# Lifestyles & Discussion > Peace Through Religion >  23 Bible Verses about "The Watchers"

## Ronin Truth

> *23 Bible Verses about "The Watchers"
> *
> 
> *Daniel 4:13 ESV 
> 
> *I saw in the visions of my head as I lay in bed, and behold, a watcher, a holy one, came down from heaven. 
> 
> *Daniel 4:17 ESV
> 
> ...


http://www.openbible.info/topics/watcher

----------


## Ronin Truth

> *The names of the Watchers
> *
> According to the Book of Enoch, exactly 200 Watchers fell to Earth to take human wives. It names 20 of these, explaining that each one was a leader in a group of 10. In his book From the Ashes of Angels, Andrew Collins names a few others, and other reference works corroborate some of the names given in these sources, sometimes with alternate spellings. Through these various sources, I have collected information on what some of these named Watchers taught to mankind. Where there was a variation in wording, I have included both wordings.
> 
> According to Collins, there is no complete record of the names of all 200 Watchers. Most of the names included in Enoch are not included in other books, apocryphal or otherwise; in fact, very few of the others appear inother mythological texts; these include Azazel and Kokabel (Shemyaza is a central character in Storm Constantine's Grigori triology). Azazel is a curious example; although the Watchers, in the beginning of Enoch, swear to Shemyaza, the clear leader, that they will not change their minds about descending. But later, Azazel takes the brunt of the blame for what happens (to his credit, he taught more forbidden items to humankind than the others). He was thrown into the canyon of Duadel, and pinned with sharp rocks, with his face covered. In the Biblical book Leviticus, he is recreated as a desert creature to whom the ancient Israelites dedicated their scapegoats: 
> 
> "Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel. And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord, and offer it as a sin offering; but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the lord to make atonement for it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel." 
> 
> In still later times, Azazel is considered a demon, and is occasionally identified as the devil -- or as one of his chieftains. 
> ...




http://echoes.devin.com/watchers/names.html

----------


## Ronin Truth

> *The rise of the Watchers*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Watchers, biblical angelic figures are once again carving out a reputation. Their popularity is so much on the rise that some UFO researchers have actually argued that they might be the people abducting people. Whether or not the return of the Sumerian gods is factual or merely mythical  their popularity continues to rise. --_ Philip Coppens 
> 
> 
> ...


http://www.philipcoppens.com/watchers.html

----------


## erowe1

Only three of those verses mention watchers, and all three are spoken by the pagan king Nebuchadnezzar about something he saw in a vision.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Only three of those verses mention watchers, and all three are spoken by the pagan king Nebuchadnezzar about something he saw in a vision.


 Thanks for counting.

----------


## Terry1

The "Watchers" and also called "the sons of God" were the father of the giants mentioned in Genesis 6, also called the Nephilim..  These were the fallen angels who went rogue mating with human women.  These are also the same angels that are bound in the earth for their crimes against God and mankind.  

Jude 1:6

6And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 7Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> *Enoch & the Watchers: The Real Story of Angels & Demons
> 
> *February 15, 2014 
> 
> By davidjones 
> 
> By MICHAEL HOWARD
> —
> *Every visible thing in the world is put under the charge of an angel.* – St Augustine
> ...


http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/artic...-angels-demons

----------


## Terry1

These off-spring between the Watchers and human women were also told to have been cannibals.  They made men slaves in order to keep them fed and fed on human flesh as well.  They were so huge and hungry it was almost impossible to satisfy their hunger.    So the story goes.  This is what happens when mankind or angels mate with "strange flesh" or have ungodly immoral sex that goes against the will of God.  Bad things happen as a result--one can expect it if they venture into that realm.

It's also said that when God flooded the earth, some of these giants held onto the side of Ark and survived, but that's simply speculating and nothing that really supports it.

It's a very interesting topic and study with scripture that support it as well.  In fact there is so much in the (Ethiopian version of Enoch) that is supported in the standard Bible that one has to wonder why it was left out--aside from the reasons given at the council.

