Sons of God study part 1

This information in this post comes largely from a "Bible" study given by Alex Golovenko, the pastor of the church I happen to currently fellowship at. However, while Golovenko presents the view that you are about to read, he does not necessarily agree with them. He just played the role of presenting the information. The information comes from both a handout that he distributed to persons at the Bible study that took place some time ago (January 19, 2013 according to this church bulletin; I failed to record the date). For this post I will insert my own commentary throughout (in red ink/font) to let you know my view points on the matter. Due to the length of the notes, I have to break this post into a series of posts, of which this is the first.

Sons of God, according Alex Golovenko, occurs only 5 times in the oldest books of the Bible (Genesis and Job). While not specifically occurring in the book of Psalm (at least according to Golovenko), there is a similar phrase translated as "ye mighty ones" (Psalm 29:1) or "the sons of the mighty" (Psalm 89:6). (Golovenko is speaking specifically about the Hebrew word occurrence found in Genesis and Job; he does not take into account the English translations of sons of God else where in the Bible.)  Daniel also references the concept (Daniel 3:25). The Septuagint according to Golovenko, faithfully translates these other terms into "Sons of God" and so has the Peshita (Aramic/Syraic Bible).

According to Golovenko, not all translations use the term sons of God. Codex Sinaiticus (4th century), Alexandrius (5th century) and Codex Vaticanus (12th century) translate the phrases as "angels". Further, Golovenko points that sometimes, Elohim (the Hebrew plural name for God; see Wikipedia article or Maas, 1909).

Golovenko goes on to assert that it is in the Book of Watchers (1st Enoch) and the Book of Jubilees (3rd century B.C.) that propose the idea of "sons of god" being "angels". "Watchers", Golovenko said, (used in Daniel 4:13,17,23), refers to the angels pointed to guard Eden (I thought God appointed cherubs to do that! Oh Well!).

Golovenko continued to state that the early records of "church fathers" and historians of antiquity from the 1st to 3rd century including Flavius Josephus, Philo, Eusebius and many of the "Ante-Nicene Fathers" including Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus (one of the early Christians that I respect based on a reading of a translation of his writings; see earlier blog post on this) and others continued in what Golovenko calls "this tradition" of fallen angels having children. Golovenko further states that, "Their pagan origins and Greek mythology permitted such a worldview" (for added emphasis I want to mention that this quote is verbatim and are not my words, but Golovenko's. It is on this latter point that I would like to make some commentary and reserve the rest of the information presented for another post).

First of all, I must say that Golovenko is of the view or belief that angels cannot have intercourse with human beings. I however, note that such a view goes against the circumstantial evidence of females who have shared their personal stories of sleeping in the night and experiencing demons (or some unseen spiritual entity) attempting to have intercourse with them. I also note that I have never heard of men sharing those stories. I also note that apostle Paul gives a rare warning that females must cover their heads during spiritual gatherings "because of the angels" (1st Corinthians 11:10; see the KJV or NIV). It seems to me, if I interpret it correctly, going back to Genesis 6:1-2, that the angels by looking at women, their hair and all, can find them attractive. Further, Genesis 3:15 states categorically that the serpent (if we interpret the serpent as being Satan), will have an offspring or children that will fight against the offspring and children of the woman (NIV). 
I further add to the evidence the fact that many Satanic cults and pagan religions practice and celebrate sex and have many sexual  and fertility rites (Ross, 1995). Many ancient pagan deities have priestesses and orgies or group sex, as part of their ceremonies. It was within this pagan milieu that the Christian church was born. Based on all these data, it seems to me that it is not only possible that angels can have intercourse with women, but it is also prophesied that Satan will have children (sons of Satan) just like how God would have an incarnate son.

