Are you Elijah? I am not. Then who are you? John 1:25.

 John the Baptist told those who came to question him that he was NOT Elijah, nor was he the Messiah.

“They asked him, “If you’re not the Messiah, Elijah, or the Prophet, why then are you immersing?” (John 1:25 TLV)

 It is interesting, primarily because, despite John's comment that he was NOT Elijah, people will tell you that Elijah came back as John the Baptizer.

I want you to pay attention to what Jesus said to the disciples.

“Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and the brothers James and John and led them up a high mountain where they were alone. (2) As they looked on, a change came over Jesus: his face was shining like the sun, and his clothes were dazzling white. (3) Then, the three disciples saw Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus. (4) So Peter spoke up and said to Jesus, "Lord, how good it is that we are here! If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah." (5) While he was talking, a shining cloud came over them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my own dear Son, with whom I am pleased—listen to him!" (6) When the disciples heard the voice, they were so terrified that they threw themselves face downward on the ground. (7) Jesus came to them and touched them. "Get up," he said. "Don't be afraid!" (8) So they looked up and saw no one there but Jesus. (9) As they came down the mountain, Jesus ordered them, "Don't tell anyone about this vision you have seen until the Son of Man has been raised from death." (10) Then the disciples asked Jesus, "Why do the teachers of the Law say that Elijah has to come first?" (11) "Elijah is indeed coming first," answered Jesus, "and he will get everything ready. (12) But I tell you that Elijah has already come, and people did not recognize him but treated him just as they pleased. In the same way, they will also mistreat the Son of Man."
(Matthew 17:1-12 GNB)

1. No photographs of Moses and Elijah existed, so how did the disciples know who was standing there talking to Jesus?

   The answer lies in the fact that the three were given an instant download of information. That download is the Holy Spirit. If you are that person who loves to argue and is willing to say, “that's impossible.” I ask you, had the Holy Spirit been restricted from operating on the earth? The answer is NO and if you are prone to argue against that, then prove your thesis. You cannot.

2. The three disciples started raving about building tabernacles for each “prophet,” talking with Jesus. If they had done this, those structures would have quickly become idolatrous structures, snares, and patterns for other idol worship, which Israel was very adept at.

   So what happens next?

   While they were talking, “a shining cloud came over them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my own dear Son, with whom I am pleased—listen to him!" God is trying to snap them out of this human response mode. This voice was much like when God spoke over Jesus at His baptism by John, where those that heard it said it sounded like thunder.

3. Note the next question.

   “Why do the teachers of the Law say that Elijah has to come first?

   That would be confusing, especially if you had just seen Elijah talking with Jesus. As I tried to put my thoughts together about Elijah, I was reminded that he left this earth without dying. The writer of Hebrews tells us that we must die. (Hebrews 9:27.)

   Other witnesses to this assertion that we must die.

   Psalms 103:13-14 NASB Just as a father has compassion on his children, So the LORD has compassion on those who fear Him. (14) For He Himself knows our frame; He is mindful that we are but dust.

   Made in the image of God, a spirit (Genesis 1:26,27.) It was not until Genesis 2:7 that the man was given a body, and this was after the seventh day. We are all built from the earth.

   The author of Ecclesiastes can be attributed to one who identifies as a “son of David,” but this does not necessarily mean it was Solomon. The author, talking about pottery, a created thing that must return to dust, says this.

   “Then the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.” (Ecclesiastes 12:7 TLV )

   Since the psalmist had already told us that we are dust, we will return to dust. But there is a small problem – we have a hope of eternal life filled with peace. So these bodies that will be changed must die, an event that happens in that twinkling of an eye. Why? Because it is the body that became corrupted and is the reason that God could NOT use humans to procreate the Son of God. Having a young girl that had never intimately known a man to be a surrogate mother bypassed the genetic brokenness called sin.

When, then, does Elijah return again?

Ah, when God sends the two witnesses to preach in the streets of Jerusalem. By the way, the world is about to see this happen.

Okay, that may cover one of the witnesses; who is the other? 

First, the question is unimportant, as the church will have gone up in the rapture, and we will NOT see any of that. Many think it will be Moses. But, unfortunately, it will not be Moses, and our evidence for that comes from the writings of Jude.

“But when Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil, was arguing about the body of Moses, he did not dare to render a judgment against him for slander, but said, “May the Lord rebuke you!” “
(Jude 1:9 TLV)

The devil would not be wasting his time arguing about the body of Moses unless there was a dead body. This would tell us that Moses died and was, therefore, excluded from returning to earth and being subjected to death once again. Even our “so-called” legal system prevents double jeopardy, for crying out loud. 

Having eliminated a “major” player, who is left?

There is only one more player left, and that is Enoch.

Yes, I am aware that most have no clue about Enoch and would never call him a prophet, as though being a prophet is a requirement for God to send you back to earth as a witness to the greatness of God.

A significant piece of evidence about Enoch is these words.

