrase “Son of Man” to indicate His deity as the Son of God.

[link to christiananswers.net (secure)]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26465988
United Kingdom
10/28/2012 10:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Religion - mental illness
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Religion - mental illness
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26465988


there is no religion or "religiosity" being discussed here.

(see my sig line for explanation)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26103646
United States
10/28/2012 10:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Nephilim is a Hebrew word from the book of Genesis, translated to English having nothing to do with actual giants or fallen angels. The uninspired gnostic book of Enoch was not written by Enoch, and again has no inspiration. Jesus did not use the book of Enoch. It is not to be used as scripture.

[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

Physical giants was the Hebrew word: rapha (Deu 2:11)

Angels do not breed or procreate. The passage has nothing to do with fallen angels, and all early Christian Bible commentators understood this.

[link to www.youtube.com]

[link to davelivingston.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26103646


For one, Enoch was apocrypha but definitely not Gnostic. It was a 2nd temple Era Jewish text that all of Jesus' disciples would have understood. The book of Jude also clearly references it.

Now as for the Nephilim part of Genesis, how do you explain the "Sons of God" and "Daughters of Man" having offspring? It's pretty clear when you look at the Hebrew "Sons (plural) of Elohim" and "Daughters of Adam".

Why would it be wrong of me to understand the scriptures on my own without relying on an "official" meaning?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26508846


Simon Magus is regarded as the first gnostic - meaning one who takes Bible Christian doctrine and changes it. Magus was rebuked in the Book of Acts. Magus would be the one who would use such a text/ There were many such text/books at the time, and they were all rejected, except for what we find in canon.

The book of Enoch was not mentioned anywhere in the Bible. Jude mentions Enoch being a prophet, yet we have none of his writing.

The sons of God are God's people while the daughters of men were the line of Cain. When these two lines intermarried it caused many problems, both before and after the flood. God destroyed the world by flood because of this SIN not because of GENETICS.

You may see the links for further explanation, or see earlier Bible commentary by such as Matthew Henry for the correct understanding.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26103646
United States
10/28/2012 10:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Son of man - being God who was indeed a son of man, having manifest on earth and known his people. That is all. The gnostic try and make something simple out more complicated. Next they go to the confusion of astology. Totally lost and leading others astray.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Nephilim is a Hebrew word from the book of Genesis, translated to English having nothing to do with actual giants or fallen angels. The uninspired gnostic book of Enoch was not written by Enoch, and again has no inspiration. Jesus did not use the book of Enoch. It is not to be used as scripture.

[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

Physical giants was the Hebrew word: rapha (Deu 2:11)

Angels do not breed or procreate. The passage has nothing to do with fallen angels, and all early Christian Bible commentators understood this.

[link to www.youtube.com]

[link to davelivingston.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26103646


angels do not MARRY.
there is a big difference.
Seeker of Truth
'Be the love that you are.'

User ID: 20607485
United States
10/28/2012 10:38 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Simple, because He was one of us... Showing us by shining example what we all could be if we would but choose to be. He never separated Himself from us but chose instead to be an example for what we all can be if we are but the love we are. hf
'Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.' - Dr. Seuss
'love has no opposite as it is the divine solvent that ends duality.' - m'Lord
'Be the love that you are' -m'Lord
The amount of love and good feelings you have at the end of your life is equal to the love and good feelings you create during your life.- mine
What will get you from here to there most quickly is total honesty—
being willing to assert, acknowledge, and declare exactly how you feel about a thing.
Say your truth—kindly, but fully and completely. Live your truth, gently, but totally
and consistently. Change your truth easily and quickly when your experience brings
you new clarity.-God

[link to www.youtube.com]
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Nephilim is a Hebrew word from the book of Genesis, translated to English having nothing to do with actual giants or fallen angels. The uninspired gnostic book of Enoch was not written by Enoch, and again has no inspiration. Jesus did not use the book of Enoch. It is not to be used as scripture.

[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

Physical giants was the Hebrew word: rapha (Deu 2:11)

Angels do not breed or procreate. The passage has nothing to do with fallen angels, and all early Christian Bible commentators understood this.