----------


## erowe1

> These off-spring between the Watchers and human women were also told to have been cannibals.  They made men slaves in order to keep them fed and fed on human flesh as well.  They were so huge and hungry it was almost impossible to satisfy their hunger.    So the story goes.  This is what happens when mankind or angels mate with "strange flesh" or have ungodly immoral sex that goes against the will of God.  Bad things happen as a result--one can expect it if they venture into that realm.
> 
> It's also said that when God flooded the earth, some of these giants held onto the side of Ark and survived, but that's simply speculating and nothing that really supports it.
> 
> It's a very interesting topic and study with scripture that support it as well.  In fact there is so much in the (Ethiopian version of Enoch) that is supported in the standard Bible that one has to wonder why it was left out--aside from the reasons given at the council.


Source?

----------


## Ronin Truth

> These off-spring between the Watchers and human women were also told to have been cannibals. They made men slaves in order to keep them fed and fed on human flesh as well. They were so huge and hungry it was almost impossible to satisfy their hunger. So the story goes. This is what happens when mankind or angels mate with "strange flesh" or have ungodly immoral sex that goes against the will of God. Bad things happen as a result--one can expect it if they venture into that realm.
> 
> It's also said that when God flooded the earth, some of these giants held onto the side of Ark and survived, but that's simply speculating and nothing that really supports it.


Some of them survived somehow, or came back down afterward. The Goliath parentage line for one example. I also find it difficult to imagine enough water to cover the Himalayas. Seems, to me, like that would take much more than 40 days and nights of rain.

----------


## Terry1

> Source?


Enoch is mentioned 11 times in the Old and New testaments.  

Whether or not the book was falsely superscribed being called the pseudepigrapha remains a mystery.  It certainly gives account of the same things that Genesis 6 does as well as Jude, Hebrews and Luke.  So if the church Fathers recommended that this book not be included--I'm assuming they had their own reasons as well.  I recommend reading it in the spirit to rightly divide whether it is or isn't.

----------


## erowe1

> Enoch is mentioned 11 times in the Old and New testaments.  
> 
> Whether or not the book was falsely superscribed being called the pseudepigrapha remains a mystery.  It certainly gives account of the same things that Genesis 6 does as well as Jude, Hebrews and Luke.  So if the church Fathers recommended that this book not be included--I'm assuming they had their own reasons as well.  I recommend reading it in the spirit to rightly divide whether it is or isn't.


I mean what was the source for all the stuff you said in that post?

For example, you mention a council. What council? And where can we learn more about it?

----------


## Terry1

> Some of them survived somehow, or came back down afterward. The Goliath parentage line for one example. I also find it difficult to imagine enough water to cover the Himalayas. Seems, to me, like that would take much more than 40 days and nights of rain.


Goliath was "six cubits and a span," which taking the cubit at 21 inches, is equal to approximately 10 1/2 feet. 

The Nephilim were much larger according to scripture which likened them to the same height as the great cedars which grew anywhere between 40 to 85 feet tall.

You could be right.  I think it will remain a mystery since they had to have simply died out if any of them did survive the flood.  I don't believe the Nephilim were able to reproduce on their own--I'm not sure about that either though.

----------


## Terry1

> I mean what was the source for all the stuff you said in that post?
> 
> For example, you mention a council. What council? And where can we learn more about it?


The Church of Rome had the most influence, but the council of Nicaea is where the final decision was made as to which books would be included--as far as I know anyway.  Can you add anything to that--please do.

----------


## erowe1

> The Church of Rome had the most influence, but the council of Nicaea is where the final decision was made as to which books would be included--as far as I know anyway.  Can you add anything to that--please do.


No, the Council of Nicea did not decide which books belong in the Bible.

----------


## Terry1

> No, the Council of Nicea did not decide which books belong in the Bible.


Okay, so--who did then?

----------


## erowe1

> Okay, so--who did then?


Every individual Christian.

----------


## Terry1

> Every individual Christian.


Really?  Well I certainly didn't expect that answer for sure.  Um--I think there's some gaps in your theology there erowe.

----------


## erowe1

> Really?  Well I certainly didn't expect that answer for sure.  Um--I think there's some gaps in your theology there erowe.


If you can find an ecumenical council that came up with a list of books of the Bible let me know.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> If you can find an ecumenical council that came up with a list of books of the Bible let me know.


https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...ed=0CFgQ1QIoAQ

http://www.gotquestions.org/canon-Bible.html    ???