Hence, for me, Genesis 6:1-4, with references to the sons of God having intercourse with women is not a  myth. Rather, it shows that human beings are vulnerable to being raped by demonic entities. This also goes back to the issue of extra-terrestrial abduction and rapes that many females witnesses report in our modern times. I am sure, pastor Golovenko and any other Christian pastor cannot explain away such modern day occurrences by saying that females who experience extra-terrestrial abduction and rape were just imagining these things. It is further clear to me that our ancients, pagans and those closer to the time of Jesus and to Noah, know how vulnerable human beings are to such abductions and rapes by fallen angels. As such, we should not approach the Bible with the view that angels having sex with  women is a crazy or even pagan idea. It is a very real phenomenon, and one which the Bible, not giving specific details, shadows the reality. 

It is on this point that I end this posting and promise to continue the report of the Bible study, along with my commentary. Until then, God bless you.

References:


Maas, A. (1909). Elohim. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 27, 2013 from New Advent:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05393a.htm

Ross, C. A. (1995). Satanic ritual abuse: Principles of treatment. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Waking up in 2040

A Christian man met in an accident and was in a coma until the year 2040. His wife kept him on life support for 27 years, believing that one day he would miraculously awake from the coma. It happened that after 27 years, she lost hope, remarried and asked that he be removed from life support.

On the day that the hospital was about to remove him from life support, he miraculously awoke from the coma. The hospital staff were amazed and told him the story of what happened to him and how his wife had just decided to turn him off the machine. Bitter sweet feelings over took him, but he was so glad to be alive and to experience such a miracle.

After being examined and cleared to leave the hospital, he immediately when to the street to share his miracle with the world outside the hospital walls. As he stood on the street shouting how God was good to him, he was approached by 2 police officers, who asked to see some ID. But he had none to show them.

So one of the officer said to him: "Sir, you can't be making religious pronouncements on the street without a permit. I am afraid that we are going to have to arrest you." The man protested, but was handcuffed and taken to the police lock-up. In jail, he was visited by a lawyer hired by his wife. He inquired about the first amendment and free speech.

"The first amendment was amended, sir. All assembly, speech, expression and religious freedoms must be regulated to prevent the spewing of hatred that results in violence, oppression and public disorder." the lawyer said.

Our Christian protagonist also learned that in the year 2040, Christianity was no longer a mainstream religion, but a mere five percent of his nation and less than 10 % of the world described themselves as Christian. The majority religion was the Universal Inter-faith Religion of Love that believed in a variety of "inspired" sources of which Biblical material was just part of the rich diverse sources of human inspiration. Further this majority religion did not hold all the Bible to be inspired.

Our Christian protagonist also learned that preaching about hell was forbidden unless one was an authorized Satanist. He also found out that the state legally recognised human beings in permanent unions with any person, living creature and non-living thing that made them happy (with consent only being required for the person) as marriages.

"Oh my", the Christian man exclaimed! "My nation has become Sodom and Gomorrah!"

"Watch your language buddy," said his lawyer. "What you just said could be interpreted as treason against the state and its constitution."

"There isn't any religious freedom any more", the Christian man began to mourn.

"Yes, there is," said the lawyer. "But your religious beliefs must be practiced according to state law. State law requires that you practice your religion under the supervision of state approved theologians, who are respectable guides in how you interpret your sacred text and practice the tenets of your faith. In addition, your religious sacred text must be modified to reflect the times and modernity of human progress."

"So I can't read the King James Bible?"  the Christian man asked.

"No," said the lawyer. "You need a more update version. That can only be read as a historical work."

"What if I disagree with my approved theologian?" the Christian man asked?

The lawyer replied, "You got to be careful that you do not make yourself an enemy of state, a vagabond of public disorder and be guilty of mischief against humanity or the human race, our advanced civilisation and human evolutionary progress."

"When and how did this happen?" the Christian man in shock exclaim.

The lawyer replied, "the great International Federation has given us principles of respecting diversity. They have been able to give us great principles in order to promote peaceful and prosperous society and economy that the world now has today. Human beings have to trade certain liberties in order to secure our universal survival, in order for us to all pursue the different paths that make us happy."

"But I can't be truly happy if I can't practice my religion freely," said the Christan man.

