Let’s start with Genesis 6:1-4:
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.3 And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants 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. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown
It says the “sons of God” and daughters of men bore giants, mighty men of renown. Curiosity compels asking this question: Who are the “sons of God?” Modern commentators say they were the descendants of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve, the godly son from whom Jesus came after many generations. The phrase “daughters of men,” they also say, refers to the descendants of Cain, the wicked son of Adam who killed Abel. So, plugging in these definitions, what are they saying? That the marriages of godly men and ungodly women produced giants. How did that happen? A strange idea. There is not one verse of Scripture backing this theory. No Scripture anywhere, either, refers to the descendants of Seth as “sons of God.” Why are godly men and ungodly women singled out? Why not the reverse? And why would their sexual union produce giants? Their theory is too odd. This wild idea proves that you can’t always follow the commentators.
As it turns out, the phrase “sons of God” does appear in Scripture. We find it in Job 38, where God is chastising Job for not seeing the big picture of His sovereignty. He is speaking here of the creation of the earth. Here is God talking to Job:
“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
I remind you, this is at the time of the creation of the earth. Notice how the "sons of God" were present. But as you read the order of events in the first chapter of Genesis, man was not created at this time; that was later. Thus, the only ones who were there with God were the angels. They have to be the "sons of God.” For further proof, in Job 1 and 2, when Satan appears in heaven to accuse Job, angels are in attendance and are again called by that name, “sons of God." For my third and final proof, one translation of the Bible, the Septuagint, was so reliable that its Old Testament was used by the early apostles, such as Paul and Peter. It simply translates the Hebrew word in Genesis 6; instead of “sons of God,” they straightforward called them angels. Thus, with these three proofs, the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 were, by all reasonable accounts, angels.
But mot of us believe angels are always good. But Scriptures (Isaiah 14:12ff) show that there were angels earlier that rebelled against God and were thus called fallen angels. That Satan himself was their chief. So Genesis 6 is probably blaming these fallen angels, who were immortal, as lusting after earth women. They had sex with them; they had babies, called Nephilim, that were giants.
I'll further speculate that their aberrant children were not only giants, but violent, and helped greatly in degrading the culture. Genesis 6 also shows that God was so sick of the corrupt culture that He brought about a flood under Noah that wiped the entire population of humanity away, except Noah’s family; which I presume (another speculation, to be proved later) had the only DNA that were unpolluted.
Now, to answer an objection some of you knowledgeable folk might raise--it’s true that Jesus said in Matthew 22 that heavenly angels are unmarried, so would not lust after women. But these in Genesis 6 are rule-breakers, and not heavenly--their ultimate destination is hell. Anyway, they took human form--as men. That is not unusual; it happens many times in Scripture, such as Genesis 19. So, back to Genesis 6, the fallen angels entered earth with a physical body, to have sex and to marry. But this broke God’s rule. What rule, you ask? The one implied in another Scripture, which again will back our theory up. In the Book of Jude, some angels are accused of the sin of “not keeping their proper domain,” and leaving “their own abode.” Their proper domain was originally heaven. But they broke that rule, and became fallen. It's fair to assume that when they became humans on earth, that was the first act that broke God's rule. They messed with human society, which God would only let them do upon His command. So God punished them by placing them in “chains under darkness.” As it says in Jude:
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Now, another proof: please note the mention of Sodom and Gomorrah and these angels in the same Jude Scripture. It suggests that they had the same sin going on. It is called a “similar manner.” You can tie the Jude angels to the Genesis 6 angels very easily now. There were two characteristics both possessed: first, in Sodom, they had "given themselves over to sexual immorality." The same is true of Genesis angels: They lusted and wanted to have sex with these desirable women so much that they were willing to leave their domain, heaven, though they knew they would be punished severely for it. Secondly, note the reference in Jude to their going after "strange flesh." That's true in Jude, since the sin was homosexuality, which God designed for men and women. (Subject for another blog). That's true in the Genesis 6 angels simply because angels are immortal and earth women are mortal. So angelic "flesh" is not human flesh. It's strange flesh. Thus, the reference in Jude has to be the same angels that are spoken about in Genesis 6.
This is confirmed, and proven again, by II Peter 2. Note the “chains of darkness” reference again, which now ties all three Scriptures together. Here's II Peter:
For....God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;
Now note another connection; this time to Noah. This ties II Peter back to Genesis 6, where Noah was introduced. Thus, again, all three verses—Genesis, Jude, and II Peter-- speak of the same angels, lusting after earth women in Genesis 6.
I remind you that those angels were rebellious and fallen. The angels that stayed in heaven who were NOT disobedient are the ones that carry out God's commands in Scripture, and protect us now, including fighting with "rulers of the darkness of this age," making warnings and happy announcements to humans, and worshiping God in heaven.
Back to the union of fallen angels and women. The evil result was that the babies turned out to be giants. Why giants? Now I get to my very important speculation: The story is the DNA. Angel DNA is not human; but mixed with human DNA of the women, that sex act with "strange flesh" produced aberrant children--who can predict how that DNA mix would result? This is not impossible to believe.
Now here’s another point in the theory: It's true that when the children grew up, their activities were joined (as it says in Genesis) to a vast increase in violence and evil. The question is, were the appearance of the giants and increase in evil cause and effect? The answer to that is the Scriptural word “then.” Note how fast the giants and violence are close to one another in Scripture. Reading further in Genesis 6:
Those (the giants) were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth…12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.
When you think about it, tying the giants to violence is easy. The giants were loved by the people for their sinful ability to conquer and killL Let's just show them the enemy--and in those days, anyone not of your tribe could be your enemy. Thus, if a tribe has a giant, they'll attack other tribes to conquer them for booty, slaves, and women. This heightens the killing, the blood shed. It seems reasonable to then suspect that the giants, the greatest of warrior-heroes who ever lived, were often worshiped as demigods. After all, they had one parent mortal, the other parent immortal—there would have been a fascination with them just because of that. (It would also explain the stories of powerful giants like Atlas and Hercules, and others in world literature of the day.) They were called “men of renown”—the public knew them. They were rock stars in that day. They were incredibly strong. Based on Galileo's estimates of size and weight, they could easily have weighed over 3000 pounds! They also had superior intellect and could make weapons of war (see Genesis 4 and 11). I suspect Satan passed along a lot of information to them. So, I see men falling into idolatry by worshiping these creatures. And idolatry will ruin any godliness you had faster than anything. I’m sure they were happy for the attention, and it boosted their ego—egged them on to perform outrageous feats for entertainment. How many men could a giant kill? Can we capture more men, make them slaves, take advantage of their wives, loot their houses, with this giant as our leader? Let’s find out!
To further prove my DNA speculation, let's take a closer look at the word “corrupt” in Gen. 6:12 above. In Hebrew, the word means “marred, spoiled, perverted,” and “injured.” So their corruptness was not just immoral, as perverted says--the definitions "marred" and "injured" guide us to something physical. I speculate that the mixed DNA of the angel and the women perverted and physically injured the DNA genes of their descendants. I speculate that the giants and their parents then probably spread these corrupted genes around. We can assume that they, with their giant egos, had casual sex. Women would certainly be attracted. Their female "casual sex" partners probably had sex with others. Any resulting babies’ DNA would be corrupted, and on down it would go with their partners passing it on to others ,until it perverts a great number of people's DNA (think about the rapid spread of sexual diseases, and Covid; don't all of these spread super-rapidly from a small starting point?). The thing to also keep in mind is the extended life span they had to spread their corrupted DNA. We're talking a lifespan of over 800 years, on average. Now, finally: If you pervert the gene pool, you can’t go back and make it right again. I also believe (and this is speculation) that a person who is not really human, with aberrant DNA, cannot experience salvation from hell; cannot repent to be godly or deserve heaven. That’s because God's plan of salvation was strictly for humans. We humans are the people in His image. These giants, their genes, were NOT humans, but an aberrant hybrid. They were not in His image. Look how Noah was considered a preacher of righteousness in II Peter 2--yet, in 120 years that he worked on the ark and explained to everyone its purpose, he couldn't save one person outside his immediate family! That's unusual failure. That failure has to have been caused by preaching to a group of people that were completely unreceptive. The simplest explanation is, they couldn't be turned to righteousness, because they were not human. So if we ever wonder about why God killed everyone except 8 people, perhaps He had a legitimate reason; maybe they were tainted and unsaveable. Perhaps we could also understand why God would want to start over, at least with humans, those whose DNA had not been corrupted. They would have a chance at salvation. He loves to see people saved.
