Topic of "angels having sex with human females".

gillyflower wrote:

Davelaw wrote:

gillyflower wrote:And did not his disciples give up everything to follow Jesus?

Luke 14:26 Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple.
Luke 14:27 Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.
Luke 14:33 So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions.

So wonder how many are true disciples of Jesus? Maybe the rest ought to shut up.

Jesus also said whoever is not against Him is for Him.

Sounds like a politician to me.

Sure doesn't sound like most ministers I've ever met. For that matter, unlike virtually every Christian I've known.

Davelaw wrote:

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:

Davelaw wrote:its the perceived tone or the undertone

that Sak and I find somewhat offensive

-now, now dear little deluded Christian
you can find real meaning in your myths-just don't think they are real tm

Dave, there is always something that we all can take offense from. Really, you don't think my myths are real either. The Christian community is actually very dismissive of my beliefs. They don't even bother to try to refute them, they just dismiss their actual existence. All the while demanding air time for theirs.

I don't lump all individual Christians in the same basket. It is more of a specific type of person, whether they be Christian, or Buddhist (we ran into one of those recently on bnet) or whatever. It is the person who thinks that they need to spread what they consider to be the truth.

all

You haven't spoken to me much if you think I'm that dismissive of your beliefs. I'm commanded not to worship your gods; does not mean they didn't/don't exist. I'm convinced there was/is a one-eyed wanderer mucking about with the Nordic peoples for his own amusement.

As I said, I don't lump all Christians together. I don't recall ever hearing from you specifically that your faith is the only right one. Or saying that I should follow your god, or anything like that. I'm sorry that you get caught in the middle of all this.

I'm trying to think of how to proceed with this. Whining about perceived injustices is not the road that I necessarily want to take, but I have to say, generally speaking of course, that constantly hearing the most vocal, and most aggressive things from a label that you just happen to share, makes me less apt to worry about whether or not I might sound offensive sometimes.

all

Davelaw wrote:

The official Christian doctrine is that all Myths contain truth; but our Myths are Truth.

... and really happened.

When it comes to official doctrine, it doesn't really bother me what other people believe. It's when people try to convince me of their interpretation that I go off.

I have no problem believing that any myths are truth, they are just localized to a specific region and culture.

If we really wanted to "prove", at least as much as using archeology and geography and saying that it verified supernatural stories, I'll break out the sagas, and we'll go toe to toe. It might be too involved for this discussion though.

Davelaw wrote:You are correct on that point. No other gods before me-is Henotheism; not monotheism.

I've been saying that for years. "The other people" argument exemplifies that well actually.

Davelaw wrote:
Christians are commanded to do so; but can do so without ever speaking.

Dave, I don't mean this in an offensive way, so please don't interpret it that way, but I'd almost have to think you'd have to do it without speaking. What deity a person follows is largely a matter of perspective. What may be true for one person may be false for another. It doesn't mean that it is wrong in general, or in specific, it just can't be applied in some of the places that people try to make it fit.

There are some things that are common though. Mostly regarding how people behave in groups.

all

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:

Davelaw wrote:You are correct on that point. No other gods before me-is Henotheism; not monotheism.

I've been saying that for years. "The other people" argument exemplifies that well actually.

but the "other people" argument conviently skips the next couple chapters where they are wiped out in the deluge.

All, you don't need to walk softly around me; but if I perceive arrogance or superiority in anothers underlying assumption I will call it out-its usually not on my own behalf though-I'm rather thick skinned myself

and I'm willing to concede local floods etc... after the scripture says eretz which is interpreted earth; but Eretz Israel ain't the whole earth its the Land of Israel

Davelaw wrote:
but the "other people" argument conviently skips the next couple chapters where they are wiped out in the deluge.

Except....

Davelaw wrote:
and I'm willing to concede local floods etc... after the scripture says eretz which is interpreted earth; but Eretz Israel ain't the whole earth its the Land of Israel

In any case, my belief in other gods is not because of my understanding that the bible is henotheistic, not monotheistic, but my understanding is because of my belief.

I know there are issues with the "other people" argument. It's just fun!

Davelaw wrote:All, you don't need to walk softly around me; but if I perceive arrogance or superiority in anothers underlying assumption I will call it out-its usually not on my own behalf though-I'm rather thick skinned myself

Well, Dave, it's kind of funny really. I do believe that my beliefs are superior, at least for me. If we are all going to be honest, at least with ourselves, we'd all probably say the same thing. After all, they are our beliefs, and if we thought they were wrong, or deficient, we'd probably be looking for another explanation, wouldn't we?

Now, just speaking for myself. I don't have a problem with arrogance. Especially if you can back it up. Humility isn't exactly a virtue I strive for.

Offense though, I don't set out to offend people, at least not without a reason.

all

Oh yes, I do feel that my beliefs are superior, too, for myself. Since my religious beliefs are based upon a personal relationship with deity (my gods), I find that infinitely superior to following gods that I don't have a personal relationship with. As a matter of fact, I see no reason to follow gods that don't interact with me and I see no reason for other people to follow my gods, when my gods don't want anything to do with them.

