Section 9B .. The Future/
Index To The Days Of Noah


003white  Index to Section 9B... The Future         >         Days of Noah


The Days Of Noah

Carol Brooks

Our Lord said "As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the days of the coming of the Son of Man," (Matthew 24:37, Luke 17:26). He linked these two periods of history, and said that one is the parallel of the other.  The nearness of His coming makes it crucially important that we understand what occurred in the days of Noah.



The Sons of God
Noblemen, Aristocrats, Kings?
Descendants of Seth?

The Line of Cain
Lamech and Worldy Pursuits

The Line of Seth
Genesis 4:26... The Standard Understanding of This Verse Is Impossible
The Two Other Options
In Summary
Additional Evidence That Points Away From The Sons Of God Being The Sons Of Seth

So Who Were The "Sons of God" and "Daughters of Men"

Objections to The Fallen Angel Scenario
Angels Do Not Marry etc.
Were The Fallen Angels Demonic Beings?

Could Noah Have Been The Only Righteous Man?

A Hundred And Twenty Years

Tales, Folklore And Tradition... Based On Primitive Truths?
Demigods in Greeks Mythology, Hinduism etc. The Titans

The Nephilim
Several Words To Describe This Hybrid Offspring

Who, or What, Were The Inhabitants Of Canaan?
7 Related or Allied Tribes Lived in Canaan... All of Whom Were Men OF Great Size
Specific Named Giants After The Flood
Early Instructions Regarding The Canaanites
Israel's Failure To Completely Destroy The Canaanites

The Overlooked Implications
The Personal Pronoun in Daniel's Prophecy

The "Masters" in The Occult

The Lord Jesus specifically taught that the days of Noah and the days of the Son of Man parallel each other. In His words. "As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the days of the coming of the Son of Man," (Matthew 24:37, Luke 17:26). He linked these two epochs together and said that one is the parallel of the other. In other words, in the days immediately preceding the return of Jesus Christ, we should expect to find conditions similar to those that existed just before the flood. The Bible is very clear as to what those conditions were.

    Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. The Lord said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them." (Genesis 6:5-7 NASB)

Words which pretty much wipe out the doctrine of Post-millennialism which holds that the church will progressively bring righteousness to the world, or control it to the extent that there will be "peace on earth" for 1,000 years. Following a brief time of tribulation, Christ will return and establish a new heaven and a new earth for all eternity. (See The Millennium)

However, there is something else that we need to pay attention to. Genesis also tells us. Emphasis Added

    Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. Then the Lord said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. (Genesis 6:1-4 NASB)

There is a great deal of controversy among Bible scholars as to the exact nature of the events described in these verses. I suspect much of stems from the fact that Christians seem to like their theology nice and tidy and are reluctant to accept anything that is even remotely bizarre. We, therefore, tend to try and explain away anything that offends our orderly version of history and the supernatural world. One devil with horns and a pitchfork we can accept, but not some mysterious and very powerful 'masters,' nor angels who fathered children with human women.

It has been said that an understanding of these verses is not one of the critical issues which underlie one's salvation, which is certainly true. However, if we are living in the days immediately preceding the return of Jesus Christ, we can expect conditions similar to those that existed in the days of Noah. Therefore, so as to be prepared for what the future holds, it is imperative that we understand who these sons of God were, and what behavior they will replicate. It is extremely silly to either gloss over these verses, or blindly accept the 'sanitized' version. Having accurate information is exceedingly important to prepare us for what is to come in the not too distant future.

Those who don't take the Bible literally, or seriously, are quick to call the account a myth, even though Moses spoke of it as an actual historical event. On the other hand, conservative scholars who seem to have great difficulty with these passages, endeavor to provide one or two possible explanations which fit their ideas of what is and isn't possible in the spirit world.

The problem is that none of these explanations hold water.

An accurate interpretation of Genesis 6:1-6 hinges upon the definition of three key terms, the sons of God, the daughters of men, and the Nephilim. However, this has to be done honestly... letting the text tell us what it means, instead of attempting to force it into saying what we consider palatable, or even possible.

The Sons of God:
The term translated "the Sons of God" is the Hebrew B'nai HaElohim or Sons of Elohim. Elohim in the Old Testament most often refers to the one God of the Israelites,

    "And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all that they chose. And Jehovah said, My spirit shall not strive with man for ever, for that he also is flesh: yet shall his days be a hundred and twenty years. The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown: [Genesis 6:1-4. Emphasis Added]

Who Were These Sons of God?
There are three possible answers to the question

    The first and least likely, theory is that these sons of God were noblemen or aristocrats of the land, who intermarried with women who were not highborn.

    The second theory, advanced by many conservative scholars, is that the sons of God were the descendants of Seth (Adam and Eve's third son), who married unbelieving ungodly women.

    The third, and most bizarre theory, which was the view of both the translators of the Septuagint and the early church fathers, is these sons of God were fallen angels who through cohabitation with human women produced very strange hybrid offspring called the "Nephilim. [See The Septuagint]

Since all three viewpoints cannot possible be true, we need to examine the pros and cons of each one.

Noblemen, Aristocrats or Kings
In the ancient Near East, it was common practice for the pagan ruler to be called the son of one of their deities. For example Egyptian pharaohs like Tutankhamun were called the son of the god Re. [See Wikipedia article on Tutankhamun].

Although it is true that, on at least one occasion, the judges of Israel were referred to as gods...

    I said, "You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High." Nevertheless you will die like men And fall like any one of the princes." [Psalm 82:6-7]

But, read in context, the term "gods" is used more as irony... language that normally signifies the opposite. The judges in Psalm 82 were being condemned for showing partiality to the wicked instead of delivering the weak and needy out of their hands. The statement, "Nevertheless, you will die as men," indicates that far from being gods, they were condemned to death. [See The Deification of Man]. Similarly, Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians 4:8.. "you have already become rich, you have become kings without us " was dripping with sarcasm, and written to admonish them [See Vs. 14].

However, no king or other noble in Israel.. in fact no one in the Old Testament, besides Adam, was ever called son of God, a term which has a very precise definition in the Bible. More about that below.

Descendants of Seth
The second theory is that the sons of God in Genesis 6 referred to the line of Seth.

    Adam had relations with his wife again; and she gave birth to a son, and named him Seth, for, she said, "God has appointed me another offspring in place of Abel, for Cain killed him."  (Genesis 4:25 NASB)

Possibly because Seth was born to Adam and Eve to replace the righteous Abel, many students of the Bible have been taught that Seth's descendants remained holy and faithful. However, following in the footsteps of their father, Cain's descendants were ungodly and rebellious.

It is therefore believed that the sons of God refer to the Seth's male descendants, and the daughters of men are Cain's female descendants. The resulting marriages supposedly blurred an inferred separation between them. One line of reasoning for this belief is that since the generations of Cain and Seth are outlined in detail in the previous two chapters, it is reasonable to conclude that chapter six is continuing the discussion about these two family lines.

Since it avoids the bizarre, almost unbelievable, situation of spirit beings copulating with humans, this interpretation is quite palatable and not at all disturbing and is, therefore, taught in many churches today. Nonetheless it is based on a series of assumptions that have absolutely no Scriptural support. There is no evidence, stated or implied, that the entire line of Seth was godly or that the entire line of Cain was ungodly. In any case, the drastic step of drowning the entire human race presupposes an infinitely more sinister situation than marriages between good and bad people.

Besides which Jesus Himself said that the events of Genesis 6 would parallel the days preceding His return (Matt 24:37 and Luke 17:26). I fail to see how the Sethite- Cainite scenario could duplicate itself.

The Line of Cain

Lamech and Worldy Pursuits
Although Cain killed his brother, the Bible never once says, or even infers, that his entire line was particularly ungodly... any more so than the rest of the world at the time. Genesis 6:12 states that all flesh had corrupted His way upon the earth. In fact some of Cain's descendants had names that implied they both recognized and revered God. For example, the name Mechujael, Cain's great grandson, meant smitten of God, while his son Methushael's name meant man of God.

Lamech, about five generations down from Cain, had three sons who were the inventors of many things that both sustain and greatly enrich life.  Jabal- father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock, Jubal- father of all those who play the lyre and pipe, and Tubal-Cain- forger of all implements of bronze and iron (metal working).

In an effort to prove that they were all ungodly, it is said that these were "material pursuits" because the Cainites had a "worldly character" and paid more attention to the practical side of life than the Sethites. I wonder what would be said about the "worldly pursuits" of the modern day Christian.. baseball, concerts, and manufacturing anyone? The truth is, there is not much to condemn in the recorded conduct of the race of Cain. In fact Lamech's family, inventors of the various arts, seem rather remarkable. Interestingly, the line of Cain is traced only until the seventh generation from Adam, while Seth's line is traced much further. One has to wonder if the reason for doing so was to point out the origin of man's inventiveness, enterprise and talent?