Lest you think this story is just too strange to be true, I have several more Bible quotes to consider. And do not throw away this idea because you've never heard it before. Modern commentators often have a flaw they learned in seminary; they shy away from the supernatural as an explanation for strange events. They see it as a cop-out from rational thinking (and they take great pride in being rational). And they also shy away from showing God's anger in judgment. They want to sell more books. Negative subjects like God's judgment are killers for book sales.
Actually, though, supernatural events are what God is all about. Think about Mary, Jesus’ mother. If I had a daughter who got pregnant, what would people say when I told them, “she is still a virgin—she has never known a man. The child’s father is God.” Would I be believed? No. But was it true nevertheless? Yes. Likewise, the Resurrection is hard to believe, but it happened--nothing is impossible with God. And also consider the anthropologists’ argument that, when many societies have a demigod legend, it more than likely that the core of it really happened. I'm thinking of the demigod giants. I’m also thinking of this: Don't we have huge structures and detailed perfection in weighty materials, that archaeologists and architects say could not have been engineered by humans? Perhaps the simple explanation is, they were in fact not humans--they were built by giants in that day.
So, God wanted to start over with Noah’s immediate family, perhaps the only ones left who had pure DNA, uncorrupted by sex with an ungodly recipient of corrupted DNA. Well, what happened to the Nephilim, the giants? Physically, they died with the Flood. But their evil spirits lived on, since they were immortal. Satan was not done with corrupting men, so the angels were still living, still under his command, and they were "at it" again, later, taking human form and enjoying sex. Scripture shows some more of these giants, on a lesser scale, were still being born, after the Flood. (Trace the word “Nephilim” or "Rephaim" in Scripture, using the NIV Bible, and don’t forget Goliath. And don't forget Og of Bashan).
I’d like to take a little rabbit path below. I realize I am dipping into speculation now for awhile, but it’s interesting stuff.
Jesus said the end times would be like the days of Noah, in Matthew 24:36-38. Here is part of His teaching:
“But of that day and hour (that is, end times) no one knows….but My Father only.37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark
Everybody focuses on the feasting and marriages, and the lesson they get is that people are not thinking of God, and no one is aware that judgment is coming. But the simple truth is, men weren’t thinking about God or a second coming much in any time period, so why did God pick Noah’s day as the particular comparison for judgment? Well, what’s starting to happen today? Have you ever heard the term “editing DNA,” or “recombinant DNA?” Or, have you ever heard the word "transhumanism?" An interesting article in Forbes magazine’s August 2017, issue, gives the good side of altering DNA. Their headline is "Transhumanism And The Future Of Humanity: 7 Ways The World Will Change By 2030." They cite Elon Musk's Neuralink, Zuckerberg's Meta, and DARPA as working on making humans more "augmented." Their ultimate goal is making humans live "forever." and fulfilling social life. Another article is from Wired magazine's August 2015 article (recent articles are scarce and over my head. Much of this controversial subject is secret.) To quote Wired: “Using the three-year-old technique, researchers have already reversed mutations that cause blindness, stopped cancer cells from multiplying, and made cells impervious to the virus that causes AIDS. Agronomists have rendered wheat invulnerable to killer fungi like powdery mildew, hinting at engineered staple crops that can feed a population of 9 billion on an ever-warmer planet. Bioengineers have used Crispr--that's the name of the technique--to alter the DNA of yeast so that it consumes plant matter and excretes ethanol. This promises an end to reliance on petrochemicals.”
All good results, right? But the article also shows a little of the questionable side of it. I quote Wired again: “designer babies, invasive mutants, species-specific bioweapons, and a dozen other apocalyptic sci-fi tropes. It brings with it all-new rules for the practice of research in the life sciences. But no one knows what the rules are—or who will be the first to break them.” At least, successfully. It’s all done in the quiet.
Bioweapons. Invasive mutants. I don't know what that is, but "mutants" catches my eye. Reading further on transhumanism, these DNA mixing are creating what they call a chimera. That word’s meaning: "In medicine, a person composed of two genetically distinct types of cells." By mixing man's DNA with creatures' DNA, they can mix in the creature's superiority in some trait. What if soldiers had the benefits of the eyes and ears of the bat, so they could see and hear better in the semi-darkness? They would have a great advantage if they attacked terrorists at dusk or just before sunrise.
But there is a problem. We can't predict side effects. Did Satan know that the mixed-DNA babies of angels and women would be giants? We don't know. There’s also a rumor, with some support, that the giants had six fingers and six toes. Despite the risks (as every movie on this theme shows), I'm sure that won't stop the military; they would love to develop mixing in these creatures into soldiers' DNA. They could breed super-soldiers, the kind that could kill more people, hear and see them better, maybe mixing in ant DNA so they could comfortably carry more weight, making them more efficient and durable. And I'll bet they could also psychologically engineer them to not feel remorse. Those countries who have this technology would use it to attack other nations who don’t have the money or the scientific capability to develop it. This would kick off a scramble of many wars of oppression and land-grabbing again, on a scale like it hasn’t been for centuries. That’s the military’s dream scenario--assuming, they figure, we could win such wars. As for the other purposes of editing DNA--most everybody would like perfect babies. With that, we could say good-by to the flaws of natural birth and natural genes. Does that sound great too? But what if only some parents could afford it, others couldn't? Then we'd be talking about who gets the designer genes, who doesn't. Separate schools would have to be built for the mutant intelligence. This is starting to sound like X-Men. Then we're back to the Superior Race stuff again, a replay of Nazism, and that didn't turn out good. Every one of these results has an immoral end-play. More wars, more killing, more oppression, slavery, superior races, no remorse. Man creates bad with far more devastation than his creation of good.
So here we are, messing with DNA again, looking at the possibility of unpredictable sinful results again. There are no rules, so I guarantee some scientists are on a quest to expand DNA editing, no matter the results. The Wired article’s sub-headline was spooky and probably prophetic, "The Genesis Engine."
Thus my final point in my theory: If we corrupt DNA again, we again have superior "people," or really hybrid trans-humans, who are revered for their killing power and for their intelligence. Since they are a chimera of DNAs, and not in God’s image, and not human, they are again unsaveable. Like Noah. They would again be prone to ego, violence, and oppression. It also could lead to many wars and land-grabbing, and man oppressing man. Now think about it: Does this not sound like a Scriptural description for the Beast's environment? Would this not help generate the wars predicted in the End Times? The Beast is a great warrior and general, with an ego to match. He loves being worshipped. And plenty of people are willing to be his lackeys.
By the way, a little side speculation: note that that term "beast" is an unusual description of a man. It could conceivably mean he is partly animal and partly human. And note his extreme hatred of God and his extreme persecution of God's people in Revelation 13, where I quote:
And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon (or Satan) who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
If the Beast is a DNA-edited creature, along with lots of other warriors that are chimera produced by man, that may mean judgment day is coming again--the Last Days. We're not far off from editing DNA, so we may not be far off from end times. I have other blogs that say more about the chronological events of end times, and my Scripture-based belief that Scripture proves that Christians will have to live through this Great Tribulation from Matthew 24 and Revelation 6-13. It will be a world of great danger.
Are you ever fearful for the future, for yourself and your children? Would you want them to live in a world where you have no answers for the things that are happening? Where you are always feeling unsafe? You can receive help by falling into the arms of Jesus. He has a claim on your obedience to His commands in Scripture--He loved you enough to die for you.
Acknowledgement: David Bercot, CD, “Satan and the Demons,” Scroll Publishing.