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Goliath was "six cubits and a span," which taking the cubit at 21 inches, is equal to approximately 10 1/2 feet. 
> 
> The Nephilim were much larger according to scripture which likened them to the same height as the great cedars which grew anywhere between 40 to 85 feet tall.
> 
> You could be right. I think it will remain a mystery since they had to have simply died out if any of them did survive the flood. I don't believe the Nephilim were able to reproduce on their own--I'm not sure about that either though.


40 - 85 feet tall does not seem to me to be bio-mechanically plausible for two-legged mobility in Earth's gravity. I've seen estimates in 8 - 16 foot range. Who knows? A few skeletons of giants have been found around the world. None that I've heard of have even been 20 feet long.

https://www.google.com/search?q=How+...97782&oq=&gs_l=

----------


## Ronin Truth

> *Watchers*
> 
> 
> by Fabrisia
> from Fabrisia Website
> recovered through WayBackMachine Website
> 
> Common to almost all Pagan/Witch/Wiccan traditions is the concept of the Watchers or the Keepers or the Guardians. They are known by many names in many traditions. 
> 
> ...


http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vi...watchers07.htm

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> Okay, so--who did then?


The NT canon was determined by the surviving apostles (Peter, Paul, John, et al) and their contemporaneous associates at the end of the 1st century/early 2nd century. Basically, Christ stated in the gospels that what His known apostles would write of Him would be scripture. Peter stated in his letters that the writings of Paul were scripture, and both in turn regarded Mark and Luke's writing as canon. Just these two connecting links confirm 90% of the NT canon we know. 

The apostles and their direct circle confirmed the rest (James, Jude, Hebrews), such that by the mid 2nd century writings of early apostolic fathers (Martyr, Muratorian document) lists all NT books we know as scripture by 170 AD. Thus the entire NT canon as we know it had been identified by the mid second century.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> The NT canon was determined by the surviving apostles (Peter, Paul, John, et al) and their contemporaneous associates at the end of the 1st century/early 2nd century. Basically, Christ stated in the gospels that what His known apostles would write of Him would be scripture. Peter stated in his letters that the writings of Paul were scripture, and both in turn regarded Mark and Luke's writing as canon. Just these two connecting links confirm 90% of the NT canon we know. 
> 
> The apostles and their direct circle confirmed the rest (James, Jude, Hebrews), such that by the mid 2nd century writings of early apostolic fathers (Martyr, Muratorian document) lists all NT books we know as scripture by 170 AD. Thus the entire NT canon as we know it had been identified by the mid second century.


Are there other biblical sources vouching for the legitimacy of Paul, besides Peter? I've read that the original Apostles (including Peter) viewed Paul as a heretic, and had serious falling outs with him.

*"Christianity is the religion founded by Paul, which replaces Jesus' Gospel with a Gospel about Jesus - a religion that should rather be called Paulinism." -- Dr. Wilhelm Nestle, Church Historian*

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> Are there other biblical sources vouching for the legitimacy of Paul, besides Peter? I've read that the original Apostles (including Peter) viewed Paul as a heretic, and had serious falling outs with him.
> 
> *"Christianity is the religion founded by Paul, which replaces Jesus' Gospel with a Gospel about Jesus - a religion that should rather be called Paulinism." -- Dr. Wilhelm Nestle, Church Historian*


The apostles also attested to or confirmed Luke, which makes Luke's account of Paul being a legitimate apostle also canon. The apostles acted as a "living canon" to affirm the developing _written_ canon at the time they and other primary witnesses of Christ's or the apostles' ministry were alive to so identify it, whereas the views of a 20th century church historian are just an opinion.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> The apostles also attested to or confirmed Luke, which makes Luke's account of Paul being a legitimate apostle also canon. The apostles acted as a "living canon" to affirm the developing _written_ canon at the time they and other primary witnesses of Christ's or the apostles' ministry were alive to so identify it, whereas the views of a 20th century church historian are just an opinion.


I'm much more interested in truth than in "canon". Isn't "canon" just 1,800ish year old commitee consensus opinion? 

BTW, is that THE Luke, or just A Luke? Either way, how do you know?