Besides which, we have to remember that it is entirely likely that Noah (a descendent of Seth) must have had either natural ability and/or some previous training that stood him in good stead when he built the ark.

It is true that Lamech admitted to his wives that he had killed a man, which many have taken as a proud boast. However, we need to stop inventing reading  into the text details that are neither explicitly stated, nor even implied. The text reads as if Lamech slew the man in self defense. In those days a murdered person's next of kin had a right to revenge his death by taking away the life of the murderer. It could just as well be that Lamech was seeking to reassure his wives that he had done no wrong, comforting them with the thought that if Cain, who had murdered Abel, would be avenged sevenfold, he who had killed in self self-defense would be avenged seventy and seven-fold.

The Line of Seth

Genesis 4:26...
Certainly there were righteous men who found favor with God found among Seth's descendants. For example both Enoch and Noah were direct descendants of Seth [Enoch was Methuselah's father and Noah's great grandfather]. However, a great deal of the arguments in favour of Seth's righteous line stem from the last verse of Genesis 4.

    To Seth, to him also a son was born; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord. [Genesis 4:26 NASB]

The verse above seems straightforward enough but, on reflection, poses more than one problem. To begin with, the usual understanding of this verse does not make sense. If it was only in the time of Enosh that men began to call on God and worship Him, who did Adam and the righteous Abel call upon? Who did Seth himself call upon and worship? In fact, the Bible tells us that Eve praised the Lord after Abel's birth.. "I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord." [Genesis 4:1]

Additionally, the text does not say that the line of Seth began to call upon the name of the Lord. It says that in Enosh's time, men began to call upon the name of the Lord, with absolutely no indication of who was being referred to. We have assumed it means Seth's descendants.

There is however, another possibility - one that paints exactly the opposite picture - that the time of Enosh was ...

The Beginning Of Idolatry
It is entirely possible that the verse in question can be translated as "Then men began to profane the name of the Lord". This is amply supported by Genesis 6:12, that says ALL flesh was corrupted.

    God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth. [Genesis 6:12 NASB]

Further support is found in older texts and Jewish commentaries ...

In chapter three of his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus says that for seven generations the sons of Seth regarded the name of the Lord but, from the seventh generation on, they fell into moral decay and began to worship other gods

    NOW this posterity of Seth continued to esteem God as the Lord of the universe, and to have an entire regard to virtue, for seven generations; but in process of time they were perverted, and forsook the practices of their forefathers; and did neither pay those honors to God which were appointed them, nor had they any concern to do justice towards men. But for what degree of zeal they had formerly shown for virtue, they now showed by their actions a double degree of wickedness, whereby they made God to be their enemy. [1]

The Targums
According to Eliezer Segal who holds a Ph.D in Talmud from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and serves as Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Calgary

    A "Targum" is a translation, but the term is usually used specifically to designate Aramaic translations of the Bible. According to an ancient Jewish tradition, the public reading of the Bible in the synagogue must be accompanied by a translation into Aramaic, which was the spoken language of most Jews in Israel and Babylonia during the Talmudic era. ... As the use of Aramaic declined, the practice of reciting the Targum in the synagogue fell into disuse in most Jewish communities. [2]

According to NTCS the Newsletter for Targumic and Cognate Studies, the Targum of Onkelos reads: [Emphasis Added]

    And Adam knew yet his wife, and she bare a son, and called his name Sheth; Because, said she, the Lord hath given me another son instead of Habel, whom Kain slew. And to Sheth also was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. Then in his days the sons of men desisted (or forbore) from praying in the name of the Lord. [3]

And the Targum of Jonathan says: [Emphasis Added]

    And Adam knew his wife again, at the end of a hundred and thirty years after Habel had been slain; and she bare a son, and called his name Sheth; for she said, The Lord hath given me another son instead of Habel whom Kain slew. And to Sheth also was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. That was the generation in whose days they began to err, and to make themselves idols, and surnamed their idols by the name of the Word of the Lord. [4]

More Modern Commentators
The Companion Bible by Dr. E.W. Bullinger (1837-1913) says

    And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men [profanely] to call upon the name of the Lord. [5]

The Hebrew Chalal
The Hebrew words used in this verse do not necessarily agree with the traditional interpretation of a righteous Enosh in whose time men began to worship the true God. The traditional translation reads [Emphasis Added]

    To Seth, to him also a son was born; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call upon the name of the LORD. [Genesis 4:26 NASB]

The English word began has been translated from the Hebrew chalal which, according to both Brown-Driver-Briggs and Strong's Hebrew and English Lexicona, means "to profane, defile, pollute, desecrate.." etc. While there is no question that the word can also mean "to begin (as if by an opening-wedge)", of the roughly 130-140 instances of chalal in the Old Testament it has, more often than not, been rendered, profaned, polluted, defiled etc.

    If you make an altar of stone for Me, you shall not build it of cut stones, for if you wield your tool on it, you will profane it. [Exodus 20:25 NASB]

    Also the daughter of any priest, if she profanes herself by harlotry, she profanes her father; she shall be burned with fire.  [Leviticus 21:9 NASB]

    I will first doubly repay their iniquity and their sin, because they have polluted My land; they have filled My inheritance with the carcasses of their detestable idols and with their abominations."  [Jeremiah 16:18 NASB]

Adam Clarke, in his commentary, acknowledges

    "that many eminent men have contended that huchal [chalal], which we translate began, should be rendered began profanely, or then profanation began, and from this time they date the origin of idolatry." [6]

In Summary
There is absolutely no Biblical evidence, stated or implied, that the line of Cain was particularly ungodly or the line of Seth particularly godly. In fact, if all of Seth's line were so pure, why were Noah and his sons the only ones saved and the rest of Seth's descendants left out of the Ark to die in the flood? (But then there may be more to this than first meets the eye).

It doesn't make a whit of sense to say it was only in the time of Enosh that men began to call upon the name of the Lord, considering that both his father Seth and his uncle Abel were considered righteous men. In fact the underlying cause of Abel's murder was his offering unto God a more excellent sacrifice than his brother, Cain. Abel obviously did something right.

The weight of evidence points to the fact that men did not start turning to God in the time of Enosh, but rather began profaning His name.

Both the Targums and Jewish commentators agree that it was in the days of Enosh that man began to make themselves idols, calling them by the name of the Lord. Evidence for this is found in Genesis 6:12, just before God told Noah to build the ark. The verse says "all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth" (Genesis 6:12).

But, there is even more evidence that repudiates the idea that the term sons of God referred to the sons of Seth.

Additional Evidence
Command to Remain Separate? There is no evidence that the lines of Seth and Cain kept themselves separate, or were ever instructed to do so. The command for the people of God to remain apart from the unbelieving world was not issued until much later. In Genesis 28:1, Abraham made his servant swear that he would not pick a wife for Isaac from among the Canaanites and, in Genesis 24, Isaac instructed his son Jacob to not choose a wife from the daughters of Canaan. However, it was not until Exodus 34 that there was a direct command from God to avoid any intermarriage lest the daughters of pagan nations made the sons of Israel "play the harlot".

Reverse Intermarriage? And why was this supposed intermarriage a one way street? Supposedly male Sethites married female Cainites, but male Cainites never married female Sethites... godly men married ungodly women, but godly women never married ungodly men.

Arrogance Unlimited: The wording of the text suggests that it was the sons of God that did the choosing, while the daughters of men had little say in the matter. This arrogance would not be the method undertaken by the "godly" sons of Seth.

Were Seth's Female Descendants all Ugly? It also seems slightly out of place that the text specifically says they these sons of God saw that the daughters of men were attractive. Did they not find the women in their own line attractive? What was so special about the daughters of Cain? Besides which, this interpretation of the text implies that only the sons of Seth were godly. What about the daughters of Seth?

Sin Big Enough to Cause the Flood: Reading these verses in context makes it clear that along with man's wickedness, which the Bible calls "great in the earth" [V.5], this cohabitation was a contributing cause of the cataclysmic flood.

It is impossible to reconcile intermarriage between the Sethites and Cainites, which would not be particularly unusual or unnatural, with the destruction of the entire earth, especially since God had never instructed them to remain separate. In fact, at no time, either before the flood or since, has God destroyed, or threatened to destroy, the human race for the sin of "mixed marriages". If God is going to be consistent, He should have destroyed the human race many times over!