Let’s start with Genesis 6:1-4:
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.3 And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants 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. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown
It says the “sons of God” and daughters of men bore giants, mighty men of renown. Curiosity compels asking this question: Who are the “sons of God?” Modern commentators say they were the descendants of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve, the godly son from whom Jesus came after many generations. The phrase “daughters of men,” they also say, refers to the descendants of Cain, the wicked son of Adam who killed Abel. So, plugging in these definitions, what are they saying? That the marriages of godly men and ungodly women produced giants. How did that happen? A strange idea. There is not one verse of Scripture backing this theory. No Scripture anywhere, either, refers to the descendants of Seth as “sons of God.” Why are godly men and ungodly women singled out? Why not the reverse? And why would their sexual union produce giants? Their theory is too odd. This wild idea proves that you can’t always follow the commentators.
As it turns out, the phrase “sons of God” does appear in Scripture. We find it in Job 38, where God is chastising Job for not seeing the big picture of His sovereignty. He is speaking here of the creation of the earth. Here is God talking to Job:
“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
I remind you, this is at the time of the creation of the earth. Notice how the "sons of God" were present. But as you read the order of events in the first chapter of Genesis, man was not created at this time; that was later. Thus, the only ones who were there with God were the angels. They have to be the "sons of God.” For further proof, in Job 1 and 2, when Satan appears in heaven to accuse Job, angels are in attendance and are again called by that name, “sons of God." For my third and final proof, one translation of the Bible, the Septuagint, was so reliable that its Old Testament was used by the early apostles, such as Paul and Peter. It simply translates the Hebrew word in Genesis 6; instead of “sons of God,” they straightforward called them angels. Thus, with these three proofs, the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 were, by all reasonable accounts, angels.
But mot of us believe angels are always good. But Scriptures (Isaiah 14:12ff) show that there were angels earlier that rebelled against God and were thus called fallen angels. That Satan himself was their chief. So Genesis 6 is probably blaming these fallen angels, who were immortal, as lusting after earth women. They had sex with them; they had babies, called Nephilim, that were giants.
I'll further speculate that their aberrant children were not only giants, but violent, and helped greatly in degrading the culture. Genesis 6 also shows that God was so sick of the corrupt culture that He brought about a flood under Noah that wiped the entire population of humanity away, except Noah’s family; which I presume (another speculation, to be proved later) had the only DNA that were unpolluted.
Now, to answer an objection some of you knowledgeable folk might raise--it’s true that Jesus said in Matthew 22 that heavenly angels are unmarried, so would not lust after women. But these in Genesis 6 are rule-breakers, and not heavenly--their ultimate destination is hell. Anyway, they took human form--as men. That is not unusual; it happens many times in Scripture, such as Genesis 19. So, back to Genesis 6, the fallen angels entered earth with a physical body, to have sex and to marry. But this broke God’s rule. What rule, you ask? The one implied in another Scripture, which again will back our theory up. In the Book of Jude, some angels are accused of the sin of “not keeping their proper domain,” and leaving “their own abode.” Their proper domain was originally heaven. But they broke that rule, and became fallen. It's fair to assume that when they became humans on earth, that was the first act that broke God's rule. They messed with human society, which God would only let them do upon His command. So God punished them by placing them in “chains under darkness.” As it says in Jude:
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Now, another proof: please note the mention of Sodom and Gomorrah and these angels in the same Jude Scripture. It suggests that they had the same sin going on. It is called a “similar manner.” You can tie the Jude angels to the Genesis 6 angels very easily now. There were two characteristics both possessed: first, in Sodom, they had "given themselves over to sexual immorality." The same is true of Genesis angels: They lusted and wanted to have sex with these desirable women so much that they were willing to leave their domain, heaven, though they knew they would be punished severely for it. Secondly, note the reference in Jude to their going after "strange flesh." That's true in Jude, since the sin was homosexuality, which God designed for men and women. (Subject for another blog). That's true in the Genesis 6 angels simply because angels are immortal and earth women are mortal. So angelic "flesh" is not human flesh. It's strange flesh. Thus, the reference in Jude has to be the same angels that are spoken about in Genesis 6.
This is confirmed, and proven again, by II Peter 2. Note the “chains of darkness” reference again, which now ties all three Scriptures together. Here's II Peter:
For....God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;
Now note another connection; this time to Noah. This ties II Peter back to Genesis 6, where Noah was introduced. Thus, again, all three verses—Genesis, Jude, and II Peter-- speak of the same angels, lusting after earth women in Genesis 6.
I remind you that those angels were rebellious and fallen. The angels that stayed in heaven who were NOT disobedient are the ones that carry out God's commands in Scripture, and protect us now, including fighting with "rulers of the darkness of this age," making warnings and happy announcements to humans, and worshiping God in heaven.
Back to the union of fallen angels and women. The evil result was that the babies turned out to be giants. Why giants? Now I get to my very important speculation: The story is the DNA. Angel DNA is not human; but mixed with human DNA of the women, that sex act with "strange flesh" produced aberrant children--who can predict how that DNA mix would result? This is not impossible to believe.
Now here’s another point in the theory: It's true that when the children grew up, their activities were joined (as it says in Genesis) to a vast increase in violence and evil. The question is, were the appearance of the giants and increase in evil cause and effect? The answer to that is the Scriptural word “then.” Note how fast the giants and violence are close to one another in Scripture. Reading further in Genesis 6:
Those (the giants) were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth…12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.
When you think about it, tying the giants to violence is easy. The giants were loved by the people for their sinful ability to conquer and killL Let's just show them the enemy--and in those days, anyone not of your tribe could be your enemy. Thus, if a tribe has a giant, they'll attack other tribes to conquer them for booty, slaves, and women. This heightens the killing, the blood shed. It seems reasonable to then suspect that the giants, the greatest of warrior-heroes who ever lived, were often worshiped as demigods. After all, they had one parent mortal, the other parent immortal—there would have been a fascination with them just because of that. (It would also explain the stories of powerful giants like Atlas and Hercules, and others in world literature of the day.) They were called “men of renown”—the public knew them. They were rock stars in that day. They were incredibly strong. Based on Galileo's estimates of size and weight, they could easily have weighed over 3000 pounds! They also had superior intellect and could make weapons of war (see Genesis 4 and 11). I suspect Satan passed along a lot of information to them. So, I see men falling into idolatry by worshiping these creatures. And idolatry will ruin any godliness you had faster than anything. I’m sure they were happy for the attention, and it boosted their ego—egged them on to perform outrageous feats for entertainment. How many men could a giant kill? Can we capture more men, make them slaves, take advantage of their wives, loot their houses, with this giant as our leader? Let’s find out!
To further prove my DNA speculation, let's take a closer look at the word “corrupt” in Gen. 6:12 above. In Hebrew, the word means “marred, spoiled, perverted,” and “injured.” So their corruptness was not just immoral, as perverted says--the definitions "marred" and "injured" guide us to something physical. I speculate that the mixed DNA of the angel and the women perverted and physically injured the DNA genes of their descendants. I speculate that the giants and their parents then probably spread these corrupted genes around. We can assume that they, with their giant egos, had casual sex. Women would certainly be attracted. Their female "casual sex" partners probably had sex with others. Any resulting babies’ DNA would be corrupted, and on down it would go with their partners passing it on to others ,until it perverts a great number of people's DNA (think about the rapid spread of sexual diseases, and Covid; don't all of these spread super-rapidly from a small starting point?). The thing to also keep in mind is the extended life span they had to spread their corrupted DNA. We're talking a lifespan of over 800 years, on average. Now, finally: If you pervert the gene pool, you can’t go back and make it right again. I also believe (and this is speculation) that a person who is not really human, with aberrant DNA, cannot experience salvation from hell; cannot repent to be godly or deserve heaven. That’s because God's plan of salvation was strictly for humans. We humans are the people in His image. These giants, their genes, were NOT humans, but an aberrant hybrid. They were not in His image. Look how Noah was considered a preacher of righteousness in II Peter 2--yet, in 120 years that he worked on the ark and explained to everyone its purpose, he couldn't save one person outside his immediate family! That's unusual failure. That failure has to have been caused by preaching to a group of people that were completely unreceptive. The simplest explanation is, they couldn't be turned to righteousness, because they were not human. So if we ever wonder about why God killed everyone except 8 people, perhaps He had a legitimate reason; maybe they were tainted and unsaveable. Perhaps we could also understand why God would want to start over, at least with humans, those whose DNA had not been corrupted. They would have a chance at salvation. He loves to see people saved.