“And Enoch continually walked with God...” Genesis 5:24 TLV

Walked is the Hebrew word hālaḵ. The Word Study Dictionary tells us that: “this common word carries with it the basic idea of movement: the flowing of a river. Since the word is also used to describe natural movement, it applies to the descending of floods (Gen_8:3); the crawling of beasts (Lev_11:27); the slithering of snakes (Lev_11:42); the blowing of the wind (Ecc_1:6); the tossing of the sea (Jon_1:13). Since it is usually a person who is moving, it is frequently translated "walk."” “This word is also used metaphorically to speak of the pathways (i.e., behavior) of one's life.” And I add one more word from the NASEC dictionary – accompany.

Every description above speaks to me of an intimacy, whether it was in an up time or a down time. The relationship was mutual as Enoch, who was NO MORE spiritual than you or I, accompanied God/elohim in his everyday affairs. Think about the fact that Enoch, a husband, had to eat, till a field, hunt game, feed a family (he was, by the way, the father of Methuselah,) and he had to pass along the verbal understanding of who elohim is. Things I know about the man.

• Enoch lived 65 years, then fathered Methuselah.

• Enoch walked with God continually for 300 years after he fathered Methuselah.

• Enoch fathered other sons and daughters, which we know nothing about.

• All of Enoch’s days were 365 years. 

• Enoch continually walked with God.

• Enoch walked with God, and then he was no more because God had taken him away.
  (Gen 5:24 BSB)

I can remember when I read about Enoch, asking myself, where and how did Enoch understand what it was like to have such an intimate relationship? 

It would seem that “sin” had stripped that intimacy away, but that was only on our side. I say that because God still came to the couple, respecting their newly found discomfort, and spoke to them in the garden, as He killed some animals for sacrifice and coverings, which He gave them instructions on how to do all that. 

I started to do the math and discovered that Adam, a great-grandfather (many times over), was over 600 years old when Enoch was born. All the people on earth were related in some way to the man that walked with God, and none chose to pursue what this God – elohim, was like. The only man that ever walked with Him in the cool of the day was still alive, and Adam described those days with such longing and passion that even now, as I write, I can hardly see through the tears. 

I am painfully aware of many people who had the opportunity to God. Consider that Enoch had a son, Methuselah, and other children, but only one stands out, primarily because of his age when he died. 

Did you know that Methuselah's name had meaning and was, therefore, a prophecy? 

His name meant when he dies, it will come. 

What was coming?

A flood that would purge the earth of NOT just sin; the flood could not eliminate sin because that “sin” was embedded within the bodies of Noah and his extended family that God saved on that ark. The primary purpose of the flood was to eliminate the effects of fallen angels, sons of god, that were taking any woman they chose and having sexual relations with them. The only purpose behind this was to eliminate the heritage of God on earth. Those children Enoch had that did not get on the ark, descendants of Adam, and Methuselah's children, aside from Noah, were all killed in the flood because all of them had been genetically altered by the fallen angels. Only Enoch, Methuselah, and Noah's family, a descendant of Methuselah, escaped this perversion.

One last shot. Enoch was a prophet. 

It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, 

(Jude 1:14 NASB)

An intensive look at Enoch. Part 3 - the end.

Growing up in church about the only thing we knew of Enoch was that he walked with God and was no more. Common sense tells you there is more; and, when we add in dimensions that include the probability of interactions with giants, and a strange vagueness about the lineage leading to Noah. I always found myself puzzled as I waited for the details and reasons as to why Noah's family was the only one found worthy of saving, but they never came. Doing this intensive study has shown me that Enoch was no less righteous than Noah; that Methuselah was a living prophecy and an indicator of the judgment that was coming. And, that Enoch had a "global" influence, but that information, in the form of The Book of Enoch, or the writings of Tertullian, was taken from us.

Here is where I interject some history and hopefully validation. Feel free to skip or fast forward.

The Book of Enoch had been an integral part of the early Church and had been read aloud among the church body for 700 years. Early Church fathers, such as Clement, Barnabas, and Irenaeus referenced and quoted from the Book of Enoch. Th D. JR Church published the book, “Enoch, The First Book Ever Written,” and he does the commentary on it as it progresses.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch#Rediscovery; we have this information on the origins of The Book of Enoch.

Sir Walter Raleigh, in his History of the World (written in 1616 while imprisoned in the Tower of London), makes the curious assertion that part of the Book of Enoch "which contained the course of the stars, their names and motions" had been discovered in Saba (Sheba) in the first century and was thus available to Origen and Tertullian. He attributes this information to Origen,[59] though no such statement is found anywhere in extant versions of Origen.[60]

Better success was achieved by the famous Scottish traveler James Bruce, who, in 1773, returned to Europe from six years in Abyssinia with three copies of a Ge'ez version.[62] One is preserved in the Bodleian Library, another was presented to the royal library of France, while the third was kept by Bruce. The copies remained unused until the 19th century; Silvestre de Sacy, in "Notices sur le livre d'Enoch",[63] included extracts of the books with Latin translations (Enoch chapters 1, 2, 5–16, 22, and 32). From this, a German translation was made by Rink in 1801.