The very reason for the later prohibition against intermarriage was that the Israelites would have been enticed to worship idols and bow down to strange gods [Numbers 25:1-2] [See The Phinehas Spirit]. In those days, it was of crucial importance to preserve the nation of Israel, because not only did the Jews have the privilege of being the keepers of the sacred books, with the responsibility to preserve them for posterity, but it was through them that the Messiah came to the world. [See The Apocrypha

However, idolatry was obviously not a reason to destroy the entire world. Even when Moses was up on the mountain waiting to receive the Law and the Israelites had Aaron fashion them a golden calf which they then began to worship, the Lord threatened to only obliterate the nation of Israel, then start again with Moses. In His words, "now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation".

On the other hand, cohabitation between angels and humans would be reason aplenty to destroy what would have become an unbelievably tainted gene pool.

Nephilim: Why would the offspring of a union between the Sethites and Cainites be called the Nephilim? Children born to parents of different religious views are not unnatural' in any way, but all indications are that the Nephilim were very different from normal humans. But more about this later.

As should be perfectly obvious by now, the hypothesis of the sons of God being Seth's descendants is completely unconvincing. It is made even more implausible by the Bible's very specific use of the term sons of God, which again does not fit the Seth theory. If the text was speaking of the sons of Seth and the daughters of Cain, why didn't it simply say.... "the sons of Seth saw the daughters of Cain that they were fair..." Besides which, why would Seth's descendants be referred to as "the sons of God"?

Lets take an in-depth look at the two terms used...

The "Sons of God" and "Daughters of Men
Since it is much shorter, I will begin with...

The Term "Daughters of Men".
The second key expression in these verses is the term "The Daughters Of Men" translated from the Hebrew Benoth Adam, or daughters of Adam.

If the expression daughters of Cain had been used, we would have been justified in assuming the phrase referred to women directly descended from Cain. However Daughters of Adam points to all Adam's natural female descendants. The terms are quite simply not interchangeable.

The idea that the daughters of Cain can be read into text that clearly says daughters of Adam, is an attempt to force the text to fit what we think is or isn't possible in the spirit world.

The Term "Sons of God"
The Biblical term "Sons of Elohim" (son of the Creator Himself) is only used of someone who is born of a specific divine act of creation.

Jesus is referred to as the Son of God throughout the New Testament. While He was with the Father from the beginning, He was also God's Son in that He was conceived in Mary by the Holy Spirit. Luke 1:35 tells us that the angel told Mary ... 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.'"

Adam: In Luke's genealogy of Jesus, only Adam is called a son of God (Luke 3:38) However note very carefully that, except for Adam, who was directly created by God, no human in the Old Testament was ever called a Son of God.

Believers in The New Testament are called Sons of God (John 1:12) because they, being born again of the Spirit of God, are considered to be a new creation. Christ gives them that receive Him the power to become the sons of God who, at their resurrection, will be equal to the angels. [Luke 20:36]

    He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, [John 1:11, 12]

    Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come. [2 Corinthians 5:17]

Since Jesus, Adam and believers can be safely eliminated as the sons of God spoken of in Genesis 6:4, the only remaining option is that the verse is speaking of angels. This option has much in way of support....

The Angels were directly created by the Father and were referred to as B'nai HaElohim or sons of God. Job 1:6 and Job 2:1 tell us that Satan was among the sons of God who came to present themselves before the Lord, which makes it certain that the sons of God were angelic beings. Additionally, the third quote (Job 38:7) could not refer to any other beings besides angels, since man had not even been created at this time.

    Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. [Job 1:6 NASB]

    Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them to present himself before the LORD. [Job 2:1 NASB]

    When the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?  [Job 38:7 NASB]

In Daniel 3:25, when king Nebuchadnezzar looked into the fiery furnace and saw four men, he said "Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm, and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods!" [Daniel 3:25 NASB], he used the words bar elohim... a similar form of the phrase B'nai HaElohim used in Genesis 6. In other words, the pagan king applied the term to a being who looked majestic enough to be ranked among the gods.

It is interesting that no one takes issue with the fact that the angels are the only ones in the Old Testament (beside Adam) called the sons of God, yet the same people will argue that the same exact term (B'nai HaElohim), used in Genesis 6, does not refer to the angels.

Additionally, it may be worth noting that when the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek in the third century before Christ (what we know as The Septuagint, the term sons of God was translated as angels.

Josephus, like many of the ancient Jewish commentators believed that Genesis 6 was talking about literal angels. In chapter three of his Antiquities of the Jews, he wrote...

    For many angels of God accompanied with women, and begat sons that proved unjust, and despisers of all that was good, on account of the confidence they had in their own strength; for the tradition is, that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did; and being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions and their acts for the better: but seeing they did not yield to him, but were slaves to their wicked pleasures, he was afraid they would kill him, together with his wife and children, and those they had married; so he departed out of that land.

I Corinthians: There is a very intriguing verse in I Corinthians which has given rise to no end of speculation and conjecture. It says

    for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. [1 Corinthians 11:9-10 NASB]

Paul instructs women to cover their heads as a sign of subjection to her husband, and also because of the angels. Why this sudden reference to angels? Paul apparently believed that an uncovered woman was a temptation even to the angels, which makes sense in light of Jewish tradition that maintains that it was the beauty of the women's long hair that, in the Genesis 6 account, attracted and tempted the angel.

Objections to The Fallen Angel Scenario

Fallen Angels Can Not Be Sons Of God
One of the reasons given is that these fallen angels can not be described as sons of God. However, a careful reading of the text ("...the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all that they chose") simply says that these sons of God noticed that the daughters of man were attractive. Since no one is considered a criminal before they carry out a crime, it is only when they acted on their desires and left their heavenly abode to intermarry with women that they could actually be considered fallen.

Angels Do Not Marry
In answering the Sadducees who tried to trip Him up, Jesus spoke about the state of man after the resurrection of the body. He said

    "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven." (Matt 22:30-31; Mark 12:25)

So how is it possible that the fallen angels could cohabit with the daughters of man? It is less of a problem than some imagine, since Scripture is very clear that the reason the angels are described as fallen is because they had actually left their first estate, or proper dwelling. They were no longer a part of God's heaven. The word Oiketerion, which means (literally or figuratively) a residence appears only twice in the Bible... in 2 Corinthians 5:2 and Jude 1:6.

    For indeed in this house we groan, longing to be clothed with our dwelling (Gk. oiketerion) from heaven, [2 Corinthians 5:2 NASB]

    And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode (Gk. oiketerion), He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day,  [Jude 1:6 NASB]

While Paul's phrase "to be clothed upon with our house" is unusual, he probably used the word as representing a permanent dwelling place... an eternal body that was not subject to decay. The word oiketerion is used for the state that believers aspire to and the angels abandoned. Until humans achieve this they will continue to marry and produce children. When Jesus said that the angels of God in heaven do not marry, this does not necessarily mean that when they left their proper habitation, something changed and they were able to cohabit with whom they chose. It is in heaven they do not marry, but neither will we.

Jude was certainly very explicit when he used the Greek word ekporneuo, which comes from ek, a primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), and porneuo which means to act the harlot or, literally, indulge in unlawful lust.

Strange Flesh
Although Jude made no bones about the fact that angels left their own habitation, and "indulged in gross immorality", there are those that believe that the "strange flesh" can only refer to homosexuality.

    And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day, just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. [Jude 1:6-7 NASB]

The Greek word heteros translated strange simply means other or different, and is not necessarily a reference to homosexuality. For example 1 Timothy 1:10 says

    for fornicators, for abusers of themselves with men, for menstealers, for liars, for false swearers, and if there be any other (heteros) thing contrary to the sound doctrine;

Jude is certainly comparing the sin of the fallen angels with the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah [Genesis 19].. In both cases a sexual union, unnatural and contrary to nature, is at issue. In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, the strange flesh referred to homosexuality; in the case of the angels, the strange flesh was female.

Note: There are those that believe that Jude was not referring to homosexuality when he penned the statement about the men of Sodom and Gomorrah going after strange flesh. [See Footnote I What Did Jude Mean by "Strange Flesh"?]

Were The Fallen Angels Demonic Beings?
We simply can not assume that the fallen angels were demonic beings, the difference being that the demons rebelled against God and were chucked out of heaven. The fallen angels of Genesis 6 left Heaven to intermarry with the daughters of man, which does not necessarily make them "evil", in the same sense as demons are 'evil'.