Lest you think this story is just too strange to be true, I have several more Bible quotes to consider. And do not throw away this idea because you've never heard it before. Modern commentators often have a flaw they learned in seminary; they shy away from the supernatural as an explanation for strange events. They see it as a cop-out from rational thinking (and they take great pride in being rational). And they also shy away from showing God's anger in judgment. They want to sell more books. Negative subjects like God's judgment are killers for book sales.
Actually, though, supernatural events are what God is all about. Think about Mary, Jesus’ mother. If I had a daughter who got pregnant, what would people say when I told them, “she is still a virgin—she has never known a man. The child’s father is God.” Would I be believed? No. But was it true nevertheless? Yes. Likewise, the Resurrection is hard to believe, but it happened--nothing is impossible with God. And also consider the anthropologists’ argument that, when many societies have a demigod legend, it more than likely that the core of it really happened. I'm thinking of the demigod giants. I’m also thinking of this: Don't we have huge structures and detailed perfection in weighty materials, that archaeologists and architects say could not have been engineered by humans? Perhaps the simple explanation is, they were in fact not humans--they were built by giants in that day.
So, God wanted to start over with Noah’s immediate family, perhaps the only ones left who had pure DNA, uncorrupted by sex with an ungodly recipient of corrupted DNA. Well, what happened to the Nephilim, the giants? Physically, they died with the Flood. But their evil spirits lived on, since they were immortal. Satan was not done with corrupting men, so the angels were still living, still under his command, and they were "at it" again, later, taking human form and enjoying sex. Scripture shows some more of these giants, on a lesser scale, were still being born, after the Flood. (Trace the word “Nephilim” or "Rephaim" in Scripture, using the NIV Bible, and don’t forget Goliath. And don't forget Og of Bashan).
I’d like to take a little rabbit path below. I realize I am dipping into speculation now for awhile, but it’s interesting stuff.
Jesus said the end times would be like the days of Noah, in Matthew 24:36-38. Here is part of His teaching:
“But of that day and hour (that is, end times) no one knows….but My Father only.37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark
Everybody focuses on the feasting and marriages, and the lesson they get is that people are not thinking of God, and no one is aware that judgment is coming. But the simple truth is, men weren’t thinking about God or a second coming much in any time period, so why did God pick Noah’s day as the particular comparison for judgment? Well, what’s starting to happen today? Have you ever heard the term “editing DNA,” or “recombinant DNA?” Or, have you ever heard the word "transhumanism?" An interesting article in Forbes magazine’s August 2017, issue, gives the good side of altering DNA. Their headline is "Transhumanism And The Future Of Humanity: 7 Ways The World Will Change By 2030." They cite Elon Musk's Neuralink, Zuckerberg's Meta, and DARPA as working on making humans more "augmented." Their ultimate goal is making humans live "forever." and fulfilling social life. Another article is from Wired magazine's August 2015 article (recent articles are scarce and over my head. Much of this controversial subject is secret.) To quote Wired: “Using the three-year-old technique, researchers have already reversed mutations that cause blindness, stopped cancer cells from multiplying, and made cells impervious to the virus that causes AIDS. Agronomists have rendered wheat invulnerable to killer fungi like powdery mildew, hinting at engineered staple crops that can feed a population of 9 billion on an ever-warmer planet. Bioengineers have used Crispr--that's the name of the technique--to alter the DNA of yeast so that it consumes plant matter and excretes ethanol. This promises an end to reliance on petrochemicals.”
All good results, right? But the article also shows a little of the questionable side of it. I quote Wired again: “designer babies, invasive mutants, species-specific bioweapons, and a dozen other apocalyptic sci-fi tropes. It brings with it all-new rules for the practice of research in the life sciences. But no one knows what the rules are—or who will be the first to break them.” At least, successfully. It’s all done in the quiet.
Bioweapons. Invasive mutants. I don't know what that is, but "mutants" catches my eye. Reading further on transhumanism, these DNA mixing are creating what they call a chimera. That word’s meaning: "In medicine, a person composed of two genetically distinct types of cells." By mixing man's DNA with creatures' DNA, they can mix in the creature's superiority in some trait. What if soldiers had the benefits of the eyes and ears of the bat, so they could see and hear better in the semi-darkness? They would have a great advantage if they attacked terrorists at dusk or just before sunrise.
But there is a problem. We can't predict side effects. Did Satan know that the mixed-DNA babies of angels and women would be giants? We don't know. There’s also a rumor, with some support, that the giants had six fingers and six toes. Despite the risks (as every movie on this theme shows), I'm sure that won't stop the military; they would love to develop mixing in these creatures into soldiers' DNA. They could breed super-soldiers, the kind that could kill more people, hear and see them better, maybe mixing in ant DNA so they could comfortably carry more weight, making them more efficient and durable. And I'll bet they could also psychologically engineer them to not feel remorse. Those countries who have this technology would use it to attack other nations who don’t have the money or the scientific capability to develop it. This would kick off a scramble of many wars of oppression and land-grabbing again, on a scale like it hasn’t been for centuries. That’s the military’s dream scenario--assuming, they figure, we could win such wars. As for the other purposes of editing DNA--most everybody would like perfect babies. With that, we could say good-by to the flaws of natural birth and natural genes. Does that sound great too? But what if only some parents could afford it, others couldn't? Then we'd be talking about who gets the designer genes, who doesn't. Separate schools would have to be built for the mutant intelligence. This is starting to sound like X-Men. Then we're back to the Superior Race stuff again, a replay of Nazism, and that didn't turn out good. Every one of these results has an immoral end-play. More wars, more killing, more oppression, slavery, superior races, no remorse. Man creates bad with far more devastation than his creation of good.
So here we are, messing with DNA again, looking at the possibility of unpredictable sinful results again. There are no rules, so I guarantee some scientists are on a quest to expand DNA editing, no matter the results. The Wired article’s sub-headline was spooky and probably prophetic, "The Genesis Engine."
Thus my final point in my theory: If we corrupt DNA again, we again have superior "people," or really hybrid trans-humans, who are revered for their killing power and for their intelligence. Since they are a chimera of DNAs, and not in God’s image, and not human, they are again unsaveable. Like Noah. They would again be prone to ego, violence, and oppression. It also could lead to many wars and land-grabbing, and man oppressing man. Now think about it: Does this not sound like a Scriptural description for the Beast's environment? Would this not help generate the wars predicted in the End Times? The Beast is a great warrior and general, with an ego to match. He loves being worshipped. And plenty of people are willing to be his lackeys.
By the way, a little side speculation: note that that term "beast" is an unusual description of a man. It could conceivably mean he is partly animal and partly human. And note his extreme hatred of God and his extreme persecution of God's people in Revelation 13, where I quote:
And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon (or Satan) who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
If the Beast is a DNA-edited creature, along with lots of other warriors that are chimera produced by man, that may mean judgment day is coming again--the Last Days. We're not far off from editing DNA, so we may not be far off from end times. I have other blogs that say more about the chronological events of end times, and my Scripture-based belief that Scripture proves that Christians will have to live through this Great Tribulation from Matthew 24 and Revelation 6-13. It will be a world of great danger.
Are you ever fearful for the future, for yourself and your children? Would you want them to live in a world where you have no answers for the things that are happening? Where you are always feeling unsafe? You can receive help by falling into the arms of Jesus. He has a claim on your obedience to His commands in Scripture--He loved you enough to die for you.
Acknowledgement: David Bercot, CD, “Satan and the Demons,” Scroll Publishing.