"Is your religion hate?" the lawyer retorted. "You can't make other unhappy and uncomfortable by practicing an antiquated religion that does not take into consideration the diversity of human beliefs and feelings. You can only be happy when you can integrate and have cordial relations with those who share different perspectives from you. How can you accomplish that if you are judgemental about their beliefs and views, and make them unhappy by what you say?"

The Christian man replied, "but Jesus did not say things to make the Pharisees feel good. He always spoke to reveal truth and point the way to salvation."

"I have a copy of the New State Approved New Testament. You may want to read it and be updated on what we moderns believe is the message of Jesus," the lawyer said, pulling out a book.

THE END!

Edited April 20, 2013

A change of direction on my spiritual blog

The world has become a dangerous place for people of faith, especially those of the Christian and Jewish faith. I say this as I acknowledge the threat and movement by governments, organizations, corporations and institutions to silence the grass-root movement of social media. I also acknowledge that our laws need to be changed to protect and preserve the freedoms of people on the Web to engage in social exchange and conversations, without the threat of civil law suit or loss of employment, especially when people respectfully criticize institutions, organizations and companies in those exchanges or conversations.

I'm deeply concerned that human beings are losing their freedoms because of laws established to protect corporations, big businesses, institutions, special interest groups and organizations. My great fear is that we are entering a new dark ages, where people will be persecuted because they tell their personal stories or share their personal experiences.

We (humanity) have indeed been this route before in history, and are heading there again. In the past, early Christians were persecuted for telling their stories. Even more, humanity's history of religious intolerance continues to show that people (whatever their faith or belief) have the proclivity to persecute and punish those who do not share their stories or view points.

I'm deeply concern that our world is moving to the place where people will and are persecuted for what they post online, without proper trial or proper administration of natural justice.

I have contemplated pulling the plug on my spiritual blog, but when I look back at what Jesus did, how he spoke out in the face of danger, I reconsider. Rather, to follow my spiritual leader and mentor, I will do as my Lord would and instead of speak directly about the issues that concern me, I will address those difficult subjects in parables. Hence, I write this entry to inform my loyal (but small) readership that you should expect from me more short stories and parables addressing the concerns that are of interest to me, in a way that does not directly attack any person, group or institution. Rather, all things will be left up to your interpretation. (I cannot take responsibility for how you will interpret my future stories). So that said, expect to see a change in my future posts on this blog.

God bless you.

A look at women ordination and roles in the church: Part II

Before I begin, I must apologize for the lack of citations to support the points in this post. This is one of those posts that I just want to get the opinion out first, and perhaps come back to later with supporting references.  That said, most of my view point for this post comes from my interpretation of the Genesis story (Chapters 1 to 3). That also said, please forgive me and endure my opinionated response (which is still emerging as I encounter many life experiences and mature spiritually in my walk with the LORD).

In part I of my post on this subject, I laid out my views about how I as a father of daughters welcome some of the gains of feminism in Christianity, but disagree with the challenge to overthrow the patriarchal hierarchy totally. I however, welcome the role of feminist thought in the church to re-emphasize what men's Biblical obligations for the proper treatment of females, especially the transformation of our thinking towards women. However, in this post, I want to discuss the dangers of extreme feminism in Christianity, especially in leading us into apostasy.

If one wants to know the role that women play in church history, one only has to look at the Catholic's elevation of Mary as the mother of God. This was done, in my understanding of church history, as a way of marketing Christianity to pagans, through use of symbols and stories that pagans were familiar with. Pagans at that time in history, possessed views about a god-family (father, mother and son), and so early Roman-dominated Christianity adapted these ideas in order to market the religion to the new market of pagan adherents.

Today, however, we as Christians do not need to emphasize the merits of our faith through incorporating pagan ideas. In addition, we do not need to appoint women as priestesses, which follows a spiritually dangerous tradition of pagan religious systems. God has ordained a hierarchy since the fall of humanity, that in time he will redeem all those who oppressed or under authority, giving them the true status they deserve. (This does not mean a justification for slavery, a subject that I am prepared to write in a future time). Yet, God has established an order and hierarchy that is contrary to pagan practices for purposes that only he knows best, that at the end of time, he will reverse, and men and women will be elevated to their rightful status, after Satan, sin, death and evil is finally dealt with.