While the Bible makes it clear that it was the terrible offspring of the union between women and angels that were to be eliminated off the face of the earth [See the next section on the Nephilim], one does not know the state of mind of the angels confined to Tartarus. 1 Peter 3:18-19 brings up the interesting possibility... that Jesus after His resurrection went and preached to these fallen angels in prison.

    For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation (Gk. kerusso) to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. [1 Peter 3:18-20 NASB]

Since the text refers solely to Noah's generation many, who assume the captive spirits are people, conclude that Peter was suggesting that Jesus went and preached to the people of Noah's generation in a spiritual sense. However, it is impossible that Jesus, in any way, preached the Gospel to people who had already died, because Hebrews 9:27 is unambiguous...."And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment".

There is no such thing as post-mortem salvation... the spirits of dead people cannot be reached with the gospel.

In any case, the text itself reads that Jesus preached to the spirits in prison, not to anyone in Sheol/Hades, which was the abode of the dead. This brings up the strong possibility that this message was delivered to the fallen angels.

However, since it is not made explicit in the text, we can not be sure about is what message Jesus proclaimed to the angels. But, contrary to much I have read on the subject, the Greek word that has been translated "preached" or "proclaimed" (depending on the translation) is kerusso. With, I believe, the sole exception of Revelation 5:2, kerusso is clearly used to proclaim the Gospel in the 60 plus times it is used in the New Testament

    "Truly I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached (Gk. kerusso) in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be spoken of in memory of her." [Matthew 26:13 NASB]

    preaching (Gk. kerusso) the kingdom of God and teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all openness, unhindered. [Acts 28:31 NASB]

Could Noah Have Been The Only Righteous Man?
There are those that find it rather odd that, prior to the flood, Noah was found to be the only righteous person on earth, and that the rest of the earth was filled with violence. Some believe that this is entirely possible because of the small size of the earth's population...

    If we factor in (a) significant gaps in the genealogy; (b) late/low procreativity; and (c) abnormally high incidence rates for infant mortality and for murder/war [see below] we might establish a broad range of population estimates, varying from 15,000-25,000 (the size of the ancient city of Tiberias, or perhaps the combined population of Sodom and its sister cities in Gen 19) to an order of magnitude greater 150,000-250,000 (the size of the ancient city of Nineveh). [8]

Additionally, both archaeological and literary evidence point to the fact that ancient man was exceptionally violent. [See Footnote II].

But there may be another side to this...another reason Noah was spared. Genesis 6:9 says that "Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his time; Noah walked with God". [Genesis 6:9]. The word translated "blameless" is the Hebrew tmym, which has been used some 140 times in the New Testament. What is interesting is that it has very often been used to describe the lambs and bulls that were offered in sacrifice. For example...

    'Your lamb shall be an unblemished (Heb. tmym) male a year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats. [Exodus 12:5 NASB]..

    'He shall present his offering to the LORD: one male lamb a year old without defect (Heb. tmym) for a burnt offering and one ewe-lamb a year old without defect(Heb. tmym) for a sin offering and one ram without defect (Heb. tmym) for a peace offering,  [Numbers 6:14 NASB]

Since animals cannot be morally sound, the word tmym indicates they were to be without physical defect. While there is little question that Noah was a righteous man.. (he walked with God), one has to wonder whether he was also without physically perfect defect ie. tainted genes. We tend to forget that Noah was not the only one saved. His wife, three sons and their wives were as well. So if their family had managed to/happened to steer clear of the "sons of God", they might have been the humans alive free of genetic contamination. If the entire human race had been corrupted, the Messiah... the perfect Son of God, the promised "seed of the woman" would not have been born on earth. Since it was her seed that would defeat Satan, destroy his power over mankind, turning them from the power of Satan unto God;

    And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." [Genesis 3:15 NASB]

    to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.' [Acts 26:18 NASB]

There is little question that The Lord was not going to tolerate this for very long...

A Hundred And Twenty Years
The book of Genesis says

    Then the LORD said, "My spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh, but his days shall be a hundred and twenty years." (Genesis 6:3 RSV)

The verse above is often taken as a reference to the length of man's life before the flood. In other words, prior to this, man often lived several hundred years, but the individual's life span was now limited by God to a hundred and twenty years. However, considering the context, this is probably not the meaning at all, but is quite certainly a reference to how long the entire human race was going to be allowed to live. In other words, God's long-suffering would endure only for one hundred and twenty more years before He put an end to the then prevalent conditions... It was a period of grace.

But even in that relatively short period of time God did not leave humankind without a witness or a warning, which came in the form of Noah, a righteous man who walked with God. Although it probably took Noah a long time to build the Ark, it was apparently ignored by people who had nothing but evil in their hearts. At the end of the set number of years the cataclysmic flood came. Note that Noah was 500 years old when his sons were born (Genesis 5:32) and 600 years old when the flood came.

Tales, Folklore And Tradition... Based On Primitive Truths?

Affairs (or marriages) between spirit beings and mortals is not relegated solely to an obscure passage of Scripture, but is also found in several non Biblical sources... the tales, folklore and traditions of many cultures around the world. Perhaps best known are the Greek myths about the amorous adventures of their gods.

How is this possible? Simply because mythology are not necessarily made up of mere fairy stories that spring from imagination, but originate in the memories of various people around the globe. Considering the common elements that often run through these stories found in multiple cultures, it is not hard to believe that they were essentially based on primitive truths. In other words, true history, embellished and corrupted over time, eventually evolved into the 'myths' that we are familiar with today.

The myths and legends of many major cultures speak of the gods impregnating human women. The resulting half-god, half-man offspring were called demigods and often themselves became legendary figures. For example...

    Greeks Mythology
    Hercules is the Roman name for the Greek divine hero Heracles. In classical mythology Hercules, famous for his strength and for his numerous far-ranging adventures, was the son of Zeus (the Roman Jupiter) and the mortal Alcmene.

    Achilles who fought in the Trojan War was the hero of Homer's Iliad. He was the son of the mortal Peleus and the sea nymph Thetis.

    Perseus who slew Medusa was the son of Zeus and the mortal Danae.

    The five Pandava brothers, the heroes of the Hindu epic Mahabharata, also fit the Western definition of demigods, since the two wives of king Pandu were impregnated by several different gods.

    The Egyptians
    In the kingdom period of Egyptian history, the pharaohs were believed to be the embodiments of Horus, son of Isis and one of the oldest and most significant deities in ancient Egyptian religion. The concept of the Pharaoh as the son of Ra came about during the Fifth Dynasty of Egypt.

These hybrids were stronger, braver, and quicker than other mortals, accomplishing superhuman feats only possible because of their divine parent.

Sound familiar?

But wait! The connections are no where near exhausted.

The Titans
In Greek mythology, the Titans were a race of 12 powerful deities, sons and daughters of Gaia and Uranus, the god of the sky. Cronus, the leader of the Titans, was father of Zeus. When the Titans rebelled against their father Uranus, they were defeated by Zeus and condemned to Tartarus.

In Greek mythology, Tartarus is both a deity and a place in the underworld even lower than Hades. This word only occurs once in the Bible (2 Peter 2:4) where it is wrongly translated "hell". I say "wrongly" because 1) the actual Greek word used is tartaroo, which is a verb. In any case, proper names cannot be translated. Regardless of the language, "Tartarus" has to always be rendered "Tartarus". Additionally, there are no Biblical references to people going to Tartarus which seems to be a separate place from Hades and possibly reserved for fallen angels).

Alice Bailey once wrote

    'After the great descent of the spiritual Existences [the Masters] to the earth, the work they planned to do was systematised. Offices were apportioned, and the processes of evolution in all the departments of nature were brought under the conscious wise guidance of this initial Brotherhood. This Hierarchy of Brothers of Light still exists, and the work goes steadily on. They are all in physical existence, either in dense physical bodies, such as many of the Masters employ, or in etheric bodies, such as the more exalted helpers and the Lord of the World occupy ..."

Compare this to Revelation 12:9

    'The great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him'

So both Greek "mythology" and occult literature tell a very similar story to the one told by the Bible. Additionally, Peter not only links the time of the fall of these angels with the days of the Flood of Noah, but provides an interesting background to Greek "mythology". When the Titans, sons and daughters of Gaia and Uranus, rebelled against their father they were defeated by Zeus and condemned to Tartarus.

    [4] For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment;  [5] and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; [6]  and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter; [2 Peter 2:4-6 NASB] 

Even more tellingly, the Greek Titan is linguistically linked to the Chaldean Sheitan, the Hebrew Satan and the Hindi Shaitan, all of which mean the devil.