Let’s start with Genesis 6:1-4:
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.3 And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants 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. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown
It says the “sons of God” and daughters of men bore giants, mighty men of renown. Curiosity compels asking this question: Who are the “sons of God?” Modern commentators say they were the descendants of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve, the godly son from whom Jesus came after many generations. The phrase “daughters of men,” they also say, refers to the descendants of Cain, the wicked son of Adam who killed Abel. So, plugging in these definitions, what are they saying? That the marriages of godly men and ungodly women produced giants. How did that happen? A strange idea. There is not one verse of Scripture backing this theory. No Scripture anywhere, either, refers to the descendants of Seth as “sons of God.” Why are godly men and ungodly women singled out? Why not the reverse? And why would their sexual union produce giants? Their theory is too odd. This wild idea proves that you can’t always follow the commentators.
As it turns out, the phrase “sons of God” does appear in Scripture. We find it in Job 38, where God is chastising Job for not seeing the big picture of His sovereignty. He is speaking here of the creation of the earth. Here is God talking to Job:
“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
I remind you, this is at the time of the creation of the earth. Notice how the "sons of God" were present. But as you read the order of events in the first chapter of Genesis, man was not created at this time; that was later. Thus, the only ones who were there with God were the angels. They have to be the "sons of God.” For further proof, in Job 1 and 2, when Satan appears in heaven to accuse Job, angels are in attendance and are again called by that name, “sons of God." For my third and final proof, one translation of the Bible, the Septuagint, was so reliable that its Old Testament was used by the early apostles, such as Paul and Peter. It simply translates the Hebrew word in Genesis 6; instead of “sons of God,” they straightforward called them angels. Thus, with these three proofs, the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 were, by all reasonable accounts, angels.
But mot of us believe angels are always good. But Scriptures (Isaiah 14:12ff) show that there were angels earlier that rebelled against God and were thus called fallen angels. That Satan himself was their chief. So Genesis 6 is probably blaming these fallen angels, who were immortal, as lusting after earth women. They had sex with them; they had babies, called Nephilim, that were giants.
I'll further speculate that their aberrant children were not only giants, but violent, and helped greatly in degrading the culture. Genesis 6 also shows that God was so sick of the corrupt culture that He brought about a flood under Noah that wiped the entire population of humanity away, except Noah’s family; which I presume (another speculation, to be proved later) had the only DNA that were unpolluted.
Now, to answer an objection some of you knowledgeable folk might raise--it’s true that Jesus said in Matthew 22 that heavenly angels are unmarried, so would not lust after women. But these in Genesis 6 are rule-breakers, and not heavenly--their ultimate destination is hell. Anyway, they took human form--as men. That is not unusual; it happens many times in Scripture, such as Genesis 19. So, back to Genesis 6, the fallen angels entered earth with a physical body, to have sex and to marry. But this broke God’s rule. What rule, you ask? The one implied in another Scripture, which again will back our theory up. In the Book of Jude, some angels are accused of the sin of “not keeping their proper domain,” and leaving “their own abode.” Their proper domain was originally heaven. But they broke that rule, and became fallen. It's fair to assume that when they became humans on earth, that was the first act that broke God's rule. They messed with human society, which God would only let them do upon His command. So God punished them by placing them in “chains under darkness.” As it says in Jude:
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Now, another proof: please note the mention of Sodom and Gomorrah and these angels in the same Jude Scripture. It suggests that they had the same sin going on. It is called a “similar manner.” You can tie the Jude angels to the Genesis 6 angels very easily now. There were two characteristics both possessed: first, in Sodom, they had "given themselves over to sexual immorality." The same is true of Genesis angels: They lusted and wanted to have sex with these desirable women so much that they were willing to leave their domain, heaven, though they knew they would be punished severely for it. Secondly, note the reference in Jude to their going after "strange flesh." That's true in Jude, since the sin was homosexuality, which God designed for men and women. (Subject for another blog). That's true in the Genesis 6 angels simply because angels are immortal and earth women are mortal. So angelic "flesh" is not human flesh. It's strange flesh. Thus, the reference in Jude has to be the same angels that are spoken about in Genesis 6.
This is confirmed, and proven again, by II Peter 2. Note the “chains of darkness” reference again, which now ties all three Scriptures together. Here's II Peter:
For....God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;
Now note another connection; this time to Noah. This ties II Peter back to Genesis 6, where Noah was introduced. Thus, again, all three verses—Genesis, Jude, and II Peter-- speak of the same angels, lusting after earth women in Genesis 6.
I remind you that those angels were rebellious and fallen. The angels that stayed in heaven who were NOT disobedient are the ones that carry out God's commands in Scripture, and protect us now, including fighting with "rulers of the darkness of this age," making warnings and happy announcements to humans, and worshiping God in heaven.
Back to the union of fallen angels and women. The evil result was that the babies turned out to be giants. Why giants? Now I get to my very important speculation: The story is the DNA. Angel DNA is not human; but mixed with human DNA of the women, that sex act with "strange flesh" produced aberrant children--who can predict how that DNA mix would result? This is not impossible to believe.
Now here’s another point in the theory: It's true that when the children grew up, their activities were joined (as it says in Genesis) to a vast increase in violence and evil. The question is, were the appearance of the giants and increase in evil cause and effect? The answer to that is the Scriptural word “then.” Note how fast the giants and violence are close to one another in Scripture. Reading further in Genesis 6:
Those (the giants) were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth…12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.
When you think about it, tying the giants to violence is easy. The giants were loved by the people for their sinful ability to conquer and killL Let's just show them the enemy--and in those days, anyone not of your tribe could be your enemy. Thus, if a tribe has a giant, they'll attack other tribes to conquer them for booty, slaves, and women. This heightens the killing, the blood shed. It seems reasonable to then suspect that the giants, the greatest of warrior-heroes who ever lived, were often worshiped as demigods. After all, they had one parent mortal, the other parent immortal—there would have been a fascination with them just because of that. (It would also explain the stories of powerful giants like Atlas and Hercules, and others in world literature of the day.) They were called “men of renown”—the public knew them. They were rock stars in that day. They were incredibly strong. Based on Galileo's estimates of size and weight, they could easily have weighed over 3000 pounds! They also had superior intellect and could make weapons of war (see Genesis 4 and 11). I suspect Satan passed along a lot of information to them. So, I see men falling into idolatry by worshiping these creatures. And idolatry will ruin any godliness you had faster than anything. I’m sure they were happy for the attention, and it boosted their ego—egged them on to perform outrageous feats for entertainment. How many men could a giant kill? Can we capture more men, make them slaves, take advantage of their wives, loot their houses, with this giant as our leader? Let’s find out!
To further prove my DNA speculation, let's take a closer look at the word “corrupt” in Gen. 6:12 above. In Hebrew, the word means “marred, spoiled, perverted,” and “injured.” So their corruptness was not just immoral, as perverted says--the definitions "marred" and "injured" guide us to something physical. I speculate that the mixed DNA of the angel and the women perverted and physically injured the DNA genes of their descendants. I speculate that the giants and their parents then probably spread these corrupted genes around. We can assume that they, with their giant egos, had casual sex. Women would certainly be attracted. Their female "casual sex" partners probably had sex with others. Any resulting babies’ DNA would be corrupted, and on down it would go with their partners passing it on to others ,until it perverts a great number of people's DNA (think about the rapid spread of sexual diseases, and Covid; don't all of these spread super-rapidly from a small starting point?). The thing to also keep in mind is the extended life span they had to spread their corrupted DNA. We're talking a lifespan of over 800 years, on average. Now, finally: If you pervert the gene pool, you can’t go back and make it right again. I also believe (and this is speculation) that a person who is not really human, with aberrant DNA, cannot experience salvation from hell; cannot repent to be godly or deserve heaven. That’s because God's plan of salvation was strictly for humans. We humans are the people in His image. These giants, their genes, were NOT humans, but an aberrant hybrid. They were not in His image. Look how Noah was considered a preacher of righteousness in II Peter 2--yet, in 120 years that he worked on the ark and explained to everyone its purpose, he couldn't save one person outside his immediate family! That's unusual failure. That failure has to have been caused by preaching to a group of people that were completely unreceptive. The simplest explanation is, they couldn't be turned to righteousness, because they were not human. So if we ever wonder about why God killed everyone except 8 people, perhaps He had a legitimate reason; maybe they were tainted and unsaveable. Perhaps we could also understand why God would want to start over, at least with humans, those whose DNA had not been corrupted. They would have a chance at salvation. He loves to see people saved.