The first English translation of the Bodleian/Ethiopic manuscript was published in 1821 by Richard Laurence, titled The Book of Enoch, the prophet: an apocryphal production, supposed to have been lost for ages; but discovered at the close of the last century in Abyssinia; now first translated from an Ethiopic manuscript in the Bodleian Library. Oxford, 1821. Revised editions appeared in 1833, 1838, and 1842.

In 1838, Laurence also released the first Ethiopic text of 1 Enoch published in the West, under the title: Libri Enoch Prophetae Versio Aethiopica. The text, divided into 105 chapters, was soon considered unreliable as it was the transcription of a single Ethiopic manuscript.[64]

In 1833, Professor Andreas Gottlieb Hoffmann of the University of Jena released a German translation, based on Laurence's work, called Das Buch Henoch in vollständiger Uebersetzung, mit fortlaufendem Kommentar, ausführlicher Einleitung und erläuternden Excursen. Two other translations came out around the same time: one in 1836 called Enoch Restitutus, or an Attempt (Rev. Edward Murray) and one in 1840 called Prophetae veteres Pseudepigraphi, partim ex Abyssinico vel Hebraico sermonibus Latine bersi (A. F. Gfrörer). However, both are considered to be poor—the 1836 translation most of all—and is discussed in Hoffmann.[65]

The first critical edition, based on five manuscripts, appeared in 1851 as Liber Henoch, Aethiopice, ad quinque codicum fidem editus, cum variis lectionibus, by August Dillmann. It was followed in 1853 by a German translation of the book by the same author with a commentary titled Das Buch Henoch, übersetzt und erklärt. It was considered the standard edition of 1 Enoch until the work of Charles.

Jude, the author of his own New Testament book, quotes a prophecy from Enoch that is not in our Bibles and can only be found in the Book of Enoch. The writer of Hebrews places Enoch in the hall of fame for his great faith, by which he walked off this earth and into God's arms, never to see death (Hebrews 11:5). And we find the name of Enoch in Luke 3:37, where he is listed in the lineage of Jesus Christ.

There is nothing that tells us that Enoch merely sat in one spot, waiting for God to take him away.

The man lived 365 years, and we have links between Enoch and Egypt and Africa. One of those who articulated regarding Enoch was Tertullian.

His full name was Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, c. 155 – c. 240 AD and he was a prolific early Christian author from Carthage in the Roman province of Africa. Born:160 AD, Died:220 AD, Carthage, Tunisia [Wikipedia]

Others, including “Arabic writers, tell us of pyramids and pillars erected by him, on which he engraved the arts and the instruments of them; and some writers ascribe the invention of letters of letters and writing of books to him.” JR Church on page 23 of his book The Book of Enoch, tells us that he obtained this information from John Gill, D.D., Ch. 2, Pg. 36 of his book A Dissertation Concerning the Antiquity of the Hebrew Language, Letters, Vowel Points, and Accents.

Diane Severance, PH.D. Writing for the website Christianity Today, tells us that “Tertullian coined the phrase Trinity, a word that does not appear anywhere in the Bible, to help us to understand the New Testament teaching about what God is like.” “In later life, he lost favor with much of the Church when he at least temporarily took up with the Montanists-- what we would probably call today a puritanical-charismatic sect.”

This Egyptian and Northern African influence may explain why writings on Enoch were found in the Ethiopian nation.

Since we understand that the earth had become so dangerous that the thoughts of every man were only evil; and, that, men like Nimrod were merely violent chieftains and hunters of men, then one can safely assume that this was the universal theme of all those who had come from a fallen angel descent.

This man Enoch, though perhaps less vague now, still leaves many questions. One of those questions arises as we try to ascribe names to the two witnesses we see in the Revelation. These two witnesses who stand in the streets of Jerusalem, testifying to Jehovah; performing miracles; stopping the rain; calling fire down from heaven, and preventing, for 1260 days, any attempts at harming them, are removed from the earth and back to the Father at the midpoint of the seven years of wrath.

Let me attempt to address some arguments that may arise.

Genesis 6:1-2 NASB Now it came about when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2) that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose.

Note that the verse tells us:

• “ they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose.”
  The Hebrew word for took also means to fetch, seize, and use.
  I seriously doubt there was much anyone could do about it.

• “when men began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them,”
   The Hebrew word for multiply also means to cast together, that is, increase, especially in number; also to multiply by the myriad:

There is nothing about this statement, that limits it to the chronological period exclusive to Genesis 6:1, and may well have been applied to babies created in the garden before the fall.

I said it before, but it bears repeating. Eve had children prior to the fall of man.

Genesis 3:16 Darby To the woman he said, I will greatly increase thy travail and thy pregnancy; with pain thou shalt bear children; and to thy husband shall be thy desire, and he shall rule over thee.

1. There would be no reason to make this assertion we see in Genesis 3:16 unless she had already been having children, as the statement would make no sense. 
2. The Darby translation demonstrates an increase in the travail. The Hebrew word ‛iṣṣāḇôn also denotes pain and sorrow. So pain and sorrow are both over and above whatever Eve deemed ordinary.
3. Having a man and a woman run naked through the most serene atmosphere you can imagine would have only evoked their passions for each other.
4. After Cain kills his brother and gets admonished by God, he shows some concern as he says, people will kill me. I have heard the illogical arguments that project far into the future where Adam and Eve would have eventually filled the earth with children. But we ignore the context and tense, as what Cain describes is a present threat. Cain also gets himself a wife; here again, we project into the future in hopes that mom and dad will produce a daughter that Cain can have for a wife. There is something sick and distasteful about the very idea.