*"One might say that it became...The exact opposite of what was intended." - Manfred Mezger, Protestant Theologian
"All the good in Christianity can be traced to Jesus, all the bad to Paul." - Franz Overbeck, Protestant Theologian
*

----------


## Peace&Freedom

You seem to not want to accept the truth that Christ authorized the apostles, and that the apostles authorized Paul. Their authority and legitimacy follows from divinity, not consensus opinion. The consensus that followed is simply a secondary confirmation of the original identification of the true scriptures by the apostles.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> You seem to not want to accept the truth that Christ authorized the apostles, and that the apostles authorized Paul. Their authority and legitimacy follows from divinity, not consensus opinion. The consensus that followed is simply a secondary confirmation of the original identification of the true scriptures by the apostles.



Yeah, I'd say that you pretty much got that one right. Appeals to authority don't seem to have the desired effect on me.  Jesus is kinda like that too.  Who authorized the authorities? How do you know?

You may wish to continue this conversation in another of my threads.

Paulinism - FWIW

In the meantime, do you have any "on topic" views or opinions about -- The Watchers?

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> Yeah, I'd say that you pretty much got that one right. Appeals to authority don't seem to have the desired effect on me.  Jesus is kinda like that too.  Who authorized the authorities? How do you know?
> 
> You may wish to continue this conversation in another of my threads.
> 
> Paulinism - FWIW
> 
> In the meantime, do you have any "on topic" views or opinions about -- The Watchers?


I'd say it's always important to straighten out what is scripture and what is not, and show the basis for calling something scripture is _not_ arbitrary or mob-rule based, before going into "on topic' views about supernatural subjects. I think that Enoch's declarations about the watchers are not as legitimate as the scriptural references to them (in your original post). 

I'd also say the watchers' direct activity, and their interbreedings with humans, can explain all the anomalous cases and legends through history from amazing ancient artifacts, giants, legends of gods and demigods, to witches and sorcerers, shape-shifting animals and other monsters, and so on. God has chosen to keep details on most of these supernatural interactions far away from us, as they mostly do not glorify God---which may account for why so many ancient documents are lost to us. Apparently, the less we definitely know about it at this stage of our history, the better.

----------


## pcosmar

> I'd say it's always important to straighten out what is scripture and what is not, 
> 
> 
> 
>  Apparently, the less we definitely know about it at this stage of our history, the better.


Hmm,, 
The Book(s) of Enoch was considered scripture at one time. Jude quoted from it,, referring to it as prophetic. 
Who decided is wasn't?  Could they have been mistaken?

And Enoch stated that it was not written for his present day,, but to a distant future. (when it would be important)

----------


## Ronin Truth

> I'd say it's always important to straighten out what is scripture and what is not, and show the basis for calling something scripture is _not_ arbitrary or mob-rule based, before going into "on topic' views about supernatural subjects. I think that Enoch's declarations about the watchers are not as legitimate as the scriptural references to them (in your original post). 
> 
> I'd also say the watchers' direct activity, and their interbreedings with humans, can explain all the anomalous cases and legends through history from amazing ancient artifacts, giants, legends of gods and demigods, to witches and sorcerers, shape-shifting animals and other monsters, and so on. God has chosen to keep details on most of these supernatural interactions far away from us, as they mostly do not glorify God---which may account for why so many ancient documents are lost to us. Apparently, the less we definitely know about it at this stage of our history, the better.


Thanks, interesting point of view on the Bible. I'm afraid I need to disagree about that.

I am less quick to attribute to God, behaviors that can more easily and simply be attributed to and accounted for by humans. However, on that point to each their own. Occam's razor, for me, proves to be a valuable filtering tool in these sort of matters.

*"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan

*

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> Hmm,, 
> The Book(s) of Enoch was considered scripture at one time. Jude quoted from it,, referring to it as prophetic. 
> Who decided is wasn't?  Could they have been mistaken?
> 
> And Enoch stated that it was not written for his present day,, but to a distant future. (when it would be important)


A stray early church father or two thought it might be scripture, the first century apostles did not. Enoch was an ORAL book, not written down in permanent form until sometime just prior to the AD era (if even that can be pinned down); and it's almost certain it was not written by the Enoch of the Bible. There are several verses in the OT and NT that cite extrabiblical sources as reliable historical texts, but this does not mean they are God-inspired or infallible texts.