Let us look at the hierarchy before the fall of humanity in Eden

Man and Woman - Earth

We must note that the Genesis story mentions that both man and woman were equally responsible for tending the garden of God and the earth. Dually, their roles were to name and understand objects and things in nature, and through nature and their work, come to an understanding of who God is as well as to love and appreciate the Creator more. They were to equally share the roles and responsibilities for the earth and all the animals. In this state, there was no hierarchy.


Let us now look at this post-sin hierarchy established from Eden.

Earth - man - woman - child  -Serpent and serpent's child

Instead of man having power over the earth as God intended, man is now subject to nature and need to exert effort in order to produce for human needs and wants. Man also goes back to the earth in death. In addition, woman, who was made an equal partner with man becomes, becomes subjected to him and now becomes the one that has the full responsibility to bear the child needed to overcome the serpent. The serpent, who apparently had some other means of travel, is now demoted to only being able to travel by land on his belly, with the added burden that there would be war between his descendants and that of humans, with humans becoming victorious.

The hierarchy established after sin, also reverses the order in which sin was introduced into the world.

Serpent - woman - man - Earth

So while the feminist movement has brought along some advancement in women rights, the true women's liberation is yet to come through God's timing and intervention. In fact, in God's timing and intervention, there will be total liberation of man and woman from their subjugation to nature and natural laws, as well as liberation of the Earth from death and decay. Hence, there will be an overthrow of hierarchy, but I have no confidence that we as human beings with our errors and faults can justly correct the situation.

However, until then, we must make the necessary incremental improvements to provide justice for women and care for our environment. Justice for women however, does not necessarily mean equity or even equal treatment. Justice means fairness, a fairness that respects and affirm differences. Also, differences do not imply a hierarchy, as objects can nominally differ. Differences mean that there is separation and demarcation, especially due to different characteristics. Justice means that people get what they deserve: where people get what is fairly, reasonably and rightly due to them based on their needs and situation.

There are some within the [radical] feminist movement that implies that there are no scientific differences between male and female. But women and men are biologically different also, which should also affect how we allocate what is due to women. Biological differences between make and female include:

• different sexual organs (and the fact that we are sexually stimulated differently)
• women experience menstrual cycle; men don't
• women possess natural wombs and can naturally give birth to children; men can do so only artificially

Hence, such differences need to be taken into consideration in seeking justice for the genders.

A look at women ordination and roles in the church: Part I

So my place of fellowship is having a Bible study on women ordination. So far, I have been listening to the debates, especially to hear the point of view that promotes women ordination as pastoral leaders. I want to hear Biblical arguments and not just feminist arguments that have originated out of secular cultural movements. Hopefully, I will get those soon, yet within the mean time, I want to share my own understanding so far, based on past revelation.

I must begin that by being a father of all girls, I have become more interested in justice issues for females. Especially considering that as a father I cannot protect my girls from engaging with the wider society and perhaps encountering the gross acts that men take to satisfy their sexual lusts and cravings. Right now, my girls are all young and do not leave the house unaccompanied. However, in the future, I can't guarantee that I can lock them up forever and only let them exit with parental accompaniment. As such, I want to see laws put in place to protect them from abuse (especially perpetrated by males).

At the same time, my spiritual views do not see the need for the feminist movement within Christianity to go beyond articulating the personhood of females and the prevention of women abuse. I hold traditional views on patriarchal hierarchy because the Holy Scriptures endorse hierarchy, rather than sees it as an evil to be presently eliminated. The New Testament reveals this the most in the relationship between Jesus and God the Father, which could be liken to man and woman in the church. (Ephesians 5: 21-33).