Genesis 6:3 NASB 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."

• “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh,”
  While this will impact the lineage of those extending out to Noah, the effect is not felt until after the flood. The evidence for this can readily be ascertained from virtually any of the people that existed prior to the flood. Methuselah lived 969 years, and when he died, the flood came.
  But there was a more pressing concern. So God, to constrain these violent, enormous hybrids who were part flesh and breath, restricts the age of everyone who will live on earth for a maximum of 120 years.

“The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward.”

Genesis 6:4 CJB The N'filim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; these were the ancient heroes, men of renown.

After what? The flood.

Does that mean that some of these titans survived the flood and lived on? No, it means fallen angels continued their sick game plan, to disrupt and destroy God's plan, by filling the earth with hybrids. Look at what the verse says,

“ when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bore children to them.”

They took what they wanted and always produced offspring.

Notice one more thing in this verse.

It says, “these were the ancient heroes, men of renown.” 

What our frightened little minds do, is to attribute this statement to men like those that gathered with King David, as they too were mighty men. 

But this was not the case with the pre-flood giants, for these titans became the imagery and god-like characteristics from which all myths are made.

An intense look at Enoch. Part two.

In the last post, you were introduced to Enoch and how he came to walk this earth. It's no great mystery, fathers have children and those children then have their own families.  But, what that lineage does not show, nor explain, is why Cain, the first born, was set aside. Nor does that lineage expressly explain how Enoch came to have a relationship with God that so closely paralleled what Adam had. Neither does Enoch's lineage explain the influence of the giants. Because of a few key paragraphs, we have clues as to why this man Enoch seemed to stand alone; that is not exactly true, as Methuselah and Noah also stood as upright pillars. I am hoping you begin to see an odd vagueness as this story leads to Noah and speaks of giants. There is nothing subtle about this story, and, as the Prophet Daniel said,

Daniel 12:3-4  "But those who can discern (CJB) will shine brightly like the brightness of the expanse of heaven, and those who lead the many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever. 4) "But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the end of time; many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase." NASB

We are in those days and many are beginning to point people to the truth that is in the Word of God. Choose to be one of those who shines.

An intense look at Enoch. Part two.

Now move forward in time to the fall of man. We only have two people in the middle of the garden at this time so we can assume that no one else was aware of what happened by hearing or seeing. Just as Eve experienced death, everyone alive suddenly felt dead on the inside, in their spirits.

How does someone, who for an extended period had creative and dominant abilities comparable to their father Adam, react to a world that they can no longer control?

Genesis 3:15 Darby And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he shall crush thy head, and thou shalt crush his heel.

As soon as Satan heard this statement from God we see in Genesis 3:15, the game was on. So what does this all add up to? The implications are that the fallen angel hybridization program began immediately, and we are still seven generations away from Enoch at this point.

One of the things I must give some consideration to is lineage and the impact of the Nephilim on Enoch's life. Nephilim is the offspring of fallen angels breeding with humans.

Let's bring Cain back into the picture for a moment. What if in taking a wife, Cain has chosen a Nephilim? Then everything produced through this union would have been a hybridized being, whose eventual motivations were only evil and violent.

Genesis 6:5 Darby And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of Man was great on the earth, and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart only evil continually.

Okay, let's try another scenario with Cain and his lovely bride. What if their son Enoch married (use that term loosely) a hybrid? There again the only possible result ends up with a hybrid. If you are not getting the point here, it is that the hybridization program was meant to eliminate an untainted humanity, and thus prevent the seed, God spoke of, from being born.

I already pointed out that Enoch is the seventh generation from Adam. (Gen 5:4-21). Without background information, I have nothing more than numbers. However, numbers are not a bad thing as they allow me to do the math and figure out things like the availability of Adam to share his wisdom with Enoch, or when Methuselah died. These all, as we have seen, had to deal with the oppression and violence of these giants.

Let's attempt to consider what role these immense beings played.

There were Giants, but not just giants, they were Titans. A Swedish museum has the remains of a skeleton that is over 3 meters tall; that equates to being over 21 feet tall. Other remains have been found placing the heights of these titans to be as much as 60 feet tall. But thanks to a concerted effort by the Smithsonian Institute which led a massive effort to gather and eliminate any evidence of giants when they became known, virtually everyone is a skeptic. There is no doubt in my mind that such evidence would only make the Bible more valid, and people would then put their trust in the stories that scripture tells, and Satan, therefore, made a stand against that truth by removing the evidence. Explore this piece of information about evidence found on World Net Daily. http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/smithsonian-admits-to-destruction-of-thousands-of-giant-human-skeletons-in-early-1900s/

Genesis 6:4 MKJV There were giants in the earth in those days. And also after that, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bore to them, they were mighty men who existed of old, men of renown.

“they were mighty men who existed of old, men of renown.”