Although called prophetic by Jude, _"this does not mean the Book of Enoch is inspired by God and should be in the Bible. Jude’s quote is not the only quote in the Bible from a non-biblical source. The Apostle Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12 but that does not mean we should give any additional authority to Epimenides’ writings. The same is true with Jude, verses 14-15. Jude quoting from the book of Enoch does not indicate the entire Book of Enoch is inspired, or even true. All it means is that particular verse is true."_
Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/book-of-...#ixzz3GExKHqfh 

See also, on the doctrinal errors and contradictions of Enoch compared to canon scripture:
http://christianity.stackexchange.co...d-as-canonical

Finally, the warning that we are in a war between "principalities and powers" extends to the controversies over canon. Satan has wanted to corrupt the biblical canon by promoting non-God inspired or error-filled texts, to muddy the waters so there would be no reliable referent as to God's word. The most serious attempt was trying to get the Roman church to hijack the faith in the 4th century, mix NT teachings up with many pagan traditions, and convert the simple doctrines of salvation by faith alone, the bible alone as sufficient authority, and direct access to Christ, with a complicated works, church tradition, and intercession system.  

In short, to turn God's unique revelation into another man-based religion. God fought back by insuring it would be the apostles and their circle who determined the canon, early in the first centuries, to keep the other side from contaminating it (and this allowed the Reformation to eventually restore mass understanding of the true core of the faith). We should be mindful the demonic attempt to obscure the true Word of God through 'canon questioning' or de-emphasis is ongoing, to this day.

----------


## moostraks

> A stray early church father or two thought it might be scripture, the first century apostles did not. Enoch was an ORAL book, not written down in permanent form until sometime just prior to the AD era (if even that can be pinned down); and it's almost certain it was not written by the Enoch of the Bible. There are several verses in the OT and NT that cite extrabiblical sources as reliable historical texts, but this does not mean they are God-inspired or infallible texts...





> Whilst this book does not form part of the canon of Holy Scripture for the larger Christian Churches, various groups, including the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, regard parts or all of 1 Enoch to be inspired Scripture. The currently known texts of this work are usually dated to Maccabean times (ca. 160s BC).


http://orthodoxwiki.org/Book_of_Enoch

Found this for those who might be interested...

----------


## pcosmar

> A stray early church father or two thought it might be scripture,





> It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones,  to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.


 not sure I would classify Jude as a stray,




> *Jude* (alternatively Judas or Judah) was one of the four brothers of Jesus (Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55) according to the New Testament. He is traditionally identified as the author of the Epistle of Jude, a short epistle which is reckoned among the seven general epistles of the New Testament - placed after Paul's epistles and before the Book of Revelation - and considered canonical by Christians


but I do question the Counsel of Laodicea.* in total*

----------


## Ronin Truth

> http://orthodoxwiki.org/Book_of_Enoch
> 
> Found this for those who might be interested...


I'm interested. Thanks!

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> not sure I would classify Jude as a stray,


Nor would I. Jude affirmed the truth of the _quote_ from Enoch, but that is not the same thing as calling all of Enoch scripture. I class Jude as one of the primary witnesses who with the apostles created the written NT canon. The "church fathers" are the figures from the second century onward, who continued building the church _after_ the apostolic era (of still living apostles and principal witnesses) had passed.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> *What is the watcher in the Bible?*
> 
> *Are "Watchers" a special class of angel?
> *
> 
> *Thank you for your question.
> *
> The word translated watcher(s) occurs just 3 times in the Aramaic section of Daniel.
> 
> ...




http://www.thisisyourbible.com/index...ow&mediaid=520

----------


## pcosmar

> Nor would I. Jude affirmed the truth of the _quote_ from Enoch, but that is not the same thing as calling all of Enoch scripture.


So "scripture" was defined by folks 250 years after Christ? after all who had walked with him were dead.

Jude referred to it as prophecy. Prophecy is the words of God spoken by men.

Ignore this if you wish.. but I would rather you seek to understand what was spoken and not dismiss it out of hand.

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> So "scripture" was defined by folks 250 years after Christ? after all who had walked with him were dead.
> 
> Jude referred to it as prophecy. Prophecy is the words of God spoken by men.
> 
> Ignore this if you wish.. but I would rather you seek to understand what was spoken and not dismiss it out of hand.