Lest you think this story is just too strange to be true, I have several more Bible quotes to consider. And do not throw away this idea because you've never heard it before. Modern commentators often have a flaw they learned in seminary; they shy away from the supernatural as an explanation for strange events. They see it as a cop-out from rational thinking (and they take great pride in being rational). And they also shy away from showing God's anger in judgment. They want to sell more books. Negative subjects like God's judgment are killers for book sales.
Actually, though, supernatural events are what God is all about. Think about Mary, Jesus’ mother. If I had a daughter who got pregnant, what would people say when I told them, “she is still a virgin—she has never known a man. The child’s father is God.” Would I be believed? No. But was it true nevertheless? Yes. Likewise, the Resurrection is hard to believe, but it happened--nothing is impossible with God. And also consider the anthropologists’ argument that, when many societies have a demigod legend, it more than likely that the core of it really happened. I'm thinking of the demigod giants. I’m also thinking of this: Don't we have huge structures and detailed perfection in weighty materials, that archaeologists and architects say could not have been engineered by humans? Perhaps the simple explanation is, they were in fact not humans--they were built by giants in that day.
So, God wanted to start over with Noah’s immediate family, perhaps the only ones left who had pure DNA, uncorrupted by sex with an ungodly recipient of corrupted DNA. Well, what happened to the Nephilim, the giants? Physically, they died with the Flood. But their evil spirits lived on, since they were immortal. Satan was not done with corrupting men, so the angels were still living, still under his command, and they were "at it" again, later, taking human form and enjoying sex. Scripture shows some more of these giants, on a lesser scale, were still being born, after the Flood. (Trace the word “Nephilim” or "Rephaim" in Scripture, using the NIV Bible, and don’t forget Goliath. And don't forget Og of Bashan).
I’d like to take a little rabbit path below. I realize I am dipping into speculation now for awhile, but it’s interesting stuff.
Jesus said the end times would be like the days of Noah, in Matthew 24:36-38. Here is part of His teaching:
“But of that day and hour (that is, end times) no one knows….but My Father only.37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark
Everybody focuses on the feasting and marriages, and the lesson they get is that people are not thinking of God, and no one is aware that judgment is coming. But the simple truth is, men weren’t thinking about God or a second coming much in any time period, so why did God pick Noah’s day as the particular comparison for judgment? Well, what’s starting to happen today? Have you ever heard the term “editing DNA,” or “recombinant DNA?” Or, have you ever heard the word "transhumanism?" An interesting article in Forbes magazine’s August 2017, issue, gives the good side of altering DNA. Their headline is "Transhumanism And The Future Of Humanity: 7 Ways The World Will Change By 2030." They cite Elon Musk's Neuralink, Zuckerberg's Meta, and DARPA as working on making humans more "augmented." Their ultimate goal is making humans live "forever." and fulfilling social life. Another article is from Wired magazine's August 2015 article (recent articles are scarce and over my head. Much of this controversial subject is secret.) To quote Wired: “Using the three-year-old technique, researchers have already reversed mutations that cause blindness, stopped cancer cells from multiplying, and made cells impervious to the virus that causes AIDS. Agronomists have rendered wheat invulnerable to killer fungi like powdery mildew, hinting at engineered staple crops that can feed a population of 9 billion on an ever-warmer planet. Bioengineers have used Crispr--that's the name of the technique--to alter the DNA of yeast so that it consumes plant matter and excretes ethanol. This promises an end to reliance on petrochemicals.”
All good results, right? But the article also shows a little of the questionable side of it. I quote Wired again: “designer babies, invasive mutants, species-specific bioweapons, and a dozen other apocalyptic sci-fi tropes. It brings with it all-new rules for the practice of research in the life sciences. But no one knows what the rules are—or who will be the first to break them.” At least, successfully. It’s all done in the quiet.
Bioweapons. Invasive mutants. I don't know what that is, but "mutants" catches my eye. Reading further on transhumanism, these DNA mixing are creating what they call a chimera. That word’s meaning: "In medicine, a person composed of two genetically distinct types of cells." By mixing man's DNA with creatures' DNA, they can mix in the creature's superiority in some trait. What if soldiers had the benefits of the eyes and ears of the bat, so they could see and hear better in the semi-darkness? They would have a great advantage if they attacked terrorists at dusk or just before sunrise.
But there is a problem. We can't predict side effects. Did Satan know that the mixed-DNA babies of angels and women would be giants? We don't know. There’s also a rumor, with some support, that the giants had six fingers and six toes. Despite the risks (as every movie on this theme shows), I'm sure that won't stop the military; they would love to develop mixing in these creatures into soldiers' DNA. They could breed super-soldiers, the kind that could kill more people, hear and see them better, maybe mixing in ant DNA so they could comfortably carry more weight, making them more efficient and durable. And I'll bet they could also psychologically engineer them to not feel remorse. Those countries who have this technology would use it to attack other nations who don’t have the money or the scientific capability to develop it. This would kick off a scramble of many wars of oppression and land-grabbing again, on a scale like it hasn’t been for centuries. That’s the military’s dream scenario--assuming, they figure, we could win such wars. As for the other purposes of editing DNA--most everybody would like perfect babies. With that, we could say good-by to the flaws of natural birth and natural genes. Does that sound great too? But what if only some parents could afford it, others couldn't? Then we'd be talking about who gets the designer genes, who doesn't. Separate schools would have to be built for the mutant intelligence. This is starting to sound like X-Men. Then we're back to the Superior Race stuff again, a replay of Nazism, and that didn't turn out good. Every one of these results has an immoral end-play. More wars, more killing, more oppression, slavery, superior races, no remorse. Man creates bad with far more devastation than his creation of good.
So here we are, messing with DNA again, looking at the possibility of unpredictable sinful results again. There are no rules, so I guarantee some scientists are on a quest to expand DNA editing, no matter the results. The Wired article’s sub-headline was spooky and probably prophetic, "The Genesis Engine."
Thus my final point in my theory: If we corrupt DNA again, we again have superior "people," or really hybrid trans-humans, who are revered for their killing power and for their intelligence. Since they are a chimera of DNAs, and not in God’s image, and not human, they are again unsaveable. Like Noah. They would again be prone to ego, violence, and oppression. It also could lead to many wars and land-grabbing, and man oppressing man. Now think about it: Does this not sound like a Scriptural description for the Beast's environment? Would this not help generate the wars predicted in the End Times? The Beast is a great warrior and general, with an ego to match. He loves being worshipped. And plenty of people are willing to be his lackeys.
By the way, a little side speculation: note that that term "beast" is an unusual description of a man. It could conceivably mean he is partly animal and partly human. And note his extreme hatred of God and his extreme persecution of God's people in Revelation 13, where I quote:
And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon (or Satan) who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
If the Beast is a DNA-edited creature, along with lots of other warriors that are chimera produced by man, that may mean judgment day is coming again--the Last Days. We're not far off from editing DNA, so we may not be far off from end times. I have other blogs that say more about the chronological events of end times, and my Scripture-based belief that Scripture proves that Christians will have to live through this Great Tribulation from Matthew 24 and Revelation 6-13. It will be a world of great danger.
Are you ever fearful for the future, for yourself and your children? Would you want them to live in a world where you have no answers for the things that are happening? Where you are always feeling unsafe? You can receive help by falling into the arms of Jesus. He has a claim on your obedience to His commands in Scripture--He loved you enough to die for you.
Acknowledgement: David Bercot, CD, “Satan and the Demons,” Scroll Publishing.