The preceding statement doesn't sound so ominous, as mighty men and men of renown could be the description given to a leader in business. Perhaps another translation will provide us with some insight.

Genesis 6:4 CJB The N'filim 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; these were the ancient heroes, men of renown.

These Titans are the people from which the ancient myths and legends were formed, and there it is in front of us, in scripture.

The word translated giants is the Hebrew word n^ep̱iyliym.

The following is from the Word Study Dictionary.

"A masculine noun used only in the plural meaning giants. The celebrated, puzzling passage where this term is first used is Gen_6:4 which merely transliterates the Hebrew word into English as NePhplim. These beings evidently appeared on the earth in the ancient past when divine beings cohabited with woman, and NePhplim, the mighty men or warriors of great fame, were the offspring. This huge race of NePhplim struck fear into the Israelite spies who had gone up to survey the land of Canaan (see Num_13:31-33). The sons of Anak, a tall race of people, came from the NePhplim (Num_13:33; cf. Deu_2:10-11; Deu_9:2; Jos_15:14). Eze_2:21, Eze_2:27 may have the NePhplim in mind, possibly equating them with the mighty men or mighty warriors in the passage. These beings were not divine but only at best great, powerful men."

In spite of physical evidence and what scripture says, many will still dispute the existence of giants. Those who try to challenge their existence have difficulty when the story of David arises where he lops off the head of Goliath who was easily over nine feet tall. Goliath, however, was not the only giant, as Og, the king of Bashan, had a bed made for him that was over thirteen feet long.

Deuteronomy 3:11 ERV (Og was the king of Bashan. He was one of the few Rephaites still alive. His bed was made from iron, and it was over 13 feet long and 6 feet wide. The bed is still in the city of Rabbah, where the Ammonites live.)

The premise behind the giants was that fallen angels cohabited with human women and produced offspring. We get this from the book of Jude and Genesis 6:4. However, we can learn that Enoch spoke of it as well.

Jude 1:6 NASB 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,

Genesis 6:4 ISV  The Nephilim were on the earth at that time (and also immediately afterward), when those divine beings were having sexual relations with those human women, who gave birth to children for them. These children became the heroes and legendary figures of ancient times.

Domain is the Hebrew word archḗ and means chief (in various applications of order, time, place or rank): - beginnings. Abandoned comes from the Hebrew word apoleipō and means to leave behind. “Their proper abode.” conveys the idea of a personal residence. Their personal residence was heaven and they it, however, my guess is that they were thrown out with Satan. WSD

 Jude 1:6, as we saw above, includes an ominous statement.

“He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day,”

A logical assumption is that the “He” in this verse, is God. The idea of keeping is from the Hebrew tēréō, and means to warden, guard, or keep an eye on. If, in your attempt to sort this out logically, you come to this passage in 2Peter 2:4. Wouldn't you then say, that the fallen angels are all taken out of the way as they are held until judgment comes?

2Peter 2:4 (AKJV)For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved to judgment;

And yet we see that as yet they are not all kept in bonds under darkness.

What do you then do with this statement from Job?

Job 1:6 (AKJV)Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. And the LORD said to Satan, From where come you? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

The apparent fact is that Satan and his fallen crowd are still walking about in the earth. We are made aware that several fallen angels are chained in the Euphrates river, awaiting the day they are to be released to bring havoc on the earth as part of God's judgment, during the seven years. But it is evident that not all are chained up.

If these angels that we see in the book of Job, are not chained and restricted from doing things like cohabiting with human women, then perhaps this idea of fallen angels, once again, after the flood, creating a hybridized race of people is not so absurd.

In looking at Genesis 6:4 once again; there are only a handful of translations bold enough to tell this story as it is.

Genesis 6:4 ISV The Nephilim were on the earth at that time (and also immediately afterward), when those divine beings were having sexual relations with those human women, who gave birth to children for them. These children became the heroes and legendary figures of ancient times.

The God's Word translation merely integrated the sons of God as some aspect of humanity, like they were some self-proclaimed demigods. This statement is not that far-fetched, for, in Genesis chapter ten, we see Nimrod, the son of Cush. It is the elaboration that should catch our attention.

Genesis 6:4 GW The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, as well as later when the sons of God slept with the daughters of other humans and had children by them. These children were famous long ago.

The point here is, that these beings had sex with human women and produced children. As I stated previously, this concept is one that is not foreign to us. Why not? You would have been living under a rock, without electricity, not to be aware that people have claimed to have been abducted by aliens and impregnated. Can you imagine the women in the time of Genesis, trying to tell someone what happened to them? Mary, the mother of Jesus, had a similar problem as she informed the women who challenged her about her pregnancy, that this baby in her womb was God's baby.

Having shared this information in conversations,  one of the arguments thrown back in my face is, that the "angels are sexless because they can't give and take in marriage." Seriously, we have people all around us having intercourse and they are not married. So there is obviously something more to this. This basis for this challenge comes from a question that the Pharisees ask Jesus while trying to trap him. It began with this,

Matthew 22:23-24 ISV  That same day some Sadducees, who claim there is no resurrection, came to Jesus and asked him,  24)  "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for his brother.'