[See Alice Bailey and the Lucis Trust]

The Nephilim
Genesis 6:4 is not talking of a physical union between two different tribes of people (the Sethites and Cainites), or even of people with different moral standards and religious beliefs, but is clearly speaking of a far more serious and deviant situation... Fallen angels intermarrying with human women, producing unnatural, superhuman offspring... a new race of beings that were neither human nor angelic. This verse uses several words to describe the hybrid offspring.

    The Nephilim (nephil) were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty (gibbr) men that were of old (lm), the men of renown (shm). [Genesis 6:4. All Emphasis Added]

1. Nephilim. This first word has been transliterated from the Hebrew nephil, but because of some uncertainty in the exact meaning of the Hebrew word, many Bible versions now leave the original word untranslated. However, what is interesting is that all three options have support.

a) Giants:
Nephilim has been translated giants in the King James Version. And there is some reason to believe that they were men of immense stature. The same Hebrew word nephil was used in Numbers 13:33 by the spies sent to scout out the promised land, which was inhabited by several tribes.

    And there we saw the Nephilim (nephil), the sons of Anak, who come of the Nephilim (nephil): and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. [Numbers 13:33]

    I have heard it said that the spies resorted to hyperbole. While it is true that there seems to be some exaggeration, inasmuch as it is very unlikely that the spies actually looked like grasshoppers in the sight of the inhabitants of the land, their words emphasized the very large size of the people settled in Canaan.

b) Distinguished Ones:
Some scholars believe "nephil" comes from niphal which means "distinguished ones", which ties in with the description of them as "men of renown" in the same verse.

c) Fallen Ones:
However, nephil is more usually considered to be derived from the verb naphal which means "to fall". If the angel theory is accurate (and there seems to be overwhelming evidence that it is) the word "fallen" would be extremely accurate.

2. gibbr. The second word translated "mighty men" is the Hebrew gibbr, commonly used to describe warriors in the Old Testament. For example, the same word is used to describe Joshua's fighting men, as well as Jericho's army.

    The Lord said to Joshua, "See, I have given Jericho into your hand, with its king and the valiant warriors (Heb. gibbr) .  [Joshua 6:2 NASB]

    So Joshua rose with all the people of war to go up to Ai; and Joshua chose 30,000 men, valiant warriors (Heb. gibbr), and sent them out at night.  [Joshua 8:3 NASB]

I have chosen to use the Concordant Literal Version's translation of this verse describing Naomi's husband, simply because gibbr does not necessarily mean "wealth" as the KJV and NASB have translated it, but is often translated army, host, might, valour, substance, strength etc.

    Naomi had a near relative of her husband, a man who was a master of valor (Heb. gibbr), of the family of Elimelech, and his name was Boaz.  [Ruth 2:1 CLV]

As used in the Old Testament, the word gibbr denotes strength and power. It would not therefore be surprising if these Nephilim were more powerful than any human especially since they were "fathered" by angels, who mighty in strength. far exceeding that of mortal men. Note that the Greek word dunamis is used for the power of the Father Himself.

    Bless the LORD, you His angels, mighty (Heb. gibbr) in strength, who perform His word, Obeying the voice of His word! [Psalms 103:20 NASB]

    whereas angels who are greater in might and power (Gk. dunamis) do not bring a reviling judgment against them before the Lord. [2 Peter 2:11 NASB]

Additionally, athough not an identical situation, demons can impart superhuman strength to the human body. An example of this is found in the New Testament in Luke 8:27-36 which tells of a possessed man who was kept under guard, and bound with chains and fetters, but who seemed to have little problem snapping his restraints.

However it is to be noted that there is no mention of 'mighty women', which would be strange if this were a product of a normal union which produces both males and females.

3. lm The third Hebrew word used is lm, translated of old. Strong's Lexicon describes this word as being "generally time out of mind (past or future), that is, (practically) eternity";

Used over 400 times in the Old Testament, lm is always used in the sense of eternal and is therefore translated into the English words everlasting, for ever, perpetual etc.

    'So the sons of Israel shall observe the sabbath, to celebrate the sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual (Heb. lm) covenant.' [Exodus 31:16 NASB]

    Israel has been saved by the LORD With an everlasting (Heb. lm) salvation; You will not be put to shame or humiliated To all eternity (Heb. lm). [Isaiah 45:17 NASB]

    "Now let them put away their harlotry and the corpses of their kings far from Me; and I will dwell among them forever (Heb. lm) .  [Ezekiel 43:9 NASB]

4 shm The last word used is shm, translated renown. Strong's Lexicon says shm is definite and conspicuous position. It is again a common word used almost 800 times in the Old Testament and, from Genesis to Malachi, has almost always been translated as name. For example

    The name (Heb. shm) of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold.  [Genesis 2:11 NASB]

    "But for you who fear My name (Heb. shm), the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings; and you will go forth and skip about like calves from the stall.  [Malachi 4:2 NASB]

So if these Nephilim were men of name as Young's Literal translation says, renown works very well.

In Summary, It appears that the Nephilim were physically very large, powerful, renowned and, in some way, of old or eternal, possibly because of their paternal parentage.

But weren't the Nephilim destroyed in the flood?

Apparently not!

Four often overlooked words in Genesis 6:4 tell us differently

Who, or What, Were The Inhabitants Of Canaan?
Those Four Little Words have huge significance. Here they are in context.

    The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.

These four obscure and seemingly innocuous words indicate that although the Nephilim were wiped out during the flood, they were again found on the earth later on. In fact, the same word Nephilim is found in Numbers 13:33, in which they are called the sons of Anak

    And there we saw the Nephilim (nephil), the sons of Anak, who come of the Nephilim (nephil): and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. [Numbers 13:33]

The book of Deuteronomy describes the Anakim thus

    a people great and tall, the sons of the Anakim, whom you know and of whom you have heard it said, 'Who can stand before the sons of Anak?'  [Deuteronomy 9:2 NASB]

    (The Emim lived there formerly, a people as great, numerous, and tall as the Anakim. Like the Anakim, they are also regarded as Rephaim, but the Moabites call them Emim. [Deuteronomy 2:10-11 NASB]

7 Related or Allied Tribes Lived in Canaan
Numbers 13:29 tells us that when the spies entered the land, they saw the descendants of Anak  living there...

    "Nevertheless, the people who live in the land are strong, and the cities are fortified and very large; and moreover, we saw the descendants of Anak there. "Amalek is living in the land of the Negev and the Hittites and the Jebusites and the Amorites are living in the hill country, and the Canaanites are living by the sea and by the side of the Jordan." [Numbers 13:28-29 NASB]

The Amalekites were distant cousins to the Israelites because Amalek was Esau's grandson.... born to Esau's son Eliphaz and his concubine Timna [Genesis 36:12]. They were, apparently, an oppressive, warlike and cruel people. As said by commentator Barnes

    Living as they did in the peninsula of Sinai, they could not but have well known the mighty acts God had done for His people in Egypt and the Red Sea; yet they manifested from the first a persistent hostility to Israel

When the people were leaving Egypt, the Amalekites attacked them [Exodus 17:8]. Not only did they do so without provocation, but they did so in a dastardly manner. They attacked the faint and weary stragglers at the rear of the column of people [Deuteronomy 25:18]. This caused the Lord to pronounce final sentence on them which was carried out under king Saul [1 Samuel 15:3]. And it didn't stop there....

    For it was when Israel had sown, that the Midianites would come up with the Amalekites and the sons of the east and go against them. So they would camp against them and destroy the produce of the earth as far as Gaza, and leave no sustenance in Israel as well as no sheep, ox, or donkey. For they would come up with their livestock and their tents, they would come in like locusts for number, both they and their camels were innumerable; and they came into the land to devastate it. [Judges 6:3-5 NASB]

However the sons of Anak were not the only people the Israelites found occupying the territory that they had been promised. Deuteronomy 7:1 mentions 7 nations who inhabited the land of Canaan from the time of Abraham to the time of Joshua.

    "When the Lord your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you, [Deuteronomy 7:1 NASB]

At least four of these tribes, who's names are in bold in the above quote, were directly descended from Canaan, son of Ham and grandson of Noah.

