creationist
4,563
edits
Line 168: | Line 168: | ||
* - With due respect, I get where your coming from. I just personally don't agree it, I see "point b" as being after the flood. I believe it was ''an intermediate period'' leading up and finally finishing at the Flood. The whole thing really rests on a negative report given by and evidently that was intended to terrorize ('''Numbers 14:11'''). The language used in | * - With due respect, I get where your coming from. I just personally don't agree it, I don't see "point b" as being after the flood. I believe it was ''an intermediate period'' leading up and finally finishing at the Flood. The whole thing really rests on a negative report given by and evidently that was intended to terrorize ('''Numbers 14:11'''). The language used in this report reflects that. Now just how trustworthy were these individuals? They after all embellished their report if we can even call it that. ('''Numbers 13:33b''') the "like grasshoppers" phrase for example comes to mind. Otherwise, how do we know our teachers, our friends, our parents, our co-workers, etc., aren't Nephilims themselves? --[[User:Anaccuratesource|Anaccuratesource]] 11:44, 7 July 2012 (PDT) | ||
* - The Bible doesn't mention a second coming of the "son of God" and mating with the "daughters of men." --[[User:Anaccuratesource|Anaccuratesource]] 14:34, 7 July 2012 (PDT) |