Matthew 22:28 ISV  Now in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be, since all of them had married her?"

Jesus response was,

Matthew 22:29-30 ISV"You are mistaken because you don't know the Scriptures or God's power,  30)  because, in the resurrection, people neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.

The IVPBBC explains this sentence like this,

"That is, they shall be elevated above the circumstances of mortality, and live in a manner and in a kind of conversation similar to that of the angels. It does not imply that they shall be equal in intellect, but only “in the circumstances of their existence,” as that is distinguished from the way in which mortals live."

Without an intense theological background, I tend to go with the obvious answer. Jesus told them, people will not marry nor will they be given in marriage in heaven. They are, however, like the angels. This is not a denial or confirmation that angels can mate, but virtually every observance we have of angels is that they are large and powerful warriors. That tends to give them male characteristics, and Genesis tells us that the fallen ones did have intercourse with human women.

I also realize that we can only understand the world through our inner brokenness; a brokenness that happens to like sex. Unfortunately, that desire is deeply tied to our selfish motivations and desires. Angels, with the exception of the third that followed Satan, have no selfish desires, and merely do what they are told. Marriage and intercourse then, are not a part of their job description. Obviously then, it is feasible.

Nimrod came after the flood, but there are some similarities that might help us understand these giants.

With a little bit of background research into the Hebrew words used to describe him, we can determine that Nimrod, is probably not an offspring of one of these fallen angels. However, this description we have of Nimrod in Genesis 10 has some ominous words used in association with him.

Genesis 10:8-11 NASB Now Cush became the father of Nimrod; he became a mighty one on the earth. 9) He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; therefore it is said, "Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the LORD." 10) The beginning of his kingdom was Babel and Erech and Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. 11) From that land, he went forth into Assyria, and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah,

“he became” This word became is interesting as it is used two times in the passage from Genesis 10:8, and yet, each instance is a different Hebrew word. 

For example, Cush became the father of Nimrod.

What can I learn from that? Since Cush is a human, then Nimrod should be a human also. But, even though scripture almost implies that the offspring were only males, that is not the case. Therefore, just because the word gibbôr, which can also mean an overwhelming influence and not height does not exclude the possibility that Nimrod was a massive man.

When verse eight speaks of Nimrod, in saying, he became. It is using the Hebrew word hâyâh which means to exist or to come to pass. Since we already know that Nimrod didn't simply appear, then we also know that who he became was a process. The NASB concordance indicates the word chalal in association with the phrase “he became.” "chalal," we are told, is a primary root and means; to pollute, defile, profane. It seems logical to assume, that Nimrod became polluted, defiled and profane. He also became a principal polluter and defiler of the representation of God. 

As corroborating evidence, when Nineveh comes up in the story of Jonah, most do not realize that Nimrod, and his defiling ways, was the founder and builder of Nineveh. Although it is not told to us in the story of Jonah, the prudent can learn that a significant influence on the Assyrians, the people of Nineveh, is Dagon (a prevalent god throughout the Middle East,) the half man – half fish god. In Judges 16 we see Samson pulling down the Philistine temple of Dagon.

“a mighty one” - a double usage of the word gibbor which means, [powerful; by implication warrior, tyrant: - giant.] [The Hebrew word gibbor is a derivative of another word gabar and also carries the implications of - one who conducts himself arrogantly, and surpasses.]

It could easily be said of Nimrod that he was a giant, but it is clear that he was also a powerful tyrant. Is there any wonder why Jonah wanted these people dead.

“hunter” - is the Hebrew word tsûd. A primitive root meaning to lie alongside - in wait; by implication to catch an animal (figuratively men).

One of our reactions as civilized people is to refuse to consider the possibility that Nimrod could have been hunting people. Based on the context we cannot exclude the idea; and, sadly, we have the testimony of Israel's history and Jonah that tells that Nimrod's Assyrians did hunt other humans and brutalized them.

If the implications are nothing less than scary, then what does that mean to Enoch. Perhaps nothing, perhaps everything, but if I am going to go any farther, then I have to expand my focus.

Genesis 6:5 NET. But the LORD saw that the wickedness of humankind had become great on the earth. Every inclination of the thoughts of their minds was only evil all the time.

Because of sin - the predisposition to act out of selfishness, along with corruption from fallen angels, the uncorrupted human gene pool had been reduced so severely that there was only one family line left that was uncorrupted.

My point? With righteous men like Enoch and Methuselah, I would have thought we would have seen a more significant impact on relatives, and thus would have had them on the Ark with Noah.

As we read, we assume things like Methuselah being destroyed by drowning in the flood, but that did not happen. Several times now I have come across a definition of Methuselah's name that states when he dies, it will come. The idea is that Methuselah was a living prophecy.

An intensive look at Enoch. Part one.