    Canaan became the father of Sidon, his firstborn, and Heth and the Jebusite and the Amorite and the Girgashite and the Hivite and the Arkite and the Sinite and the Arvadite and the Zemarite and the Hamathite; and afterward the families of the Canaanite were spread abroad. [Genesis 10:15-18 NASB]

While the Perizzites are not specifically mentioned as being related to Canaan they, along with the Rephaim, are lumped together with the Canaanites in Joshua 17:15, 18. The Hittites were closely allied to the Amorites, and are frequently mentioned along with them as inhabiting the mountains of Palestine. All these tribes banded together to fight against the Israelites

    Now it came about when all the kings who were beyond the Jordan, in the hill country and in the lowland and on all the coast of the Great Sea toward Lebanon, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, heard of it, that they gathered themselves together with one accord to fight with Joshua and with Israel. [Joshua 9:1-2 NASB]

    Then it came about, when Jabin king of Hazor heard of it, that he sent to Jobab king of Madon and to the king of Shimron and to the king of Achshaph, and to the kings who were of the north in the hill country, and in the Arabah--south of Chinneroth and in the lowland and on the heights of Dor on the west-- to the Canaanite on the east and on the west, and the Amorite and the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Jebusite in the hill country, and the Hivite at the foot of Hermon in the land of Mizpeh. They came out, they and all their armies with them, as many people as the sand that is on the seashore, with very many horses and chariots. So all of these kings having agreed to meet, came and encamped together at the waters of Merom, to fight against Israel. [Joshua 11:1-5 NASB]

All of Whom Were Probably Nephilim
Note that according to Numbers 13:21-25 the spies spent some 40 days in the land, traveling around a good part of it, and, when they returned, they told Moses and Aaron that all the people that they saw were "men of great stature" or giants.

    So they gave out to the sons of Israel a bad report of the land which they had spied out, saying, "The land through which we have gone, in spying it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants; and all the people whom we saw in it are men of great size. [Numbers 13:32 NASB]

Which is supported by the fact that the Old Testament names several giants who lived on earth after the flood

Specific Named Giants After The Flood
Og, King of Bashan:
His size is indicated by description of his bed. Note that Bashan, was called the land of Rephaim (Heb. rph) [Deuteronomy 3:13]

    For only Og king of Bashan was left of the remnant of the Rephaim (Heb. rph). Behold, his bedstead was an iron bedstead; it is in Rabbah of the sons of Ammon. Its length was nine cubits and its width four cubits by ordinary cubit. [Deuteronomy 3:11 NASB]

Goliath of Gath was the giant slain by David.

    Then a champion came out from the armies of the Philistines named Goliath, from Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. He had a bronze helmet on his head, and he was clothed with scale-armor which weighed five thousand shekels of bronze. He also had bronze greaves on his legs and a bronze javelin slung between his shoulders. The shaft of his spear was like a weaver's beam, and the head of his spear weighed six hundred shekels of iron; his shield-carrier also walked before him. [1 Samuel 17:4-7 NASB]

    And there was war with the Philistines again, and Elhanan the son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.  [1 Chronicles 20:5 NASB]

Unfortunately, the exact length of a cubit is unknown. It was based on the distance from the elbow to the fingertips, so it varied between different groups. However, it is likely that the Israelites used a "short" cubit which was just under 18 inches. If we figure 18 inches to the cubit, Goliath was over nine feet tall and Og's bedstead would be from thirteen to fourteen feet long, and could have been even longer..

Goliath's coat of mail, weighed five thousand shekels of bronze. Ancient bronze weights have been found some marked  "one-quarter shekel" have been found. They have weighed between 2.54 and 2.63, which would make the shekel between 10.16 and 10.52 grams. Averaging it out at 10.25 grams tells us that his armour weighed over two hundred pounds. A "weaver's beam" is probably the frame of the loom, which makes the shaft of Goliath and Lahmi 's spears very large indeed.

 [For more information on these measurements, See Answers in Genesis... How long was the original cubit?
And Weights, Measures, and Coins from the Bible Through the Talmudic Period.

Four Other Giants... all sons of Goliath

    Ishbibenob who was one had a spear that weighed "three hundred shekels of brass" or about eight pounds.

    Saph, about whom no details are given.

    Goliath the Gittites spear was also "like a weaver's beam".

    A fourth son said to be a man of great stature "had on every hand six fingers, and on every foot six toes, four and twenty in number"

Additionally, Flavius Josephus, the noted Jewish historian of the first century A.D., said

    In Hebron there were till then left the race of giants, who had bodies so large, and countenances so entirely different from other men, that they were surprising to the sight, and terrible to the hearing. The bones of these men are still shown to this very day. [9]

Early Instructions Regarding The Canaanites:
What we tend to forget is that when it came time for two the Patriarchs to find wives for their sons,  both men very specifically mention that no wife would be chosen from the Canaanite women. Abraham made his servant swear that he would not pick a wife for Isaac from among the Canaanites, and Isaac, in turn, instructed his son Jacob not to choose a wife from the daughters of Canaan.

    Abraham said to his servant, the oldest of his household, who had charge of all that he owned, "Please place your hand under my thigh, and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I live, but you will go to my country and to my relatives, and take a wife for my son Isaac." [Genesis 24:2-4 NASB]

    So Isaac called Jacob and blessed him and charged him, and said to him, "You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan. "Arise, go to Paddan-aram, to the house of Bethuel your mother's father; and from there take to yourself a wife from the daughters of Laban your mother's brother. [Genesis 28:1-2 NASB]

So the Patriarchs obviously had some very unfavorable knowledge about the Canaanites.

Israel's Failure To Completely Destroy The Canaanites:
Since the word Nephilim is used one other time (in the Genesis 6) it seems reasonable to surmise that these giants could only be the result of the sons of God once again interbreeding with the daughters of men, which accounts for God's instructions to Joshua when He ordered the complete extermination of the inhabitants of Canaan.... man, woman, and child

    "But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the LORD your God has commanded you, [Deuteronomy 20:17 NASB]

If the interbreeding was on a more limited scale than the first time around, God did not need to again destroy the entire earth but commanded the Jews to wipe these giant cities off the face of the earth, smiting every living person including the women and children. However, Israel, as so often happened, failed to obey God, which means that some of the Nephilim could very well have survived. For example...

    Then Joshua came at that time and cut off the Anakim from the hill country, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab and from all the hill country of Judah and from all the hill country of Israel. Joshua utterly destroyed them with their cities. There were no Anakim left in the land of the sons of Israel; only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod some remained. [Joshua 11:21-22 NASB]

    But they did not drive out the Canaanites who lived in Gezer, so the Canaanites live in the midst of Ephraim to this day, and they became forced laborers.  [Joshua 16:10 NASB]

    It came about when Israel became strong, that they put the Canaanites to forced labor, but they did not drive them out completely.  [Judges 1:28 NASB]

The Overlooked Implications
The book of Genesis tells us that God created one man and one woman. It is generally accepted by believers that this couple became the parents of all humans who live on earth. However we seem to be overlooking one unequivocal fact also pointed out in the book of Genesis. Although Adam and Eve were intended to be the parents of the human race, it didn't exactly work out that way. It wasn't very long after they left the garden of Eden, that a second non-human strain was added to the human gene pool, a strain that may never have been completely eliminated.

The Personal Pronoun in Daniel's Prophecy:
The million dollar question is exactly how these events will repeat themselves as our Lord said they would, and who will be behind the physical intrusion into our world? Certainly, one aspect of the pre-flood days is already being paralleled in our day.. the earth is full of violence. [Also See The Wrath of God]

Remember that, according to 2 Peter 2:4-6, the original fallen angels are bound in Tartarus and are "reserved unto judgment" therefore are unlikely to be part of the coming intrusion. This leaves us with one very chilling possibility... the next time around it will be the other group of fallen angels.. those who rebelled against God, were cast out of heaven, but are still free to roam the earth doing whatever damage they can. In short, Satan and his demonic hordes will seek, one way or the other, to physically take over this world. This scenario not only seamlessly blends into much occult literature (below) but brings to mind the words of the prophet Daniel.

Regardless of whether we understand all details or not, we have to remember Daniel's interpretation of king Nebuchadnezzar's dream. When Daniel came down to the feet of the statue one unusual, but highly significant, statement brings up a very grim dimension.

    "And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay." [Daniel 2:43]

Also See A Dragon and Two Beasts

Daniel uses the personal pronoun saying... they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men...". The phrase certainly indicates that whoever, or whatever, it is that will 'mingle with the seed of men' are not the seed of men themselves.

However Daniel also very specifically says they will mingle but not cleave one to another. The trick here is in exact meaning of the two words used which have been translated mingle and cleave. This portion of Daniel was written in Aramaic, therefore the corresponding Hebrew word has been given in Strong's Lexicon.

Mingle: The word translated mingle is arab, used some 18 times in the Old Testament and which means to braid, or intermix; However, this is a difficult word since it has also been used in the sense of surety or a mortgage [See for example Genesis 44:32 and Nehemiah 5:3].

In Ezra 9:2 mingle is definitely used in the sense of interbreeding.