DeavonReye wrote:Do you believe that angels would have the ability to have sex with earth females, and as a result, the females giving offspring of giants?

I'm [actually] having a discussion with christians who believe this actually occured, and when I brought up the fact that the angels would have to have the "equipment" in order to get them pregnant, they pulled out the "god is mysterious" card.

Anyway, what is your thoughs on this topic?

I know this may, or may not, require stepping outside the box a bit depending upon the grip your beliefs have upon you but have you every considered that the angels mentioned in the bible could have been some sort of alien species. Perhaps even an ancestor of ours that could also explain humans sudden jump in intelligence.

No doubt to a some what primitive group of humanity such beings would seem god, or angel, like and the concept is actually less strange of a concept then supernatural beings such as angels.

Very well could have happened that way. My only concern is, . . . . . let's say that a species had the intelligence to travel vaste distances of space. They would be extremely advanced. Would they even have considered something so primative as having sex with a species not their own [even if it were possible]? I highly doubt it.

For me, the story mentioned in the OP was nothing more than a fantasy of primative people. Never happened.

It is not a stretch to think that another form of life would be vastly more advanced than us as they would likely be thousands, millions or even billions of years more advanced then we are. We are completely to naive of a species still to say what can and cannot happen.

When you speak of them having sex with humans I am not convinced they had 'sex'. Rather, it could have been, and more likely would have been, genetic manipulation. Clearly this would have been far beyond the comprehension of people then and only now in our society does it seem possible and it would be.

The reasons why they would have done a genetic manipulation is vast. The Sumerians, in what is now Iraq, were the first known culture to develop writing and a sea of other firsts for humanity and they knew many things that does not seem rational for them to know. So the 'first' thing they write down is how they came about their knowledge and they clearly say that the so called star people came down and needed to mine precious minerals for whatever purpose. They 'had sex' with the people of earth to create a working class of people, from the otherwise primitive people to work the mines and in trade gave them a vast improvement of intelligence and knowledge.

This is a very brief version of this story but is also related to ancient Hindu texts and man other ancient cultures.

So... I contend it is a matter of perspective and from their perspective they would have had sex with them when it would have more likely been genetic manipulation. I also find this interesting since it makes sense vs the magical thinking required for the Christian stories that are actually rooted within ancient stories like that from Sumeria.

I think it could have happened.

So does that make us all part alien??

Beribee wrote:So does that make us all part alien??

If the theory is true then yes it would mean that. There is a lot of subjective evidence to support the possibility but it would seem in how everything else on earth exists within harmony save for humanity perhaps something is amiss. I don't know about the theory but it certainly seems possible and in fact more so then magical beings creating us by using some sort of magic to create us.

I suppose you could take the theory one step further and ask why did these aliens need to come to our planet for our minerals, etc? Did they destroy their own planet just as we are destroying ours?

Beribee wrote:I suppose you could take the theory one step further and ask why did these aliens need to come to our planet for our minerals, etc? Did they destroy their own planet just as we are destroying ours?

According to the ancient Sumerian texts that talk about it they explain rather plainly which I can't help but find interesting. They primarily sought out gold but it wasn't for wealth but to be used in their atmosphere to help them deal with their version of global warming. Much of this could use some verification but I recall this part and the whole process I find compelling since it isn't magical nor mystical but sounds entirely like something we would do if we could and who know may need to.

In trade of this mining they gave them a higher intelligence, of which is not overly well answered otherwise, and many of the basic things we use today such as writing (of which this is was the first thing they wrote), major advancements in mathematics, banking and many other things. In many ways if the aliens were using these people as a worker class this would make sense to help them with this as well.

Also, if they were destroying their own planet perhaps whatever they did with us had a similar effect since we are obviously doing a pretty good job of that here as well.

When the bible story says, which many of the biblical stories trace back the Sumerian culture including this one, that "we will create them in 'our' likeness" perhaps this was not a typo and literally meant like them. No doubt any beings that came from another world would seem magical to them and it just fits almost too perfectly.

When we see images of supposed alien beings many people wonder why they seem to look like us and use that in part of discrediting the idea. However, what if the better question is to wonder if we happen to look like them and they just used the closest creature to earth to them to manipulate for their needs. Today we know that soon something like that is not science fiction but certainly possible if not even probable.

All of these ancient myths and legends that are simply dismissed now would be instantly reexamined with very different eyes the moment a alien species was ever unquestionably present here. Why must we wait for that to start asking questions?

It is an interesting thought. . . . . that "angels", "demons", "god" were actually aliens of sort. Perhaps manipulating the genetics of the animal creatures on this planet to create a "smarter animal" out of existing ones [ancestoral primates], then traveling through their history to check on the progress of their "experiment", offering help in times to fast track it [which would promote a sudden increase in technology, . . . their help often looking like "magic"]. It is fun to think about.