Philippians 2:6 states that Jesus in his nature, being God: "did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage" (NIV). Rather, despite their equality, Jesus ,  "gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being... [or appearing] in human form," (Philippians 2:7; New Living Translation).  From this perspective, Jesus, despite having equal rights and privileges as God the Father, chose to deny himself those rights and privileges, in order to work with God the Father and accomplish the larger picture and plan for humanity, which required great humiliation.

It is the same Christian duty that Jesus requires of us. Women though being equal to men, are asked to endure or even put up with men's often impoverished and poor leadership (especially wives), in order to please God. Let me just raise some of the scriptures that illustrate this point:

But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. (1 Corinthians 11:3; New International Version, 2011) )

Also women be they subject to their husbands; that if any man believe not to the word, by the conversation of women they be won without word. (1 Peter 3:1; Wycliffe Bible)

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:22; New International Version, 2011)

Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. (Colossians 3:18 ; New International Version, 2011)

I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. (1 Timothy 2:12; New International Version, 2011)

Based on the above Bible verses, it seems as if women are asked by Christ to walk with him in humility and take a place less than they deserve in order to fulfil God's purpose and design for them and for the larger humanity. Again, I must emphasize that male-dominated leadership in a sinful world has often been abused and that women suffer dreadfully under such abuse as victims, as mothers of victims and even the disappointed mothers of the perpetrators of abuse. Christ in his treatment of women in the New Testament demonstrates a break with men's abuse of power:

• he teaches that men must look at women with dignity and not with an imagination desirous of fulfilling sexual cravings (Matthew 5:28); 
• he shows that we must not view a woman's one time sin of adultery as being greater than any other sin (John 8:1-11; New International Version)
• males must treat even prostitutes with dignity
• males must not criticise women's efforts to show and express their appreciation to God in worship in ways different from us (Matthew 26:7-13)

There are countless other teachings that I can't go into detail now, but look out for part 2 of my post on this subject. (I've typed it already; just to tidy it up and publish it).

The institutionalisation and corruption of Protestant Christianity

This week, I read Tooley's (2013) article putting in perspective the end of mainline Protestant churches, as the National Council of Churches abandons New York City for a shelter in D.C. Tooley's (2013) article basically raised the issue of the decline of Protestant churches politically as force to be reckoned with in American politics. In this post, I want to particularly explore some issues related to his article, especially as it relates to the corruption of Christianity by the powerful and liberal elite.

First, I must say that I learned from Tooley that the Rockefeller family and other New York elites were sponsors of the National Council of Churches. This is not a good sign, considering the rumour that the Rockefelllers are Illuminati members (Dice, 2009) and partners of  the infamous Bilderberg group (Lendman, 2009). Yet, conspiracies and rumours aside, consider this quotation from Tooley:

His father having recently died, John D. Rockefeller III was present at the dedication to honor the Interchurch Center as the fulfillment of his father’s dream of a new Christianity without denominational distinctions. Although he didn’t then specify it, the Rockefellers also dreamed of a uniformly liberal Protestantism devoted to good works instead of doctrine. The elder Rockefeller donated the land for the Interchurch Center plus over $2.6 million for costs.

Ironically, nearly all the Mainline denominations housed there would begin their nearly 50-year membership decline just a few years later. A sanitized Protestantism without doctrine or distinctions simply became too boring to sustain. In the early 1960s, about one of every six Americans belonged to the seven largest Mainline denominations. Today, it’s one out of every 15.

 Explicitly stated here is the revelation that the Rockerfeller family had a vision to purge Protestant denominations of "doctrine" and create a "new Christianity". In addition, Protestant institutions that got involved with Rockerfeller's vision, suffered a decline in their numbers. Further, another quote from Tooley shows that being aligned to elite and powerful men was the priority of Protestant churches in the 1960s, with an ecumenical aim.

Likely unable to conceive of such a dramatic spiral, the NCC’s chief pronounced at the Interfaith Center’s 1960 dedication: “It is the prayer of all who worked toward its creation that this will become more than a symbol of the growing spiritual unity of Protestant and Eastern Orthodox Churches in America.” Those days were heady times for the Mainline denominations, who were flush with members, money and influence. Church offices in the God Box then claimed to represent 40 million church members.