    For they have taken of their daughters for themselves and for their sons, so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the peoples of the lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.

But this is not necessarily the case in Ezekiel 27:27 where arab has been translated dealers in the NASB.

    "Your wealth, your wares, your merchandise, Your sailors and your pilots, Your repairers of seams, your dealers in merchandise And all your men of war who are in you, With all your company that is in your midst, Will fall into the heart of the seas On the day of your overthrow. [Ezekiel 27:27 NASB]

Cleave: While the word translated cleave is debaq, used some 52 times in the Old Testament and defined by Strong's as to impinge, that is, cling or adhere; In this sense it is used to describe the marriage relationship and, more than once, of man clinging to God. (debaq is also used in the sense of to overtake or pursue hard).

    Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. [Genesis 2:24]

    So shall no inheritance remove from one tribe to another tribe; for the tribes of the children of Israel shall cleave every one to his own inheritance. [Numbers 36:9]

    Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God; him shalt thou serve; and to him shalt thou cleave, and by his name shalt thou swear. [Deuteronomy 10:20]

    And they lifted up their voice, and wept again: and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clave unto her. [Ruth 1:14]

It is easy to see from the above examples that the word translated cleave pretty much means to stick to, which makes it difficult to know exactly what Daniel was talking about... The unholy "they" shall mingle themselves (interbreed?) with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave (stick) one to another.

I am afraid that I am not at all sure what that means.

However, there is no question that, when viewed in light of the warning of our Lord in Luke 17:26, Daniel's suggestive words leads to a mind boggling conclusion... in the near future, the events of Genesis 6 are going to repeat themselves or, possibly, are already repeating themselves. This time around, demonic beings may, or may not, infect the human gene pool, but they are certainly once again going to walk openly among men..

The "Masters" in The Occult
Alice Bailey, under the guidance of an ectoplasmic apparition from hell who called himself Djwhal Khul, Aka 'The Tibetan', wrote some 24 books and founded the Lucis Trust (formerly Lucifer Publishing Co.) which enjoys "Consultative Status" with the United Nations. Lucis Trust has not only spawned several other organization... the Arcane School, Triangles, World Goodwill, Lucis Publishing, Lucis Productions, Lucis Trust Libraries, the New Group of World Servers, but also maintain the UN meditation room. And the purpose of these groups? At their core ALL of them exist for one purpose. In their words "the helping of the Great Ones and the rendering to Them of that intelligent assistance which will make Their plans for humanity materialise". [10]

Their "plans" are centered around making conditions suitable (By occult meditation and reciting of the Great Invocation) for what they call "The Reappearance of The Christ. Except that this Christ has nothing to do with Jesus Christ of the Bible. [See Alice Bailey and The Lucis Trust]

In her book Externalization of the Hierarchy, Alice Bailey made it clear that she believed that

    "for the first time" mankind is "intelligently participating and cooperating" in the "entire evolutionary process." Therefore, the spiritual Hierarchy can "bring to an end the long silence which has persisted since Atlantean days" and "renew an ancient sharing of secrets." [11],

    and "in the immediate future," the "Masters will walk openly among men."

    With a "return to the situation which existed in Atlantean days," when "the Members of the spiritual Hierarchy were openly guiding and directing the affairs of humanity," [12]

Bailey believed that the civilization of Atlanta was destroyed by the great Flood...

    there was a "great war between the Lords of form and the Lords of Being", and "the Hierarchy was forced to intervene potently" by bringing "the Atlantean civilization to an abrupt end after a long period of chaos and disaster" by means "of a culminating catastrophe which wiped hundreds of thousands of human beings off the face of the earth. This historical event has been preserved for us in the universal legend of the great flood." [13]

...Therefore when she talk about the "situation which existed in Atlantean days", she is obviously referring to the days immediately preceding the Great Flood.

Albeit with a different slant, Alice Bailey's demonic sources are only reiterating what the Scriptures said thousands of years ago..

Is it any wonder that God is going to destroy this world yet one more time. But this time the demons will be thrown into the lake of fire and will not be able to return.

Also See
The Wrath of God The Bible labours the point in both Old and New Testament that God is good to those who trust Him and is terrible to those who do not. Both Testaments emphasize the reality and terror of God's wrath. Today's powerless, sickly sweet, sentimental Easy Christianity has chosen to babble on and on about the goodness and love of God, but totally ignore (to our peril) His wrath and judgment.

The Judgment of God... The First Six Trumpets Both Jesus and Paul imply that world conditions would not necessarily allow people to suspect the approach of Armageddon. The "day of the Lord" is described as coming suddenly, catching the non believer unawares. One often hears of the media describing one of nature's calamities as being "of biblical proportions". This extreme language makes one wonder how they would describe the true plagues that God will send on the earth, which will indeed be "of biblical proportions". Jesus describes this time as one of Great Tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, and never will be again, then goes on to say "... if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved". The first six of these plagues are each heralded by an angel blowing a Trumpet.

Foot Note I... Was Jude Referring to Homosexuality When He Said the Men of Sodom Went After "Strange Flesh"?
There are those that believe that Jude was not referring to homosexuality when he penned the following statement about the men of Sodom and Gomorrah going after strange flesh.

    Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, having in like manner with these given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire. [Jude 1:7]

The argument goes something like this... If Jude had meant homosexuality, then the word translated into the English strange would have been the Greek allos, which is supposed to mean another of the same kind. However Jude used the Greek word heteros. However I am not convinced of the validity of this argument since the word allos, is used four times in a single verse in 1 Corinthians and does not refer to 'the same kind'

    All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one (allos) flesh of men, and another (allos) flesh of beasts, and another (allos) flesh of birds, and another (allos) of fish. [1 Corinthians 15:39 NASB]

Besides which there are plenty of instances where heteros also means another of the same kind. For example...

    And again another (heteros) scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced. [John 19:37]

    For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other (heteros) is not edified. [1Corinthians 14:17]

    But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees and the other (heteros) Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees: touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. [Acts 23:6]

    And when it was determined that we should sail for Italy, they delivered Paul and certain other (heteros) prisoners to a centurion named Julius, of the Augustan band. [Acts 27:1]

Since this issue, unlike many others, can not be resolved by merely looking at the technical meanings of the words, we will have to consider a number of other factors...

1) The first point one has to remember is that we are told as early as Genesis 13:13 that the men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinners against the Lord. Genesis 18:21 has God Himself going down to survey the moral landscape and see for Himself if the cry that had come to Him was founded.

2) There is every indication that the men of Sodom had no idea that the individuals visiting Lot were angels. Every time the angels are mentioned in the account they are referred to as ysh, a commonly used word in the Old Testament, which means men. For example...."For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh".  [Genesis 2:24 NASB]. Additionally the angels ate (Genesis 19:3), and their feet could be washed (Genesis 19:2)

    and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself to the earth, [Genesis 18:2]

    And the men rose up from thence, and looked toward Sodom: and Abraham went with them to bring them on the way. [Genesis 18:16]

    and they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men that came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. [Genesis 19:5]

However, although they probably had no idea that their visitors were angelic beings, this does not detract from the sin of the men of Sodom, since the angels took the form of men, not women.

3) Sodom and Gomorrah were not the only wicked cities destroyed. Note the wording of Jude 7... "Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them suffering the punishment of eternal fire". It is possible that these cities were

    that they made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar). All these came as allies to the valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea). [Genesis 14:2-3 NASB]

Although Zoar was saved due to Lot's plea for a place to which he might flee [Genesis 19:18-22], are we to believe "that the populations of the four cities that were destroyed were all guilty of desiring sexual relations with angels? Perhaps the latest sexual fad that swept over all the cities in the vicinity was "angel sex"?"

4) Finally as asked by Dr. Dave Miller

    And are we to believe that the great warning down through the ages regarding the infamous behavior of the inhabitants of Sodoma warning that is repeated over and over again down through the ages to people in many places and periods of history (Deuteronomy 29:23; 32:32; Isaiah 1:9; 3:9; 13:19; Jeremiah 23:14; 49:18; 50:40; Lamentations 4:6; Ezekiel 16:46,49,53,55; Amos 4:11; Zephaniah 2:9; Matthew 10:15; 11:24; Luke 10:12; 17:29; Romans 9:29; 2 Peter 2:6; Revelation 11:8)- is: "Do not have sex with angels!"?