[link to www.youtube.com]

[link to davelivingston.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26103646


any OT apocryphal book is NOT a gnostic text. the gnostics were a group of philosophers that came well after the new testament era (Jesus lifetime and the time of early church formation).

there is a BIG difference between the two.

Enoch's writings are in no way gnostic texts.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26103646
United States
10/28/2012 10:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Yeshua was a God in the form of a man, but STILL A MAN, that came to fulfill a mission.


God WITH US!
 Quoting: S.O.S.


yes, and that is the context of His words when He states that He is the son of man (or the Son of man)

He is saying that He was born of a woman.
He also says He and the Father are one.

there are two things being said.

but, in the context of Son of man, it is about being of the Adamic line, born of a woman, and not born of angels/women.
 Quoting: Salt


God with us is right, born of mankind. The end. There is only one bloodline, from Adam. There is no angel breed or race. That's silly reptillian Icke malarkey. Angels do not breed with women or anything else. They are spirit. God is creator able to impregnate Mary, the virgin.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24482386
United States
10/28/2012 10:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
God - Adrogenous

Incarnations on earth - Fe male gives birth to male

God = Daughter + Son
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15256858
United States
10/28/2012 10:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
To answer this question, one must be familiar with the Genesis epic, the book of Enoch, and the Nephilim. It is important to realize that during the time of Genesis and the hybrids called the Nephilim that sometimes it was difficult to know who was a hybrid and who was born of natural causes (birthed by a woman, conceived by a man).

Jesus is clarifying that He is a 'son of man'. And, why would God Himself refer to Himself as the 'son of Himself'?

He wouldn't.

Jesus is God.

FAQ:

What other evidences for Enoch's authenticity (as a sacred text) are there?

Why isn't it in the Bible today?

Jesus said that angels can't have sex, proving this book's falsehood...


The idea that Jesus said that angels cannot have sex is a very common objection to The Book of Enoch and the angelic understanding of Genesis 6 in general. However it is also a very common misinterpretation of what he actually said. Go Here to read what he said (Matt 22:30), and to study this topic. Beyond that misunderstanding, there is no doubt today that The Book of Enoch was one of the most widely accepted and revered books of Jewish culture and doctrine in the century leading up to Jesus' birth.

It is usually noted first that New Testament author Jude directly quotes from 1 Enoch - "Behold he comes with ten thousands of his saints to execute judgment ..." (1 Enoch 2, Jude 14-15). Additionally, "the citations of Enoch by the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs... show that at the close of the second century B.C., and during the first century B.C., this book was regarded in certain circles as inspired" (1).

Aside from Jude, Peter and Paul's affirmations of the angelic/hybrid interpretation, recognition of 1 Enoch "... is given amply in the Epistle of Barnabus, and in the third century by Clement and Irenaeus" (1). The Catholic Church's Origen - known as "the father of theology" - affirmed both the Book of Enoch and the fact that angels could and did co-habitate with the daughters of men. He even warned against possible angelic and/or Nephilim infiltration of the church itself. Oddly, while thousands of his writings are still considered by them as "sacred," this very issue got him labeled as a heretic when the faulty Sons of Seth "doctrine" was conceived! (2)

Additionally, the Coptic Orthodox Churches of Egypt (est'd appx 50-100 A.D.) still include Enoch as canonized text in the Ethiopic Old Testament (2). This fact alone should carry great weight for Western Christians when honestly studying the "case" for Enoch. Given their 1900+ year history, the fact that they were never "ruled" by Rome's theology, and that they currently number over 10 million - this is a VERY significant portion of The Body of Christ that has historically esteemed 1 Enoch as inspired doctrine.

Some today (who do not seem to believe in the inspiration of scripture) claim that most major themes of the New Testament were in fact "borrowed" from 1 Enoch. "It appears that Christianity later adopted some of its ideas and philosophies from this book, including the Final Judgment, the concept of demons, the Resurrection, and the coming of a Messiah and Messianic Kingdom" (3). No doubt, these themes are major parts of 1 Enoch, and appear there as complete theologies a full 200 years before any other NT writings.