In fact, Tooley also mentions a German Lutheran bishop warning at the Interchurch Center’s 1960 dedication, against the “institutionalization” of churches, noting that a beautiful building and organization were of “no avail without true faith.” As the Apostle Paul would say: with our institutionalized churches, we have a institutionalised a form of godliness, but deny the power that makes us godly (2 Timothy 3:5). Which brings me to my personal point.


I have benefitted from institutional and bureaucratic church socially, economically, emotionally, spiritually and even psychologically. However, the more I study the Bible, experience life and the contradictions between how church and church people operate and how the Bible actually records early church life and even Jewish culture at the time of Jesus, the more I realise something is wrong. As beneficial as institutional and bureaucratic church is, and as enriching as it is to me and my family, institutional and bureaucratic church can no longer imprint in me the image or character that I see in Jesus Christ.


Church as practiced today simplifies Christian living to:

• church attendance, 
• giving tithes and offerings to church charities, 
• participating in church activities and services,
• doing good deeds for church members and 
• spending time trying to increase the membership of the church organisation (including doing good deeds for outsiders with the goal of winning them over to the church).  

Nothing is inherently wrong with any of these activities. However, when I exam Jesus and even the apostles, the way that they practice "church" was more subversive to the cultural, social and economic order. First of all, I do not see Jesus or even the church in Acts as owning property or buildings. They shared what they own and helped others. In this regard, they were socialist or almost communist. Today, Christianity is highly linked to democratic capitalism and many denominations own many properties. At the same time, the budgets of churches are focused on trivial budgetary items such as property maintenance or acquisition. Each time I hear churches talking about setting aside money to redo the tiles or carpets of the floor of the church building, or the interior or even get gowns and musical instruments to improve their 'worship service', my spirit is disturbed. And to think that there are people who are in poverty who need help getting an education and subsequently a job to sustain their own life. To make matters worse, there are even members of the same church, that while they are giving their tithes and offerings to help renovate the church building interior, they themselves are living in rent house. Compare this with the church in the book of Acts, where people met in each other's houses and other spaces and public places in order to fellowship and worship. Isn't something wrong with the picture?

Reference:

Dice, M. (2009). The Illuminati: Facts & fiction. The Resistance: San Diego, CA.


Lendman, S. (2009, June 1). The true story of the Bilderberg group and what they may be planning now: A review of Daniel Estulin's book. Global Research, Retrieved from: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-true-story-of-the-bilderberg-group-and-what-they-may-be-planning-now/13808


Tooley, M. (2013, March 1). End of the mainline: The declining National Council of Churches abandons New York City for shelter in D.C. The American Spectator. Retrieved from http://spectator.org/archives/2013/03/01/end-of-the-mainline

Return of the Neanderthals

So I have been absent from my spiritual blog for some time due to the fact that I was preparing for my comprehensive examination as well as contemplating the future of this blog in a world that is becoming increasingly intolerant of criticism. In fact, I have plans to at the start of the Passover season around the end of March to take a forty day break from social media (namely Facebook, Twitter and Blogger) in order to deepen and enrich my spiritual life as well as learn how to cope without social media. After all, one day, such freedom can be taken away from me. Nevertheless, for this post in particular, I want to discuss and comment on the National Geographic feature on the Return of the Neanderthals (Hughes, 2013) and possibly other extinct beings, putting it in a Judeo-Christian perspective.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/03/130306-neanderthal-genome-extinction-cloning-hominid-science/

Return of the Neanderthals

news.nationalgeographic.com

Scientists could someday resurrect Neanderthals—or at least their cells—to help modern humans. Would it be ethical?