    How many times have you been tempted to violate that warning? The opportunity presents itself on a regular basis, right? The country is full of "single angel" bars! No, what Barclay labeled as "the glare of Sodom and Gomorrah," which is "flung down the whole length of Scripture history" (p. 218), is not angel sex! It is same-sex relationsmen with men.  [14] [PLACE IN TEXT]

Foot Note II... Violence in The Ancient World
The Bible's statement that the earth was exceedingly violent in the pre flood days is backed up by both archeological and literary evidence. Although we can not positively and specifically link the prehistoric cultures discovered by archaeology with the pre-flood people, the data strongly indicates that ancient man was exceptionally violent.

The Archeological Data
In his book, War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage, Oxford:1996 Anthropology professor Lawrence Keeley from the University of Illinois at Chicago says..

    "The archeological evidence indicates instead that homicide has been practiced since the appearance of modern humankind and that warfare is documented in the archaeological record of the past 10,000 years in every well-studied region...If anything, peace was a scarcer commodity of members of bands, tribes, and chiefdoms than for the average citizen of a civilized state." [p.39]

    "Several of the rare burials of earliest modem humans in central and western Europe, dating from 34,000 to 24,000 years ago, show evidence of violent death. At Grimaldi in Italy, a projectile point was embedded in the spinal column of a child's skeleton dating to the Aurignacian (the culture of the earliest modern humans in Europe, ca. 36,000 to 27,000 years ago). One Aurignacian skull from southern France may have been scalped; it has cut-marks on its frontal (forehead). Evidence from the celebrated Upper Palaeolithic cemeteries of Czechoslovakia, dating between 35,000 and 24,000 years ago, implies--either by direct evidence of weapons traumas, especially cranial fractures on adult males, or by the improbability of alternative explanations for mass burials of men, women, and children--that violent conflicts and deaths were common.

    In the Nile Valley of Egypt, the earliest evidence of death by homicide is a male burial, dated to about 20,000 years ago, with stone projectile points in the skeleton's abdominal region and another point embedded in its upper arm (a wound that had partially healed before his death). The one earlier human skeleton found in Egypt bears no evidence of violence, but the next more recent human remains there are rife with evidence of homicide...The human skeletons found in a Late Palaeolithic cemetery at Gebel Sahaba in Egyptian Nubia, dating about 12,000 to 14,000 years ago, show that warfare there was very common and particularly brutal. Over 40 percent of the fifty-nine men, women, and children buried in this cemetery had stone projectile points intimately associated with or embedded in their skeletons. Several adults had multiple wounds (as many as twenty), and the wounds found on children were all in the head or neck--that is, execution shots.

    The excavator, Fred Wendorf, estimates that more than half the people buried there had died violently. He also notes that homicidal violence at Gebel Sahaba was not a once-in-a-lifetime event, since many of the adults showed healed parry fractures of their forearm bones--a common trauma on victims of violence--and because the cemetery had obviously been used over several generations. The Gebel Sahaba burials offer graphic testimony that prehistoric hunter-gatherers could be as ruthlessly violent as any of their more recent counterparts and that prehistoric warfare continued for long periods of time...In western Europe (and more poorly known North Africa), ample evidence of violent death has been found among the remains of the final hunter-gatherers of the Mesolithic period (ca. 10,000 to 5,000 years ago). One of the most gruesome instances is provided by Ofnet Cave in Germany, where two caches of 'trophy' skulls were found, arranged 'like eggs in a basket,' comprising the disembodied heads of thirty-four men, women, and children, most with multiple holes knocked through their skulls by stone axes. Indeed, some archaeologists, impressed by the abundant evidence of homicide in the European Mesolithic, date the beginnings of "real" war to this period." [15]

The Literary Data
Traditions and Legends about the flood originating in many parts of the world uniformly speak of man's corruption and violence, many of them indicating that the flood was a judgment upon humanity's evil. The following examples are given by Glenn Miller [16]

    "During the era of the fourth Sun, the Sun of Water, the people grew very wicked and ignored the worship of the Gods..." [Aztec, PM:128]

    "At a very early point in history, perhaps even before the end of the golden age, humankind grew very wicked and arrogant..." [Greece, PM:128]

    "Once there was a period called the Pachachama, when humankind was cruel, barbaric, and murderous. Human beings did whatever they pleased without any fear. They were so busy planning wars and stealing that they completely ignored the gods..." [Incas, PM:134]

    "The sun-god Ra, was warned by his father, the Watery Abyss, that humankind had grown too wicked and was on the verge of full rebellion against the gods." [Egypt, PM:135]

    "In time, the people began to misbehave, killing each other and ignoring their children, so Madumda sent a great flood..." [Pomo Indian, WR:MNNA:113]

    The Atrahasis epic, one of the oldest Flood traditions in the world, ascribe the Flood to humankind's being 'noisy' to their gods. Some see in this reference to noise a reference to violence. So, OT:BBCALL:36:

    "In the Atrahasis Epic's account of the flood the reason that the gods decide to send the flood is the 'noise' of mankind. This is not necessarily different from the biblical reason in that 'noise' can be the result of violence. Abel's blood cries out from the ground (4:10) and the outcry against Sodom and Gomorra is great (Gen 18:20). The noise could be generated either by the number of petitions being made to the gods to respond to the violence and bloodshed or by the victims who cry out in their distress"

    [PM] Parallel Myths, J.F. Bieflein, Ballantine: 1994.

    [OT:BBCALL]The IVP Bible Background Commentary--Old Testament. Walton, Matthews, & Chalvalas. IVP:2000

    [WR:MNNA] The Mythology of Native North America, David Leeming and Jake Page, UoklahomaPress:1998. [PLACE IN TEXT]


All URL's Accessed February 11th, 2014

[1] Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews, From The Creation To The Death Of Isaac.  Book I. Chapter 3. Concerning The Flood; And After What Manner Noah Was Saved In An Ark, With His Kindred, And Afterwards Dwelt In The Plain Of Shinar, Translated by William Whiston. Christian Classics Ethereal library. http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-1.htm

[2] Eliezer Segal. Targum "Onkelos" to the Torah. http://people.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/TalmudMap/MG/MGOnkelos.html

[3] J. W. Etheridge, M.A. The Targum of Onkelos. On The Book Berashith or Genesis. Section I. Bereshith Bara Elohim. First Published 1862. http://targum.info/onk/Gen1_6.htm

[4] J. W. Etheridge, M.A. The Targum Of Palestine, Commonly Entitled The Targum Of Jonathan Ben Uzziel, On The Book Of Genesis. Section I. Berashith. First Published 1862.  http://targum.info/pj/pjgen1-6.htm

[5] The Companion Bible by Dr. E.W. Bullinger (1837-1913), http://www.companionbiblecondensed.com/OT/Genesis...pdf

[6] http://biblehub.com/commentaries/genesis/4-26.htm

[7] Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews, From The Creation To The Death Of Isaac.  Book I. Chapter 3. Concerning The Flood; And After What Manner Noah Was Saved In An Ark, With His Kindred, And Afterwards Dwelt In The Plain Of Shinar, Translated by William Whiston. Christian Classics Ethereal library. http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-1.htm

[8] Glenn Miller. How likely is it that Noah was the only righteous person on the whole earth, at the time of the Flood?

[9] Josephus Antiquities of the Jews - Book V. Chapter 2. Translated by William Whiston. Christian Classics Ethereal library.

[10] Alice A. Bailey. The Externalisation Of The Hierarchy. Section Four - Stages In The Externalisation Of The Hierarchy. Copyright 1957 © By Lucis Trust. http://www.lucistrust.org:8081/obooks/?q=node/629

[11] Alice A. Bailey, The Reappearance of the Christ, Lucis Publishing Company, 1948, Pg. 685. As quoted in False Dawn by Lee Penn. Publisher... Sophia Perennis (February 15, 2005). Pages 261-262

[12] Alice A. Bailey, The Reappearance of the Christ, Lucis Publishing Company, 1948, Pg. 121. As quoted in False Dawn by Lee Penn. Publisher... Sophia Perennis (February 15, 2005). Pages 261-262

[13] Alice A. Bailey, The Reappearance of the Christ, Lucis Publishing Company, 1948, Pgs. 122-123. As quoted in False Dawn by Lee Penn. Publisher... Sophia Perennis (February 15, 2005). Pages 261-262

[14] Dr. Dave Miller, Ph.D. Homosexuality and "Strange Flesh". Copyright © 2004 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

[15] Lawrence H. Keeley. War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage [Paperback]. Oxford University Press, USA; Reprint edition (December 18, 1997) Pgs. 37-38. As quoted by Glenn Miller. How likely is it that Noah was the only righteous person on the whole earth, at the time of the Flood? http://www.christian-thinktank.com/stealtime.html#noah

[16] Glenn Miller. Answer to the question ...does God's judgment violate the free choice of His creatures?


The Future