I have been looking at Enoch and attempting to write about him, and his surroundings, for weeks now. It has been nothing less than a struggle as the things I talk about here, are controversial (I know this because I have been around religion for a long time and I have had first-hand experience with this.) And, as I will mention in the post, there seems to be so little known about the man; at least that is the impression we were given growing up in church.
May I interject something here? Growing up in church rarely brings you to an understanding of who God is. Oh sure, you can walk away with a boatload of traditions and opinions, but few of them are correct, accurate, or appropriate. For example: In today's morning study, the leader said, "you will not find a Pharisee in heaven." I do not believe that is a valid statement, nor was it appropriate. For weren't Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimethia Pharisees?

Mark 15:43 CJB  Yosef of Ramatayim, a prominent member of the Sanhedrin who himself was also looking forward to the Kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Yeshua's body.

John 3:1 NASB Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews;

So for someone to make such a brash statement like NO Pharisees will be found in heaven, is blatantly untrue. There is a point to this tirade and that is, that there is a multitude of things being preached and taught that are at worst decrepit lies, and at best, false teachings;  none-the-less, both can send you into a pit of deception. If we have bought into the lies, choosing to not challenge what we hear by reading the Word of God for ourselves. Then how will we know what is true? Jesus, by the way, is the one who said, "no one comes to the Father but through me." Is it possible that: the tearing of the veil in the temple; giving himself as the final sacrifice; pouring out his own blood on the heavenly altar, and giving his life as the payment for the redemption of the world is the thing that restored our way back to the Father?  Seriously, the price has been paid; and all that is required is that WE acknowledge and accept Jesus as that final lamb that slaughtered for us.
But what does religion do? It clouds the issue, creates more rules, and condemns every stupid thing we do as we stumble through this thing called life.

Having said all that, I give you an intensive look at Enoch.

Enoch is a man that few talk about, and yet, Enoch's legacy is found in Genesis, the book of Jude, Hebrews 11 and 2 Peter 2. We also see Enoch's name entwined in the history of Middle East. There is no doubt that Enoch interacted with the Nephilim, and, that he walked with God in such a way that he was able to walk off the earth.

By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. (Heb 11:5, UKJV)

A man like this is worthy of a concentrated look and study.

The first reference we have to the name Enoch is in Genesis 4:17 where the wife of Cain, (the man who killed his brother Abel,) is having a baby. They named that baby Enoch. This child is not the Enoch we are looking for but is the son of Cain and the father of another called Enoch. This son of Cain built a city and named that city after his son, Enoch. However, neither of these play a role in getting us to the Enoch we desire to understand. If I look carefully at the genealogy provided in Genesis chapter five, I find that Cain played NO role in the bloodline that leads us to Noah. We will probe a possible reason why Cain is excluded further on in the thesis.

Do we have other methods of determining which Enoch we want, as there are two so far?
Yes, and one of the answers comes from the book of Jude.

And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his saints, (Jude 1:14, UKJV)

Genesis provides an excellent genealogy through Seth, not Cain.

And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. And Seth lived a hundred and five years, and brings forth Enos: And Seth lived after he brings forth Enos eight hundred and seven years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And Enos lived ninety years, and brings forth Cainan: And Enos lived after he brings forth Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died. And Cainan lived seventy years and brought forth Mahalaleel: And Cainan lived after he brings forth Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died. And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and brings forth Jared: And Mahalaleel lived after he brings forth Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died. And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he brings forth Enoch: And Jared lived after he brings forth Enoch eight hundred years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died. And Enoch lived sixty and five years and brings forth Methuselah: (Gen 5:4-21, UKJV)

Since Jude says that Enoch was the seventh generation from Adam, let's test the claim. Adam; Seth; Enos; Cainan; Mahalaleel; Jared; Enoch. There it is, seven generations.

The name Enoch alone tells us much about the man, as his name means dedicated or disciplined. This dedication must have been a predominant aspect of his life because we have this,

And Enoch walked with God after he brings forth Methuselah three hundred years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. (Gen 5:22-24, UKJV)

What do we have that could explain Enoch's understanding of God and how to communicate with God as if that is a big mystery?

If we do the math, we find that Adam was 622 years old when Enoch is born, and Adam lived to be 930 years old. Therefore Adam may have had a substantial impact on Enoch, and Adam is the only logical choice to influence Enoch.

If Adam was able to inform Enoch and demonstrate what this idea of walking with God looked like, Why then didn't Adam merely walk off the earth as Enoch did?
Maybe the answer, as with Cain, has more to do with their cataclysmic errors in judgment.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges explains this walk that Enoch lived as a combination of fellowship and progress.

[walked with God] The phrase here, as in Genesis 5:24, used of Enoch, has passed into common use to express intimacy of communion with God. It denotes more than either standing in His presence, or walking before Him (Genesis 6:9, Genesis 17:1), or following after Him. It combines the ideas of fellowship and progress. It is the picture of one who has God with him in all the various scenes of life.

The word took, is explained in the Cambridge Bible commentary as well.

This expression is used to denote an unaccountable disappearance, cf. Genesis 42:13; Genesis 42:36; 1Kings 20:40. In order to make it quite clear that the words did not imply death, LXX renders οὐχ εὑρίσκετο; Vulg. “ non-apparuit.” The shortness of his life as compared with the other patriarchs might have been regarded as a proof of Divine displeasure if the next sentence had not been added to explain the circumstance. [for God took him] “Took,” or “received,” him, i.e., into His own abode, without death.