Let’s start with Genesis 6:1-4:
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.3 And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants 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. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown
It says the “sons of God” and daughters of men bore giants, mighty men of renown. Curiosity compels asking this question: Who are the “sons of God?” Modern commentators say they were the descendants of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve, the godly son from whom Jesus came after many generations. The phrase “daughters of men,” they also say, refers to the descendants of Cain, the wicked son of Adam who killed Abel. So, plugging in these definitions, what are they saying? That the marriages of godly men and ungodly women produced giants. How did that happen? A strange idea. There is not one verse of Scripture backing this theory. No Scripture anywhere, either, refers to the descendants of Seth as “sons of God.” Why are godly men and ungodly women singled out? Why not the reverse? And why would their sexual union produce giants? Their theory is too odd. This wild idea proves that you can’t always follow the commentators.
As it turns out, the phrase “sons of God” does appear in Scripture. We find it in Job 38, where God is chastising Job for not seeing the big picture of His sovereignty. He is speaking here of the creation of the earth. Here is God talking to Job:
“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
I remind you, this is at the time of the creation of the earth. Notice how the "sons of God" were present. But as you read the order of events in the first chapter of Genesis, man was not created at this time; that was later. Thus, the only ones who were there with God were the angels. They have to be the "sons of God.” For further proof, in Job 1 and 2, when Satan appears in heaven to accuse Job, angels are in attendance and are again called by that name, “sons of God." For my third and final proof, one translation of the Bible, the Septuagint, was so reliable that its Old Testament was used by the early apostles, such as Paul and Peter. It simply translates the Hebrew word in Genesis 6; instead of “sons of God,” they straightforward called them angels. Thus, with these three proofs, the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 were, by all reasonable accounts, angels.
But mot of us believe angels are always good. But Scriptures (Isaiah 14:12ff) show that there were angels earlier that rebelled against God and were thus called fallen angels. That Satan himself was their chief. So Genesis 6 is probably blaming these fallen angels, who were immortal, as lusting after earth women. They had sex with them; they had babies, called Nephilim, that were giants.
I'll further speculate that their aberrant children were not only giants, but violent, and helped greatly in degrading the culture. Genesis 6 also shows that God was so sick of the corrupt culture that He brought about a flood under Noah that wiped the entire population of humanity away, except Noah’s family; which I presume (another speculation, to be proved later) had the only DNA that were unpolluted.
Now, to answer an objection some of you knowledgeable folk might raise--it’s true that Jesus said in Matthew 22 that heavenly angels are unmarried, so would not lust after women. But these in Genesis 6 are rule-breakers, and not heavenly--their ultimate destination is hell. Anyway, they took human form--as men. That is not unusual; it happens many times in Scripture, such as Genesis 19. So, back to Genesis 6, the fallen angels entered earth with a physical body, to have sex and to marry. But this broke God’s rule. What rule, you ask? The one implied in another Scripture, which again will back our theory up. In the Book of Jude, some angels are accused of the sin of “not keeping their proper domain,” and leaving “their own abode.” Their proper domain was originally heaven. But they broke that rule, and became fallen. It's fair to assume that when they became humans on earth, that was the first act that broke God's rule. They messed with human society, which God would only let them do upon His command. So God punished them by placing them in “chains under darkness.” As it says in Jude:
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Now, another proof: please note the mention of Sodom and Gomorrah and these angels in the same Jude Scripture. It suggests that they had the same sin going on. It is called a “similar manner.” You can tie the Jude angels to the Genesis 6 angels very easily now. There were two characteristics both possessed: first, in Sodom, they had "given themselves over to sexual immorality." The same is true of Genesis angels: They lusted and wanted to have sex with these desirable women so much that they were willing to leave their domain, heaven, though they knew they would be punished severely for it. Secondly, note the reference in Jude to their going after "strange flesh." That's true in Jude, since the sin was homosexuality, which God designed for men and women. (Subject for another blog). That's true in the Genesis 6 angels simply because angels are immortal and earth women are mortal. So angelic "flesh" is not human flesh. It's strange flesh. Thus, the reference in Jude has to be the same angels that are spoken about in Genesis 6.
This is confirmed, and proven again, by II Peter 2. Note the “chains of darkness” reference again, which now ties all three Scriptures together. Here's II Peter:
For....God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;
Now note another connection; this time to Noah. This ties II Peter back to Genesis 6, where Noah was introduced. Thus, again, all three verses—Genesis, Jude, and II Peter-- speak of the same angels, lusting after earth women in Genesis 6.
I remind you that those angels were rebellious and fallen. The angels that stayed in heaven who were NOT disobedient are the ones that carry out God's commands in Scripture, and protect us now, including fighting with "rulers of the darkness of this age," making warnings and happy announcements to humans, and worshiping God in heaven.
Back to the union of fallen angels and women. The evil result was that the babies turned out to be giants. Why giants? Now I get to my very important speculation: The story is the DNA. Angel DNA is not human; but mixed with human DNA of the women, that sex act with "strange flesh" produced aberrant children--who can predict how that DNA mix would result? This is not impossible to believe.
Now here’s another point in the theory: It's true that when the children grew up, their activities were joined (as it says in Genesis) to a vast increase in violence and evil. The question is, were the appearance of the giants and increase in evil cause and effect? The answer to that is the Scriptural word “then.” Note how fast the giants and violence are close to one another in Scripture. Reading further in Genesis 6:
Those (the giants) were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth…12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.
When you think about it, tying the giants to violence is easy. The giants were loved by the people for their sinful ability to conquer and killL Let's just show them the enemy--and in those days, anyone not of your tribe could be your enemy. Thus, if a tribe has a giant, they'll attack other tribes to conquer them for booty, slaves, and women. This heightens the killing, the blood shed. It seems reasonable to then suspect that the giants, the greatest of warrior-heroes who ever lived, were often worshiped as demigods. After all, they had one parent mortal, the other parent immortal—there would have been a fascination with them just because of that. (It would also explain the stories of powerful giants like Atlas and Hercules, and others in world literature of the day.) They were called “men of renown”—the public knew them. They were rock stars in that day. They were incredibly strong. Based on Galileo's estimates of size and weight, they could easily have weighed over 3000 pounds! They also had superior intellect and could make weapons of war (see Genesis 4 and 11). I suspect Satan passed along a lot of information to them. So, I see men falling into idolatry by worshiping these creatures. And idolatry will ruin any godliness you had faster than anything. I’m sure they were happy for the attention, and it boosted their ego—egged them on to perform outrageous feats for entertainment. How many men could a giant kill? Can we capture more men, make them slaves, take advantage of their wives, loot their houses, with this giant as our leader? Let’s find out!
To further prove my DNA speculation, let's take a closer look at the word “corrupt” in Gen. 6:12 above. In Hebrew, the word means “marred, spoiled, perverted,” and “injured.” So their corruptness was not just immoral, as perverted says--the definitions "marred" and "injured" guide us to something physical. I speculate that the mixed DNA of the angel and the women perverted and physically injured the DNA genes of their descendants. I speculate that the giants and their parents then probably spread these corrupted genes around. We can assume that they, with their giant egos, had casual sex. Women would certainly be attracted. Their female "casual sex" partners probably had sex with others. Any resulting babies’ DNA would be corrupted, and on down it would go with their partners passing it on to others ,until it perverts a great number of people's DNA (think about the rapid spread of sexual diseases, and Covid; don't all of these spread super-rapidly from a small starting point?). The thing to also keep in mind is the extended life span they had to spread their corrupted DNA. We're talking a lifespan of over 800 years, on average. Now, finally: If you pervert the gene pool, you can’t go back and make it right again. I also believe (and this is speculation) that a person who is not really human, with aberrant DNA, cannot experience salvation from hell; cannot repent to be godly or deserve heaven. That’s because God's plan of salvation was strictly for humans. We humans are the people in His image. These giants, their genes, were NOT humans, but an aberrant hybrid. They were not in His image. Look how Noah was considered a preacher of righteousness in II Peter 2--yet, in 120 years that he worked on the ark and explained to everyone its purpose, he couldn't save one person outside his immediate family! That's unusual failure. That failure has to have been caused by preaching to a group of people that were completely unreceptive. The simplest explanation is, they couldn't be turned to righteousness, because they were not human. So if we ever wonder about why God killed everyone except 8 people, perhaps He had a legitimate reason; maybe they were tainted and unsaveable. Perhaps we could also understand why God would want to start over, at least with humans, those whose DNA had not been corrupted. They would have a chance at salvation. He loves to see people saved.