NT scripture was decided and defined by the still living apostles and contemporaneous associates of the *first century*, NOT CHURCH FATHERS WHO CAME CENTURIES LATER. There were many 'prophets' in ancient times, it does not mean they were of God. Prophets of God were determined by their consistent record of predicting true events, not one comment here or there. Jude did not confirm anything other than the one prophecy statement in Enoch that appears in canon scripture, as coming from God.

----------


## Ronin Truth

*Nephilim Watchers and Giants*

Uploaded on Dec 2, 2009

Corrupters of the world, the Nephilim have fathered two separate generations of giants in the world, which are still effecting us to this day. Their fathers were the angels thrown out of heaven by God for the crimes of pride, jealousy, and lust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYMg-Z63GZI

BTW, wouldn't God have seen that coming?

----------


## pcosmar

> [SIZE=3][B]
> 
> BTW, wouldn't God have seen that coming?


I believe that He did.
And I have come to believe that He is allowing it to continue for a reason.

----------


## Ronin Truth

*Nephilim pictures, real evidence, proof of the bible. ( read info please )* 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmA_lyYJLu0

----------


## Ronin Truth

> *Göbekli Tepe: Making us rethink our ancestors*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> German archaeologist Professor Klaus Schmidt first came to Turkey in 1978 for research but it wasnt until 1994 that he realized the importance of Göbekli Tepe, an early Neolithic site in the southeast of Turkey. He tells us about sites discovery, its importance, what has been uncovered to date and also has a message for those who traffic in antiquities.
> 
> *Nothing left to discover? Think again*
> 
> ...


http://www.todayszaman.com/expat-zon...rs_233727.html

----------


## pcosmar

> NT scripture was decided and defined by the still living apostles and contemporaneous associates of the *first century*,


No it was not.
"Cannon" was decided and defined by the Counsel of Laodicea. about 363–364 AD

Long after the the Apostles,, and generations after all first hand witnesses were long dead.
And after the Political Church had come to be. (State church)

----------


## jmdrake

> *Nephilim pictures, real evidence, proof of the bible. ( read info please )* 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmA_lyYJLu0


Ummmmm.....that video claims a skeleton of someone 8'4" is a "nephalim".  But there are people that are just that tall.  They don't have "12 fingers and 12 toes" or anything else special about them other than being really really tall.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> Ummmmm.....that video claims a skeleton of someone 8'4" is a "nephalim". But there are people that are just that tall. They don't have "12 fingers and 12 toes" or anything else special about them other than being really really tall.


Yeah, there does seem to be some confusing labeling and terminology going around about this stuff.  My current understanding is the that the nephilim/human female offspring hybrids were the giants and monsters.  That gene pool was apparently not wiped out by the flood of Noah/Gilgamesh.  

It does tend to get pretty confusing.

----------


## pcosmar

> That gene pool was apparently not wiped out by the flood of Noah/Gilgamesh.  
> 
> It does tend to get pretty confusing.


I suspect that they have refined their offspring,, so as to be less obvious.
 I do not believed that they have reformed,, or repented their ways.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> I suspect that they have refined their offspring,, so as to be less obvious.
> I do not believed that they have reformed,, or repented their ways.


Well according to the Sumerian clay tablets history, **** Sapiens are a creation of indigenous hominids and Annunaki DNA genetic engineering.  I'm curious about which Earth females species the "Nephilim" found so attractive to breed with, in the first place.

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> No it was not.
> "Cannon" was decided and defined by the Counsel of Laodicea. about 363–364 AD
> 
> Long after the the Apostles,, and generations after all first hand witnesses were long dead.
> And after the Political Church had come to be. (State church)


