Debunking the Sethite View of Genesis 6 - Chuck Missler

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 23

  • @mrv1271
    @mrv1271 5 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    The Seth theory holds absolutely no water. Thank you Dr Missler. We miss you.

    • @jameshughes1385
      @jameshughes1385 ปีที่แล้ว

      The giants on the earth in those days according to Genesis chapter 6 verse 4, GOD mentioned in Job chapter 40 verses 15-24. The dinosaurs 🦖🦕

  • @shadowdancer3531
    @shadowdancer3531 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Angels are not flesh and they never have been. Angels are not the sons of God

    • @SymphonyZach
      @SymphonyZach 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      “Angels are not flesh” incorrect. They can and have taken on physical forms. Angels grabbed people by the hand, they blinded men, they physically held back the lions when Daniel was in the den. They can interact with physical things. They can be touched, they can eat food (and apparently process it, albeit this food is not necessary). They were the sons of God. Isaiah proves this, saying the sons of God cheered for joy when the earth was made. Mankind came after the sons of God

    • @JamesThomas-dn6hz
      @JamesThomas-dn6hz ปีที่แล้ว +1

      First, no one said angels were flesh like you. We don't know what they are exactly except that they are God's creation, are crazy powerful compared to us and can manifest as men, in flesh. But they are, according to the Bible, called "the sons of God". Son of God is a TITLE in the Bible. It means it was a direct creation of God and that it was sinless when it was created. So, there are two options here, you were either misinformed or you refuse to believe the Bible.

    • @reuelcelestial9567
      @reuelcelestial9567 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Tell them

    • @AtreyuKhalil
      @AtreyuKhalil 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@SymphonyZachyou seriously think fallen angels who are spirit beings can reproduce with humans? 🥴 didn’t God tell us reproduction can only happen with the same “kinds”? So how can a spirit being reproduce with a human when they aren’t the same kind? 🥴🥴

    • @JoshA0669
      @JoshA0669 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Read what happened in soddom when the men wanted to "know" the men lot took in (who were angels) also, they can eat, they can interact with human beings physically. When we are talking about fallen, they are wicked and left their natural habitat it says in Jude and Peter. Also, they probably experimented with flesh and produced a race of abominations, which there is evidence for. Also, consider the text, the "sons of God" saw the daughters of "men" like muscles explained. Crystal clear to me. But it's not a salvation issue so either way, it's not a topic or anything to go crazy about, just trust Christ and the believe the gospel. Our world is far more than what it seems, and we have no clue other than our finite little lives.

  • @nancykindt6487
    @nancykindt6487 ปีที่แล้ว

    Already 2 errors 4 minutes in! The Sons of Seth were wiped out in the flood because they mated with the daughters of Cain, the ungodly. Also, "bene ha-elohim" is also a term used to describe humans, so it's a hermeneutical failture to assume that Gen 6:4 speaks of angels. Hosea 1:10 uses the term "sons of the living God" to refer to Israel. Here are some others:
    Psalms 29:1 bənê ēlîm (בְּנֵי אֵלִים) without the definite article - sons of elim (a similar expression). Refers to humans as does Psalm 28:9.
    Psalms 82:6 bənê elîon (בְּנֵי עֶלְיוֹן) without the definite article and using ‘Most high’ instead of ēl. In context, we can see that this refers to human judges, as angels do not judge us.
    Interestingly, the exact phrase "Sons of God" and related ones ARE found all over the NT, ALWAYS referring to humans.
    Now if you’re going to argue the technicality that “sons of the living God” isn’t the same as “sons of God,” then I’ll argue the technicality that “sons of God” (sons of Elohim -Job 1:6; 2:1--which isn't even the earliest manuscripts, the LXX) isn’t the same as “sons of the Mighty” (sons of Elim -Psalm 89:6).
    So, if different technical forms are used to call angels “sons of God,” then we can’t object to a different technical form for Israel as “sons of God.” Therefore, “sons of God” is not a technical expression used only of angels. Therefore, it’s not necessary to see angels in Gen. 6:4.

    • @Brujo2016
      @Brujo2016 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      But do you take the book of Enoch into consideration?

    • @Shawnjames777
      @Shawnjames777 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Wow! I looked up the passages you quoted and realized you completely destroyed the text. You took everything out of context. Wow!!! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
      I hope people will go read the verses themselves rather than trusting your faulty interpretation.

    • @JoshA0669
      @JoshA0669 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      What did the angels do that Jude was talking about? Why are they held in everlasting chains and not the others that are roaming around? Also, the corroboration of cultures and evidence that support the giants that existed, also the unclean spirits, demons who have no body, where did they come from? A lot of holes in the sethite view.

    • @nancykindt6487
      @nancykindt6487 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@JoshA0669 I am not asserting that giants did not exist. Absence of evidence in the Gen. 6 passage on demons isn't evidence against the Sethite view. Cultural beliefs are also not evidence. Scripture is.
      The Fallen Angel theory is soundly debunked by the mere fact this passage states that there were Nephilim in those days AND AFTER when the Sons of God...etc. So, we clearly see by the word order that it says Nephilim existed BEFORE the mating of the Sons of God with the daughters of men...as well as after the mating.

    • @nancykindt6487
      @nancykindt6487 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@JoshA0669 The Fallen Angel theory can be debunked merely by looking at the sentence structure of Gen. 6:4 which says there were Nephilim in those days AND AFTER when the Sons of God... So, this clearly indicates that Nephilim existed BEFORE the mating. Therefore, the Nephilim cannot be the result of the mating of humans with fallen angels.

  • @UsaFreedomrally7
    @UsaFreedomrally7 8 ปีที่แล้ว

    cool video lol

  • @Sons_of_Thunder.
    @Sons_of_Thunder. ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Genesis 6 Deuteronomy 32 sons of God explained!!
    The text is correct as sons of God in Deuteronomy 32:8. The Hebrew would be >>>>(בני האלהים‎, bənê hāʼĕlōhîm

    • @lorieclark2556
      @lorieclark2556 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Are you Christian and what is the summary of this it is an amazing explanation but I can't rap my head around it

    • @HndrXxX3
      @HndrXxX3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      So then why were the angels referred to as sons of God in job ?? When they presented themselves before the Lord ? When the sons of God shouted for joy ? That wasn’t humans.
      What about when genesis outright says there were giants in the earth in those days and after?

    • @SeekerOfSalvation
      @SeekerOfSalvation 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ​@@HndrXxX3in mythology, men were depicted as giants because of their reputation . The 3 Spanish kings were depicted as a giant with three heads because the 3 kings were brothers who all thought the same and people thought they were one... and Tyndale 1530 version says tyrant.. also if you have read old books in the 1500s, which I have, giants have been found in the ground and they were written about (the bones) and they were referred to as GIANTS, guess how tall they were 6-9ft ... oh look, we live with giants now.
      The scriptures are about perception and context, if you dont read the book from beginning, you wont perceive it in the right context.