Christian author Stephen Quayle writes, "Several centuries before and after the appearance of Jesus in Jerusalem, this book had become well known to the Jewish community, having a profound impact upon Jewish thought. The Book of Enoch gave the jewish people their solar calendar, and also appears to have instilled the idea that the coming Messiah would be someone who had pre-existed as God (4)." Translator RH Charles also stated that "the influence of 1 Enoch on the New Testament has been greater than all of the other apocryphal and pseudepigraphical books put together" (3). The conclusions are somewhat inescapable given Enoch's dating and wide acceptance between 200 B.C. and 200 A.D. - either Christian authors, and especially the Nicene Council, did plagiarize their theology directly from Enoch, or the original version of Enoch was also inspired.

James H Charlesworth, director of Dead Sea Studies at Yale University, says in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha & The New Testament (Trinity Press International),
"I have no doubt that the Enoch groups deemed the Book of Enoch as fully inspired as any biblical book. I am also convinced that the group of jewish people behind the Temple Scroll, which is surely pre-Qumranic, would have judged it to be quintessential Torah -- that is, equal to, and perhaps better than, Deuteronomy....Then we should perceive the Pseudepigrapha as they were apparently judged to be: God's revelation to humans(2 & 5)."

But perhaps the most telling argument for 1 Enoch's "inspiration" may well be that the Jewish understanding of the term "Son of Man" as a Messianic title comes - not truly from our Old Testament canon - but from the Book of Enoch! Ever wonder why Jesus refers to himself in the gospels as the "Son of Man" rather than the Son of God? (2) Of over 100 uses of the phrase "son of man" in the OT, it refers almost always to "normal" men (93 times specifically of Ezekiel, and certainly not as Messiah!), but is used only one time in the entire OT, in one of Daniel's heavenly visions, to refer to divinity. Despite the Old Testament's frequent lack of divine application of the phrase, 1 Enoch records several trips to heaven, using the title "Son of Man" unceasingly to refer to the pre-incarnate Christ. Of particular Messianic significance, Enoch describes the following scene (2):

The angels "glorify with all their power of praise; and He sustains them in all that act of thanksgiving while they laud, glorify and exalt the name of the Lord of Spirits forever and ever... Great was their joy. They blessed, glorified and exalted because the name of the Son of Man was revealed to them (1 Enoch 68:35-38)." Both His disciples, and especially the Sanhedrein knew what Jesus was claiming - 84 times in the gospels! - when referring to Himself as the "Son of Man." This claim was considered an obvious blasphemy to the Pharisees & Saducees, but it is eternal life to all who confess that Jesus of Nazareth was, and is, the Son of Man, The Messiah, God in the flesh, The Holy One of Israel, God's Christ - the Lord of All to whom every knee shall bow (Philippians 2:8-10).

Using "normal rules" of scriptural interpretation, we are never to draw firm doctrine from only one passage of scripture. Right? Daniel's single use of "Son of Man" (in a "night vision" at that - Dan 7:13), would not be sufficient to claim that the phrase is indeed Messianic, especially given the other 107 times it is not used in that way. 1 Enoch is the missing "second witness" needed (according to all other rules of interpretation) to understand the phrase's double meaning as an enduring Messianic title. It has been argued ever since Enoch's first English translation, that by using this title so familiar to the jewish people, Jesus was actually affirming the truth of this book, that the prophet was taken on many trips to heaven before his "final" translation, and that HE WAS THE ONE whom Enoch saw there - the pre-existent Son of Man, whom Enoch prophesied would judge the souls of all men.

Interestingly, Daniel is ALSO the only OT use of the term "watcher" to ever refer to angels (Daniel 4:13, 17, 23 KJV). Strong's Concordance defines a watcher as a "guardian angel" (Strong's 5894). "The distinguishing character of the Watcher (opposed to other angels in the canon) appears to be that it spends much time among men, overseeing what they are doing. It is also interesting to note that both times one of these angels appeared to Daniel, he took pains to note that it was "an holy one," suggesting that some Watchers are not aligned with God while others are (4)." Found nowhere else in the OT canon but the book of Daniel, "watcher" is patently Enoch's term for these angels. Likewise, Daniel alone used Enoch's term "Son of Man" to refer to the pre-incarnate Christ, adding further intrigue to the case for 1 Enoch's inspiration, and an overall understanding of it's doctrinal acceptance among both Old and New Testament writers.