According to Jesus, what the apostles and contemporaries they approved of said about the faith would be the true record, not statements or decisions made by church fathers centuries later. The divine authority to decide what was scripture thus extends only to the lifetime of the surviving apostles, witnesses and associates. Christ set the parameters for what would be authoritative, that put a time limit on the deciding and defining of canon that ended in the first century, thus it cannot include the claims of counsels later, whom Christ did NOT affirm had such authority.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> A stray early church father or two thought it might be scripture, the first century apostles did not. Enoch was an ORAL book, not written down in permanent form until sometime just prior to the AD era (if even that can be pinned down); and it's almost certain it was not written by the Enoch of the Bible. There are several verses in the OT and NT that cite extrabiblical sources as reliable historical texts, but this does not mean they are God-inspired or infallible texts.
> 
> Although called prophetic by Jude, _"this does not mean the Book of Enoch is inspired by God and should be in the Bible. Judes quote is not the only quote in the Bible from a non-biblical source. The Apostle Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12 but that does not mean we should give any additional authority to Epimenides writings. The same is true with Jude, verses 14-15. Jude quoting from the book of Enoch does not indicate the entire Book of Enoch is inspired, or even true. All it means is that particular verse is true."_
> Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/book-of-...#ixzz3GExKHqfh 
> 
> See also, on the doctrinal errors and contradictions of Enoch compared to canon scripture:
> http://christianity.stackexchange.co...d-as-canonical
> 
> Finally, the warning that we are in a war between "principalities and powers" extends to the controversies over canon. Satan has wanted to corrupt the biblical canon by promoting non-God inspired or error-filled texts, to muddy the waters so there would be no reliable referent as to God's word. The most serious attempt was trying to get the Roman church to hijack the faith in the 4th century, mix NT teachings up with many pagan traditions, and convert the simple doctrines of salvation* by faith alone, the bible alone as sufficient authority, and direct access to Christ, with a complicated works, church tradition, and intercession system. * 
> ...


Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura, and the other Solas come from the imagination of Reformationists.  They're neither biblical nor apostolic teachings.  Church tradition has been held as authoritative by Christians for 2000 years.  There is nothing unbiblical/invalid about intercessions.  Even Lutherans, Anglicans, and Methodists believe in this doctrine.

----------


## Ronin Truth

> The Nephilim Giants
> 
> Copyright © 2003, Wm. Michael Mott 
> 
> _This piece was originally a post to the fantasticreality discussion group at Yahoo!Groups._
> 
> Who were the Nephilim? The heart of the matter lies in the ancient accounts of the Nephilim and their offspring--who and what they really were, what they did, where they are now, what their agenda is, and so on. 
> 
> Conclusions about the nature of the Nephilim, as borne out by quotes from the book of Enoch, as well as the Books of Jude and Revelation, present a remarkable picture, as do the actual mentions in the original Old Testament of the Nephilim, Anakim (Anunna/Anunnaki), Rephaim, and Rapha--along with others descended from Nephilim forbears. In fact, the traditional Hebrew view is that the "rapha," meaning, interchangeably, "irrevocably dead," "evil spirits," "demons," and GIANTS, are the spirits of the half-angelic Nephilim offspring that were killed in the great cataclysm we remember as the Flood. This is not a tall tale, but a truth of which Christ and his disciples were aware. This is why they quoted from the book of Enoch. 
> ...


 http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/giants/giants.htm

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> According to Jesus, what the apostles and contemporaries they approved of said about the faith would be the true record, not statements or decisions made by church fathers centuries later. The divine authority to decide what was scripture thus extends only to the lifetime of the surviving apostles, witnesses and associates. Christ set the parameters for what would be authoritative, that put a time limit on the deciding and defining of canon that ended in the first century, thus it cannot include the claims of counsels later, whom Christ did NOT affirm had such authority.


The apostles handed down their authority through apostolic succession.
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Apostolic_succession



> *Apostolic succession* is the tracing of a direct line of apostolic ordination, Orthodox doctrine, and full communion from the Apostles to the current episcopacy of the Orthodox Church.  All three elements are constitutive of apostolic succession. 
> It is through apostolic succession that the Orthodox Christian Church is the spiritual successor to the original body of believers in Christ that was composed of the Apostles. This succession manifests itself through the unbroken succession of its bishops back to the apostles. 
> The unbrokenness of apostolic succession is significant because  of Jesus Christ's promise that the "gates of hell" (Matthew 16:18) would  not prevail against the Church, and his promise that he himself would  be with the apostles to "the end of the age" (Matthew 28:20). According  to this interpretation, a complete disruption or end of such apostolic  succession would mean that these promises were not kept as would an  apostolic succession which, while formally intact, completely abandoned  the teachings of the Apostles and their immediate successors; as, for  example, if all the bishops of the world agreed to abrogate the Nicene Creed or repudiate the Holy Scripture. 
> Orthodox teachings today are the same as that of the first  apostles, though their mode of expression has adapted over the centuries  to deal with heresies, changes in culture and so forth.  This form of  the doctrine was first formulated by St. Irenaeus of Lyons  in the second century, in response to certain Gnostics.  These Gnostics  claimed that Christ or the Apostles passed on some teachings secretly,  or that there were some secret apostles, and that they (the Gnostics)  were passing on these otherwise secret teachings. Irenaeus responded  that the identity of the original Apostles was well known, as was the  main content of their teaching and the identity of the Apostles'  successors. Therefore, anyone teaching something contrary to what was  known to be apostolic teaching was not, in any sense, a successor to the  Apostles or to Christ. 
> In addition to a line of historic transmission, Orthodox Christian churches additionally require that a hierarch maintain Orthodox doctrine as well as full communion  with other Orthodox bishops.  As such, the Orthodox do not recognize  the existence of apostolic succession outside the Orthodox Church,  precisely because the episcopacy is a ministry within the Church. 
> 
> *Scriptural references to Apostolic Authority* No one else dared join them, even though they were highly regarded by  the people. Acts 5:13 (Note: this shows that the early Christians had a  reverence for them)  
> 
> We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and  disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. Acts 15:24  
> ...