The Hebrew word for took is lāqaḥ: A verb meaning to take, to get. Its exact meaning must be discerned from its context. It is used of grasping or seizing a person or an animal. Word Study Dictionary.

You will also find the word lāqaḥ used in Ezekiel 8:3 where Ezekiel describes the spirit, lifting him up by the hair and taking him, by visions, to God.

This word lāqaḥ is very similar to the Greek word Harpazo, which also means to snatch away. Harpazo is the Greek word that we substitute for the word rapture. In either case, it conveys the rapid removal of the church from the earth prior to God's wrath being poured out on the planet – just like Noah and the flood; and, just like Lot before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

In the book of Jude, we have a prophecy attributed to Enoch which cannot be verified in the Old Testament by direct comparison, because it is only found in The Book of Enoch (Enoch 1:9.)

Jude 1:14-15 MKJV And Enoch, the seventh from Adam, also prophesied to these, saying, Behold, the Lord came with myriads of His saints, 15) to do judgment against all, and to rebuke all the ungodly of them concerning all their ungodly works which they ungodly did, and concerning all the hard things ungodly sinners spoke against Him.

Assuming you don't have a copy of the Book of Enoch, is a statement like this so odd?
Hardly, and here are some examples that convey that theme, although they came long after Enoch.

Daniel 7:18 But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.

Zechariah 14:5 MKJV And you shall flee to the valley of My mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. And Jehovah my God shall come, and all the saints with you.

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus will come as described in Revelation 19:14 with all the armies of heaven, just as Enoch described.

If this was all the Biblical information I had on Enoch, what then do I make of this man.

I think it would be safe to say that:

• Enoch was a good man.
  While the majority of the world was going crazy, Enoch remained sane.
  Genesis 6:5 NASB 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 passage implies that the whole world had gone mad. Even if one man had not, then I should not be allowed to say all. It is safe to assume that something close to all is being suggested, however, Enoch cannot be counted among that number.
  While it is safe to assume that Enoch was a good man, all we have is Hebrews 11:5 to validate that claim. There is something certain about Hebrews 11:5, as the writer of Hebrews had no more information about Enoch than we have, unless they had access to a copy of The Book of Enoch, as J.R. Church claims they did. Suddenly it seems the Bible itself is validating this Book of Enoch.
• He was a worshiper of God.
  Enoch seems to have taken worship to the next level; something I wish I could attain. But again, there is nothing in the Old Testament to validate this claim outside of this,
  Genesis 5:24 NASB Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.
  There is, however, this line we find in Hebrews 11:5,
  “ for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God.”
  The words obtained and witness are the same word marturéō which means (according to the Word Study Dictionary) To bear witness, to testify to the truth of what one has seen, heard, or knows. Now, did God bear witness to Enoch, or did Enoch bear witness to God? Since The Book of Enoch was known and read throughout the early church for the first 700 years of its existence; then it is safe to say that Enoch bore witness to: not only the current and future acts of the living God (prophetically,) but also the activities of the fallen angels - as they attempted to prevent God from bringing in the seed (through man) that would crush Satan's head.
• It is safe to say that Enoch walked the earth at the same time as the Titans.
  Dissecting this requires that we use our brains and think outside the religious boxes in which we entrench ourselves. Our principal source of information comes from Genesis 6. What is the problem with that? The problem is that we make immediate and critical assumptions based upon the placement of the information in the, so called, Bible “chronology.”
  Allow me to explain. We know that God created man (male and female,) put a body on them, and placed them in the garden. We assume that garden was a small selective spot and that they never left it, but neither of those ideas is valid. All you have to do is travel a bit, stop at the local museum, and you find that the barren location you are now standing on was once a vibrant, tropical garden.
  What we do know is this,
  Genesis 3:1-3 NASB Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" 2) The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3) but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"
  In this expansive place called a garden was a plot of ground considered to be the center. Here is where the fall of man took place.
  Another assumption we make is that there were no children born to Adam and Eve until the fall. If that was the case, then why would God have to make this declaration to Eve?
  Genesis 3:16 NASB To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain, you will bring forth children;
  This comment by God would make no sense to Eve unless she was producing children without all the pain and discomfort normally associated with childbirth. Add to this piece of logic a question recently thrown at me, once again; “where did Cain get his wife?” The answer lies in setting aside tradition, assumption, and faulty teaching. Since we legitimately do not know how long Adam and Eve walked this earth prior to the fall. It is only natural to think that two naked humans would have had intercourse, only without the self-serving motives sin brings. And, this, is the only reasonable explanation for Cain to obtain a wife. The alternative, of Cain, waiting for his parents to produce a female child is ridiculous. Besides that, we relish the idea of clinging to twisted chronological logic, which cannot explain why Cain would say, people, will kill me, especially when we want to believe that there were no other people. And do we have any reason that logically explains why Cain was able to go to a city? Mind you, at this time in civilizations history; a city could have been several thatch huts and a fire pit. It still implies others living there and the probability of families of their own.
  If this idea of children before the fall is valid, then what kind of mentality would they have had? They were just like their parents, godlike.