What we lose out on today by not examining 1 Enoch - even if only for its historical significance - is that it is actually more splendid than ANY OTHER book in our canon in its exultation of Christ as King! It also gives clear, stern and oft-repeated warnings to the unsaved of swift destruction at the Coming of The Lord, but is also full of amazing promises of future glory for the elect! We are of course wise to stay clear of dangerous heresy, but... ask yourself if the below sounds like false doctrine? Keep in mind, this was written at least 200 years before Christ walked the earth, and perhaps before Noah's birth:

Then shall the kings, the princes, and all who possess the earth, glorify Him who has dominion over all things, Him who was concealed; for from eternity the Son of Man was concealed, whom the Most High preserved in the presence of
His power and revealed to the elect.

He shall sow the congregation of the saints, and of the elect; and all the elect shall stand before Him in that day.
All the kings, the princes, the exalted, and those who rule
over the earth shall fall down on their faces before Him,
and shall worship Him. They shall fix their hopes on this Son of Man...

Then the sword of the Lord of Spirits shall be drunk from them (the lost); but the saints and the elect shall be safe in that day; nor the face of the sinners and the ungodly shall they thence-forth behold. The Lord of Spirits shall remain over them; And with this Son of Man shall they dwell, eat, lie down, and rise up for ever and ever...

Enoch 61:10-13


Literally Translated from the Ethiopic by Richard Laurence LL.D.
Archbishop of Cashel
Late Professor of Hebrew in the University of Oxford
 Quoting: Salt


Thread: The Book of Enoch, ETs, and the Church Coverup


There is a book in the Dead Sea Scrolls (and also the bible) that talks about how Lamech was not sure if his wife was pregnant from his own seed or was taken by one of the Watchers. (Lamech's son would be Noah). In the book in the Dead Sea Scrolls, he confronts his wife about it. She insists the unborn baby is Lamech's but Lamech doesn't believe her right away (even tho he wants to very much).




When Jesus says he is the 'son of man', He is clarifying that He was born of a woman.
 Quoting: Salt




You have posed a question that has plagued me for a long time and other have provided answers to which I am greatful.

Thank you all for answering this puzzle for me....and now I know that what Jesus is saying is that

JESUS IS NOT GENETICALLY MODIFIED...HE IS HUMAN
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Yeshua was a God in the form of a man, but STILL A MAN, that came to fulfill a mission.


God WITH US!
 Quoting: S.O.S.


yes, and that is the context of His words when He states that He is the son of man (or the Son of man)

He is saying that He was born of a woman.
He also says He and the Father are one.

there are two things being said.

but, in the context of Son of man, it is about being of the Adamic line, born of a woman, and not born of angels/women.
 Quoting: Salt


God with us is right, born of mankind. The end. There is only one bloodline, from Adam. There is no angel breed or race. That's silly reptillian Icke malarkey. Angels do not breed with women or anything else. They are spirit. God is creator able to impregnate Mary, the virgin.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26103646


i know you have been taught to think this way. but, without going into numerous paragraphs of explanation, this line of thinking would offer serious gaps and inaccuracies in the entire epic.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26103646
United States
10/28/2012 10:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Nephilim is a Hebrew word from the book of Genesis, translated to English having nothing to do with actual giants or fallen angels. The uninspired gnostic book of Enoch was not written by Enoch, and again has no inspiration. Jesus did not use the book of Enoch. It is not to be used as scripture.

[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

Physical giants was the Hebrew word: rapha (Deu 2:11)

Angels do not breed or procreate. The passage has nothing to do with fallen angels, and all early Christian Bible commentators understood this.

[link to www.youtube.com]

[link to davelivingston.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26103646


angels do not MARRY.
there is a big difference.
 Quoting: Salt


ANGELS are SPIRIT beings never given charge to procreate as God's creation of mankind were told "go forth and multiply".
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15256858
United States
10/28/2012 10:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
JESUS IS SAYING THAT HE IS HUMAN AND NOT AN ALTERED CREATION OR A GENETICALLY MODIFIED OR ENGINERRIED BEAST.