----------


## Ronin Truth

the watchers in bible

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...40.7BqYpz4d7kc

----------


## pcosmar

> , thus it cannot include the claims of counsels later, whom Christ did NOT affirm had such authority.


And yet,,, it was 360 years later that "cannon" was defined,, and that was after the creation of a State Church (through Constantine).

And nothing in the known (abridged) accepted scripture contradicts what was recorded by Enoch.
It only expands on, and illuminates what is recorded elsewhere in scripture.

I accept it,, as did Jude,, the brother of Jesus,, as prophecy. (and therefore relevant)

----------


## Peace&Freedom

> And yet,,, it was 360 years later that "cannon" was defined,, and that was after the creation of a State Church (through Constantine).
> 
> And nothing in the known (abridged) accepted scripture contradicts what was recorded by Enoch.
> It only expands on, and illuminates what is recorded elsewhere in scripture.
> 
> I accept it,, as did Jude,, the brother of Jesus,, as prophecy. (and therefore relevant)


Men hundreds of years after Jesus making claims they are "deciding the canon" does not establish they had such authority FROM JESUS to do so. Jesus is the authority for what is canon, not man. Christ's mandate was limited to the apostles and their contemporaries, with no open-ended authority given to them to authorize any 'ongoing canon' by successors the apostles would NOT be around to approve of. This is one reason why the end of the book of Revelation stresses that the canon was completed. Apostolic succession is a Roman invention and utter distortion of the scriptures, as are other pagan-drenched doctrines it conflated the faith with. 

Jude did _not_ accept Enoch as divinely inspired scripture, only as a historically reliable source. He cited a statement from it and confirmed it was true. That does not confirm the other statements from that book that patently contradict true canon scripture:




> What we don't know is when The Book of Enoch was written, who the author was, or what Jude was quoting.  (The best I can tell, the Biblical figure Enoch was not the author, but rather, someone who lived closer to the time of Christ, or possibly even after, based on some of the references.) There are many arguments on all sides of this debate, but the real question in the back of many Christian minds is:
> Is it Scripture?
> 
> Is this the Holy-Spirit inspired word of God? This is where we can pretty confidently say "no". If it were Scripture, we would expect it to be free of false doctrine. What we find instead is that false doctrine is one of the most prevalent themes in the book!
> 
> Taking a cursory look at the text up through Chapter 59, I found the following false doctrines. (I may be off on one here or there, but it should be sufficient to get my point across.)
> 
> 
> 1:1 Implies restoration during tribulation - not congruent with scriptures.
> ...


http://christianity.stackexchange.co...d-as-canonical

----------


## Ronin Truth

Hey, whatever is required to make the post-Jesus Paulinism agenda to work out. 

Right?

----------


## pcosmar

> Men hundreds of years after Jesus making claims they are "deciding the canon" *does not establish they had such authority FROM JESUS to do so*.


I agree..
And yet Canon *was* decided by them.  It was decided 360 years after .

I personally,, disagree and reject that decision.

----------


## Ronin Truth

*the watchers fallen angels
*
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...ed=0CGEQ1QIoAA

----------


## Ronin Truth

*the grigori

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...ed=0CGEQ1QIoAw*

----------


## Ronin Truth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDLuQ35mItg

----------