Lest you think this story is just too strange to be true, I have several more Bible quotes to consider. And do not throw away this idea because you've never heard it before. Modern commentators often have a flaw they learned in seminary; they shy away from the supernatural as an explanation for strange events. They see it as a cop-out from rational thinking (and they take great pride in being rational). And they also shy away from showing God's anger in judgment. They want to sell more books. Negative subjects like God's judgment are killers for book sales.
Actually, though, supernatural events are what God is all about. Think about Mary, Jesus’ mother. If I had a daughter who got pregnant, what would people say when I told them, “she is still a virgin—she has never known a man. The child’s father is God.” Would I be believed? No. But was it true nevertheless? Yes. Likewise, the Resurrection is hard to believe, but it happened--nothing is impossible with God. And also consider the anthropologists’ argument that, when many societies have a demigod legend, it more than likely that the core of it really happened. I'm thinking of the demigod giants. I’m also thinking of this: Don't we have huge structures and detailed perfection in weighty materials, that archaeologists and architects say could not have been engineered by humans? Perhaps the simple explanation is, they were in fact not humans--they were built by giants in that day.
So, God wanted to start over with Noah’s immediate family, perhaps the only ones left who had pure DNA, uncorrupted by sex with an ungodly recipient of corrupted DNA. Well, what happened to the Nephilim, the giants? Physically, they died with the Flood. But their evil spirits lived on, since they were immortal. Satan was not done with corrupting men, so the angels were still living, still under his command, and they were "at it" again, later, taking human form and enjoying sex. Scripture shows some more of these giants, on a lesser scale, were still being born, after the Flood. (Trace the word “Nephilim” or "Rephaim" in Scripture, using the NIV Bible, and don’t forget Goliath. And don't forget Og of Bashan).
I’d like to take a little rabbit path below. I realize I am dipping into speculation now for awhile, but it’s interesting stuff.
Jesus said the end times would be like the days of Noah, in Matthew 24:36-38. Here is part of His teaching:
“But of that day and hour (that is, end times) no one knows….but My Father only.37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark
Everybody focuses on the feasting and marriages, and the lesson they get is that people are not thinking of God, and no one is aware that judgment is coming. But the simple truth is, men weren’t thinking about God or a second coming much in any time period, so why did God pick Noah’s day as the particular comparison for judgment? Well, what’s starting to happen today? Have you ever heard the term “editing DNA,” or “recombinant DNA?” Or, have you ever heard the word "transhumanism?" An interesting article in Forbes magazine’s August 2017, issue, gives the good side of altering DNA. Their headline is "Transhumanism And The Future Of Humanity: 7 Ways The World Will Change By 2030." They cite Elon Musk's Neuralink, Zuckerberg's Meta, and DARPA as working on making humans more "augmented." Their ultimate goal is making humans live "forever." and fulfilling social life. Another article is from Wired magazine's August 2015 article (recent articles are scarce and over my head. Much of this controversial subject is secret.) To quote Wired: “Using the three-year-old technique, researchers have already reversed mutations that cause blindness, stopped cancer cells from multiplying, and made cells impervious to the virus that causes AIDS. Agronomists have rendered wheat invulnerable to killer fungi like powdery mildew, hinting at engineered staple crops that can feed a population of 9 billion on an ever-warmer planet. Bioengineers have used Crispr--that's the name of the technique--to alter the DNA of yeast so that it consumes plant matter and excretes ethanol. This promises an end to reliance on petrochemicals.”
All good results, right? But the article also shows a little of the questionable side of it. I quote Wired again: “designer babies, invasive mutants, species-specific bioweapons, and a dozen other apocalyptic sci-fi tropes. It brings with it all-new rules for the practice of research in the life sciences. But no one knows what the rules are—or who will be the first to break them.” At least, successfully. It’s all done in the quiet.
Bioweapons. Invasive mutants. I don't know what that is, but "mutants" catches my eye. Reading further on transhumanism, these DNA mixing are creating what they call a chimera. That word’s meaning: "In medicine, a person composed of two genetically distinct types of cells." By mixing man's DNA with creatures' DNA, they can mix in the creature's superiority in some trait. What if soldiers had the benefits of the eyes and ears of the bat, so they could see and hear better in the semi-darkness? They would have a great advantage if they attacked terrorists at dusk or just before sunrise.
But there is a problem. We can't predict side effects. Did Satan know that the mixed-DNA babies of angels and women would be giants? We don't know. There’s also a rumor, with some support, that the giants had six fingers and six toes. Despite the risks (as every movie on this theme shows), I'm sure that won't stop the military; they would love to develop mixing in these creatures into soldiers' DNA. They could breed super-soldiers, the kind that could kill more people, hear and see them better, maybe mixing in ant DNA so they could comfortably carry more weight, making them more efficient and durable. And I'll bet they could also psychologically engineer them to not feel remorse. Those countries who have this technology would use it to attack other nations who don’t have the money or the scientific capability to develop it. This would kick off a scramble of many wars of oppression and land-grabbing again, on a scale like it hasn’t been for centuries. That’s the military’s dream scenario--assuming, they figure, we could win such wars. As for the other purposes of editing DNA--most everybody would like perfect babies. With that, we could say good-by to the flaws of natural birth and natural genes. Does that sound great too? But what if only some parents could afford it, others couldn't? Then we'd be talking about who gets the designer genes, who doesn't. Separate schools would have to be built for the mutant intelligence. This is starting to sound like X-Men. Then we're back to the Superior Race stuff again, a replay of Nazism, and that didn't turn out good. Every one of these results has an immoral end-play. More wars, more killing, more oppression, slavery, superior races, no remorse. Man creates bad with far more devastation than his creation of good.
So here we are, messing with DNA again, looking at the possibility of unpredictable sinful results again. There are no rules, so I guarantee some scientists are on a quest to expand DNA editing, no matter the results. The Wired article’s sub-headline was spooky and probably prophetic, "The Genesis Engine."
Thus my final point in my theory: If we corrupt DNA again, we again have superior "people," or really hybrid trans-humans, who are revered for their killing power and for their intelligence. Since they are a chimera of DNAs, and not in God’s image, and not human, they are again unsaveable. Like Noah. They would again be prone to ego, violence, and oppression. It also could lead to many wars and land-grabbing, and man oppressing man. Now think about it: Does this not sound like a Scriptural description for the Beast's environment? Would this not help generate the wars predicted in the End Times? The Beast is a great warrior and general, with an ego to match. He loves being worshipped. And plenty of people are willing to be his lackeys.
By the way, a little side speculation: note that that term "beast" is an unusual description of a man. It could conceivably mean he is partly animal and partly human. And note his extreme hatred of God and his extreme persecution of God's people in Revelation 13, where I quote:
And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the dragon (or Satan) who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
If the Beast is a DNA-edited creature, along with lots of other warriors that are chimera produced by man, that may mean judgment day is coming again--the Last Days. We're not far off from editing DNA, so we may not be far off from end times. I have other blogs that say more about the chronological events of end times, and my Scripture-based belief that Scripture proves that Christians will have to live through this Great Tribulation from Matthew 24 and Revelation 6-13. It will be a world of great danger.
Are you ever fearful for the future, for yourself and your children? Would you want them to live in a world where you have no answers for the things that are happening? Where you are always feeling unsafe? You can receive help by falling into the arms of Jesus. He has a claim on your obedience to His commands in Scripture--He loved you enough to die for you.
Acknowledgement: David Bercot, CD, “Satan and the Demons,” Scroll Publishing.