HE IS "PURE" AND OF A MAN AND A WOMAN.

BORN OF A WOMAN AND A MAN = PURE AND HUMAN AND NOT

A CREATION FROM A LAB OR A DEVIANT OR A MODIFIED OR SPLICED OR SECTIONED ANOMALY.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Nephilim is a Hebrew word from the book of Genesis, translated to English having nothing to do with actual giants or fallen angels. The uninspired gnostic book of Enoch was not written by Enoch, and again has no inspiration. Jesus did not use the book of Enoch. It is not to be used as scripture.

[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

Physical giants was the Hebrew word: rapha (Deu 2:11)

Angels do not breed or procreate. The passage has nothing to do with fallen angels, and all early Christian Bible commentators understood this.

[link to www.youtube.com]

[link to davelivingston.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26103646


angels do not MARRY.
there is a big difference.
 Quoting: Salt


ANGELS are SPIRIT beings never given charge to procreate as God's creation of mankind were told "go forth and multiply".
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26103646


angels can split a cell. it was Gabriel who came to Mary. Yes, it was God that was placed inside her womb.

angels can procreate. they can insert dna and split a cell in a woman's womb.

consider this data:

Evidence for the existence of the Nephilim goes beyond the biblical record. The story of Lamech, found in the Genesis Apocryphon, relates how Lamech had been away from home on a long journey. When he finally came back, he discovered to his chagrin, that his wife, Bat-Enosh (sometimes spelled as "Bit- Enosh," i.e. the daughter of Enosh) had given birth to a baby boy in his absence. He was sure that the child had not been sired by him, and what is more, the child bore no resemblance to him or to anyone else in the family. Adding to the mystery was the fact that the boy was extremely beautiful, and when he opened his eyes he lighted up the whole house.

"I have begotten a strange son," said Lamech, "...his nature is different and he is not like us, and his eyes are as the rays of the sun, and his countenance is glorious.
And it seems to be that he is not sprung from me but from the Angels..." (1)

Lamech did what most husbands would have done: he reproached his wife for infidelity. Bat-Enosh, however, swore by all that was sacred that Lamech himself must have fathered the child. She had not known any other man, not a stranger and note this--not a Watcher or Heavenly Being.

How enlightening for our study! Who were these Watchers or Heavenly Beings? According to the Book of Daniel they were fallen angels (Daniel 4:13,17, 23).

Here is the statement made by Bat-Enosh as it reads in the Lamech Scroll:

"My lord and kinsman, remember my delicate feelings. How (ever), the occasion is indeed alarming, and my soul (is writhing) in it's sheath. I will tell you everything truly."

Then she saw how perturbed her husband was, and decided to repress her passion and indignation a little:

"My lord and kinsman, (I will ignore) delicate feelings and swear to you by the Holy (and) Great One, the Sovereign of heaven (and earth) that this seed came from you, conception was by you, and this fruit was planted by you and not by some stranger or any of the Watchers or heavenly beings. (Have done with) this troubled and marred expression and this gloomy mood. I am telling you the truth." (2)

Lamech by this time must have begun to realize that the child born could have been conceived by one of these Watchers or Heavenly Beings. If so, his child belonged to the Nephilim.


MYSTERY OF NOAH'S BIRTH

Not completely sure as to what to believe, Lamech sought the advice of his father on the matter. Methuselah listened attentively as Lamech revealed this strange story, then promised his son that he would seek the advice of his father, the wise and godly Enoch. Since the family's reputation was at stake, something had to be done.

Enoch, whose name meant "the intelligent" or "the learned," sensed the meaning of what had happened. He sent Methuselah home with the disturbing news that the Earth would soon be visited by a terrible catastrophe and judgment. It was clear that corruption had taken place, and that the human race had become tainted. God would soon be moving in judgment, and human flesh would perish. And as for this little boy, whose birth remained a mystery, he should be raised by Lamech, and should be called Noah. What is more, little Noah had been specially chosen by God to survive this coming judgment, and would be the progenitor of the new inhabitants of planet Earth.