The very sound of the title: "Return of the Neanderthals", seems like a title that would make a nice Hollywood story: like a modern retake on "Frankenstein" and/or even "The Planet of Apes". I find that we have this theme running in science fictions where human beings create an artificial being that is much stronger than themself who ends up tormenting humanity and becoming an oppressor, with the human creator (or creators) losing control over such beings. This idea is also expressed in Jewish mythology through the idea of the Golem, which in my opinion shows that all our (scientific) thoughts and developments are driven to some extent by our mythologies (more to come on this later).

Of course, the seriousness of the matter is overlooked. Our [mad] scientists who actually try to summon these extinct beings from the dead through cloning, need to be guided by our science fictions that warn us that one day we will create something that will almost devastate us. As they say, the road to hell is paved by good intentions. Hence it is much frightening when we consider the science fiction scenario of how we as human beings create or summon beings into our dimension that will totally devastate, oppress us and lead us to our ruin. Yet, in reality, this is actually being done and has been done in the past. Our pagan religions have sought to communicate to and establish connections with other beings not of our world that have lead to demonic possession and domination by fallen angels. But even if you do not believe in fallen angels and demons, if you just consider our science fictions and what they tell about the dangers of our inventions, it does point out that if man's destiny is in his own hand, then what a frightful and fearful future is on the horizon for us as humanity.


Essentially, human nature cannot be trusted. I have no trust in human nature. Men conspire, scheme, institute tyranny and oppress others. Such nature has not yet changed. And as long as human beings are the same as they were for millenia, then someone will use science and technology for evil. Already, we see that the US military is contemplating creating (Weinberger, 2013) and attempted to create (Heussner, 2009)  supersoldiers. However, even if humans do not intend to use their inventions for evil, as our science fiction themes point out, there can be unintended consequences of even creating artificial beings, especially humanoids.

But, since I subscribe to Judeo-Christian eschatology, I know that the future is not as scary as how science fiction predicts that it will be, at least not for everyone. The Bible already tells us how the world will end, thereby telling us that our fate is not in our own hands. However, this latest development could in fact create what we call the return of the Nephilim from Genesis 6:4. This is already an idea that is explored in Harding (2010), who suggests that what the ancients called the Nephilim may actually be the Neanderthals so-called by today's scientists. In addition, Jesus himself did say that the end of the world will be like the time of Noah (Matthew 24:37; Luke 17:26), lending credence to the fact that the Nephilim could actually return. Hence, it is very possible that our scientists in an attempt to bring extinct humanoids back to life, may create and resurrect the Nephilim of the 21st century.

Currently, we have demons, which according to some scholars are the disembodied souls of the Nephilim that continue to roam the earth and look for human bodies to possess and inhabit (Klein & Spears, 2005).  As such, I do not see it as farfetched that human scientists are creating the conditions for the return of these demonic entities in physical form that will permit them to regain physical bodies to oppress us as they once did before the flood. In fact, the imagery in the book of Revelations does show one such possibility. In one chapter of Revelations, the Bible speaks of an image being created, who will kill all that do not worship it (Revelation 13:15). When we consider that there is to be a seed of the serpent (Genesis 3:15), it is clear that Satanic forces are driving our science to create a body in which Satan can find an incarnation, just like how Jesus was an incarnation of God (an idea I know that many currently do not accept). Biblically, it makes sense.


References:

Harding, Fred. (2010, March). Nephilim skeletons found. ISEE Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.teklinepublishing.co.uk/art-nephilim.htm

Heussner, K. M. (2009, November 9). Psychic spies: Any truth in 'Men who stare at goats?' ABC News Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/psychic-spies-truth-men-stare-goats/story?id=9032019


Hughes, V. (2013, March 6). Return of the Neanderthals: Should scientists seek to clone our ancient hominid cousins? National Geographic News Retrieved from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/03/130306-neanderthal-genome-extinction-cloning-hominid-science/


Klein, J, & Spears, A. (2005). Devils and demons and the return of the Nephilim. [S.l.] : Xulon Press, c2005.



Weinberger, S. (2013, January 21). Iron Man to Batman: The future of soldier suits. BBC Retrieved from: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20130121-batman-meets-iron-man-in-combat/1