Despite the mystery surrounding his birth, Noah could not be one of the Nephilim, as we shall see in a later chapter. There is no doubt, however, that the unusual circumstances of his birth convinced Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech and Bat-Enosh that strange things were happening on the Earth.

The Genesis Apocryphon is not the only extrabiblical documentation. Numerous other documents indicate the existence of the Nephilim. I do not place these documents on par with Scripture, nevertheless they seem to corroborate Scripture. My sole purpose for introducing them is simply to state that they exist and that they share common features with the Scriptures.

[link to www.bibliotecapleyades.net]
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
JESUS IS SAYING THAT HE IS HUMAN AND NOT AN ALTERED CREATION OR A GENETICALLY MODIFIED OR ENGINERRIED BEAST.

HE IS "PURE" AND OF A MAN AND A WOMAN.

BORN OF A WOMAN AND A MAN = PURE AND HUMAN AND NOT

A CREATION FROM A LAB OR A DEVIANT OR A MODIFIED OR SPLICED OR SECTIONED ANOMALY.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15256858


correction:
born of a woman.

but, yes, not a modified or spliced/deviant hybrid of fallen angels and women.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 10:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
THE WATCHERS

Significantly, the Book of Enoch (like the Genesis Apocryphon) refers to these "sons of God" as Watchers. A term, as already noted, found in the Book of Daniel. (5) Why this particular word should be used, we are not told; possibly because part of their function was to keep vigil. R.H.C. Charles, who translates the word "watchers" as "the angels, the children of heaven," obviously believed they referred to one and the same beings.

The Book of Enoch alleges that two hundred of these Watchers descended to Earth in the days of Jared (Genesis 5:18), and some of them are given names. The worst one of all is called Azazel. The name occurs in other Jewish documents, like the Apocalypse of Abraham. Azazel is accused of having "scattered over the earth the secrets of heaven and hath rebelled against the Mighty One." His name is also found in ancient Jewish ritual concerning the Day of Atonement. On that day, the iniquities of the people of Israel were laid on the scapegoat, and then the scapegoat was driven away "to Azazel, to the wilderness" (Leviticus 16). Azazel was a demon who inhabited a region in the Judean wilderness.

There is an interesting aside on Azazel in a brilliant essay by Dr. Jacob Z. Lauterbach explaining certain "stray references to the activity of Satan on Yom Kippur." The ritual of that day, said Lauterbach, sought to negate Satan's efforts in three ways: The Azazel sacrifice to appease him; the smoke of the incense to drive him away; and the white robes of the High Priest, so different from his usual vestments, a disguise to mislead him. (6)

In the Book of Jubilees a different reason is given as to why the Watchers came to Earth. It was in order "to instruct the children of men and to bring about justice and equity on the Earth." However, the story ends in the same way: instead of instigating justice and equity, they lusted after the women of Earth, and merited the full judgment of God.
[link to www.bibliotecapleyades.net]
T Ceti H.C. Radnarg

User ID: 25547107
United States
10/28/2012 10:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
hi salt have banned me yet? lol
How unfortunate for some rulers when men,women,and children continue to think... Keep repeating the lies loud enough and long enough and just maybe the people will start to believe the lies again and good luck with that...finding your energy open until mars becomes raging aries...
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 11:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
hi salt have banned me yet? lol
 Quoting: T Ceti H.C. Radnarg


i try hard not to ban anyone, especially not members.

and anyway, why would i ban you?
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 11:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
hi salt have banned me yet? lol
 Quoting: T Ceti H.C. Radnarg


i try hard not to ban anyone, especially not members.

and anyway, why would i ban you?
Dr.DoomLittle

User ID: 6231580
United States
10/28/2012 11:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
Yeshua was a God in the form of a man, but STILL A MAN, that came to fulfill a mission.


God WITH US!
 Quoting: S.O.S.


yes, and that is the context of His words when He states that He is the son of man (or the Son of man)

He is saying that He was born of a woman.
He also says He and the Father are one.

there are two things being said.

but, in the context of Son of man, it is about being of the Adamic line, born of a woman, and not born of angels/women.
 Quoting: Salt


and after all it could still just be

SUN of man
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26509731
Thailand
10/28/2012 11:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
literaly it could be 'this man'

or 'a man' or 'just a man'


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26510026


this is the strongest candidate..

the second strongest candidate is:

'son of mankind' or 'son of humanity'

lets get someone form hebrew university or a rabbi..

they will tell you.

------------------------

as a story, the apostles don't know that he is the messiah, and 'the story itself' is that he is relealing that he is the 'son of god'. they then only realize this, when he is raised up..

this is basic stuff..

everyone should know this..
T Ceti H.C. Radnarg

User ID: 25547107
United States
10/28/2012 11:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
cool i can still get in,lol...the bible is metaphor's of our own lives from paradise/the womb with our male /female spirit/adam and eve,through the old testament<childhood with laws) to the new testament<adulthood knowing good and bad) until our death to the world<we realize we are spirit and we have no beginning and no end(no alpha and no omega) for the concepts of gods,goddesses,saviors,prophets,devils ,demons,etc do have an alpha and an omega...but the shared spirit within us all does not, for we existed before the concepts and we created the concepts...hf
How unfortunate for some rulers when men,women,and children continue to think... Keep repeating the lies loud enough and long enough and just maybe the people will start to believe the lies again and good luck with that...finding your energy open until mars becomes raging aries...
T Ceti H.C. Radnarg

User ID: 25547107
United States
10/28/2012 11:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
hi salt have banned me yet? lol
 Quoting: T Ceti H.C. Radnarg


i try hard not to ban anyone, especially not members.

and anyway, why would i ban you?
 Quoting: Salt
cause i know what the bible is and many dont want to hear it because they have heard the surface meanings, over and over and over until they cant get nothing else in,lol...as someone whom faked his death once time said,if you tell the lies loud enough and long enough ,the people will start to believe the lies...
How unfortunate for some rulers when men,women,and children continue to think... Keep repeating the lies loud enough and long enough and just maybe the people will start to believe the lies again and good luck with that...finding your energy open until mars becomes raging aries...
God Loves ALL

User ID: 26279712
United States
10/28/2012 11:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
JESUS IS SAYING THAT HE IS HUMAN AND NOT AN ALTERED CREATION OR A GENETICALLY MODIFIED OR ENGINERRIED BEAST.

HE IS "PURE" AND OF A MAN AND A WOMAN.

BORN OF A WOMAN AND A MAN = PURE AND HUMAN AND NOT

A CREATION FROM A LAB OR A DEVIANT OR A MODIFIED OR SPLICED OR SECTIONED ANOMALY.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15256858


correction:
born of a woman.

but, yes, not a modified or spliced/deviant hybrid of fallen angels and women.
 Quoting: Salt


His genetic Father was Gabriel, the body needed celestial DNA for the incarnation. Most of us starseeds coming in now have modified DNA too, in some manner. I do which is why I have been telepathic since a small child.

With the failure of the Adam and Eve mission, the races did not get adequate genetic uplift, so better DNA is being added in other ways. Jesus left behind 6 children which inserted Gabriel's dna into the population. One child with Mary M. The crucifixion separated them. 5 others with his second wife in India.
The actual Lord's Prayer Given by Jesus 2000 years ago.

"MY SPIRIT, YOU ARE OMNIPOTENT. YOUR NAME IS HOLY. MAY YOUR REALM BE INCARNATE IN ME. MAY YOUR POWER REVEAL ITSELF WITHIN ME, ON EARTH AND IN THE HEAVEN. GIVE ME TODAY MY DAILY BREAD, AND THUS, LET ME RECOGNIZE MY TRANSGRESSIONS AND ERRORS, AND I SHALL RECOGNIZE THE TRUTH. AND DO NOT LEAD ME INTO TEMPTATION AND CONFUSION, BUT DELIVER ME FROM ERROR. FOR YOURS IS THE REALM WITHIN ME AND THE POWER AND THE KNOWLEDGE FOREVER,
AMEN.

Nice video: [link to www.youtube.com] Make this World a Better One

Thread: Walter Russell Quotes Walter Russell thread
T Ceti H.C. Radnarg

User ID: 25547107
United States
10/28/2012 11:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
literaly it could be 'this man'

or 'a man' or 'just a man'


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26510026


this is the strongest candidate..

the second strongest candidate is:

'son of mankind' or 'son of humanity'

lets get someone form hebrew university or a rabbi..

they will tell you.

------------------------

as a story, the apostles don't know that he is the messiah, and 'the story itself' is that he is relealing that he is the 'son of god'. they then only realize this, when he is raised up..

this is basic stuff..

everyone should know this..
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26509731
...yeah that rabbi dont even realize the Hebrew name for god looks like 2 elephants standing in front of each other...the male in the back with its long trunk and the female in front with its short truck and it symbolizes the male/female aspect of our -spirit- and not a name for god,lol...
How unfortunate for some rulers when men,women,and children continue to think... Keep repeating the lies loud enough and long enough and just maybe the people will start to believe the lies again and good luck with that...finding your energy open until mars becomes raging aries...
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 21291600
United States
10/28/2012 11:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
hi salt have banned me yet? lol
 Quoting: T Ceti H.C. Radnarg


i try hard not to ban anyone, especially not members.

and anyway, why would i ban you?
 Quoting: Salt
cause i know what the bible is and many dont want to hear it because they have heard the surface meanings, over and over and over until they cant get nothing else in,lol...as someone whom faked his death once time said,if you tell the lies loud enough and long enough ,the people will start to believe the lies...
 Quoting: T Ceti H.C. Radnarg


i've heard your version(s)

not accurate and full of your own interpretations (which are pretty extravagant and humanist in nature.

but, everyone is welcome unless they become so intolerable that it throws the whole thread out the window.
Dr.DoomLittle

User ID: 6231580
United States
10/28/2012 11:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
cool i can still get in,lol...the bible is metaphor's of our own lives from paradise/the womb with our male /female spirit/adam and eve,through the old testament<childhood with laws) to the new testament<adulthood knowing good and bad) until our death to the world<we realize we are spirit and we have no beginning and no end(no alpha and no omega) for the concepts of gods,goddesses,saviors,prophets,devils ,demons,etc do have an alpha and an omega...but the shared spirit within us all does not, for we existed before the concepts and we created the concepts...hf
 Quoting: T Ceti H.C. Radnarg


thats very interesting. so adam and eve are metaphores for the human spirit; in the womb? birth is the consuption of the apple i.e. death of existence in the womb?
T Ceti H.C. Radnarg

User ID: 25547107
United States
10/28/2012 11:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Why does Jesus refer to Himself as the "son of man" and not the "son of God"?
JESUS IS SAYING THAT HE IS HUMAN AND NOT AN ALTERED CREATION OR A GENETICALLY MODIFIED OR ENGINERRIED BEAST.

HE IS "PURE" AND OF A MAN AND A WOMAN.

BORN OF A WOMAN AND A MAN = PURE AND HUMAN AND NOT

A CREATION FROM A LAB OR A DEVIANT OR A MODIFIED OR SPLICED OR SECTIONED ANOMALY.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15256858


correction:
born of a woman.

but, yes, not a modified or spliced/deviant hybrid of fallen angels and women.
 Quoting: Salt


His genetic Father was Gabriel, the body needed celestial DNA for the incarnation. Most of us starseeds coming in now have modified DNA too, in some manner. I do which is why I have been telepathic since a small child.

With the failure of the Adam and Eve mission, the races did not get adequate genetic uplift, so better DNA is being added in other ways. Jesus left behind 6 children which inserted Gabriel's dna into the population. One child with Mary M. The crucifixion separated them. 5 others with his second wife in India.
 Quoting: God Loves ALL
roflmao, angels are created concepts also by our spirit...you "religious" people should be comedians...
How unfortunate for some rulers when men,women,and children continue to think... Keep repeating the lies loud enough and long enough and just maybe the people will start to believe the lies again and good luck with that...finding your energy open until mars becomes raging aries...