© Brighteon.com All Rights Reserved. All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Brighteon is not responsible for comments and content uploaded by our users.
[Jan 31, 2016] Refuting the Sethite Theory and the Concept of Multiple Incursions (7.8K views on YouTube)
657 followers
Follow
1
Share
Report
Send a Crypto Tip
If you like the content from this creator, send a crypto tip to help support their channel.
Select a Crypto Method:
Copy the code below for use in your Crypto App.
Copy
100% of your tip goes directly to this channel. TheBrighteon platform does not receive or forward any crypto tips and does not have access to any records of crypto tipping activities.
If supported, scan the QR code above using your Crypto App.
31 views • September 18, 2024
Anyone who has actually studied ancient literature - especially that of the Hebrews - will tell you that the unanimous view regarding the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 was that of angels. The completely bogus and entirely unsubstantiated so-called "Sethite Theory" didn't even show up until about 160 to 200 years after Christ. In fact, that theory fails on so many levels, it's hard to believe anyone actually still subscribes to the idea.
This video then moves into refuting the equally unsubstantiated view of multiple incursions (the idea that angles continued to return and mate with women again and again). There are NO supporting Scriptures to confirm the usual assumptions people have regarding Genesis 6:4. Furthermore, the text itself refutes the idea when you factor in the context given in the book of Enoch. In my mind, Genesis 9:18,19 is the smoking gun though. It obliterates any notion that Moses had multiple incursions in mind when he described how the WHOLE EARTH WAS POPULATED - writing nearly a thousand years after the Flood. The Table of Nations in Genesis 10 further nullifies the whole argument, wherein Moses tells us exactly where ALL of the post-Flood, Biblical giants came from (most notably, Ham's son Canaan).
https://testingtheglobe.com
https://www.virtualhousechurch.com
https://ephraimawakening.com
If you like my work please like, subscribe, and share.
Support donations can be made here:
https://robschannel.com/support
https://babylonrisingbooks.com
https://seedtheseries.com
geology, astronomy, photography, cosmology, technology, bible, science
bible, science, genetics, nephilim, seed war, hybrids, technology
This video then moves into refuting the equally unsubstantiated view of multiple incursions (the idea that angles continued to return and mate with women again and again). There are NO supporting Scriptures to confirm the usual assumptions people have regarding Genesis 6:4. Furthermore, the text itself refutes the idea when you factor in the context given in the book of Enoch. In my mind, Genesis 9:18,19 is the smoking gun though. It obliterates any notion that Moses had multiple incursions in mind when he described how the WHOLE EARTH WAS POPULATED - writing nearly a thousand years after the Flood. The Table of Nations in Genesis 10 further nullifies the whole argument, wherein Moses tells us exactly where ALL of the post-Flood, Biblical giants came from (most notably, Ham's son Canaan).
https://testingtheglobe.com
https://www.virtualhousechurch.com
https://ephraimawakening.com
If you like my work please like, subscribe, and share.
Support donations can be made here:
https://robschannel.com/support
https://babylonrisingbooks.com
https://seedtheseries.com
geology, astronomy, photography, cosmology, technology, bible, science
bible, science, genetics, nephilim, seed war, hybrids, technology
Keywords
FREE email alerts of the most important BANNED videos in the world
Get FREE email alerts of the most important BANNED videos in the world that are usually blacklisted by YouTube, Facebook, Google, Twitter and Vimeo. Watch documentaries the techno-fascists don't want you to know even exist. Join the free Brighteon email newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time. 100% privacy protected.
Your privacy is protected. Subscription confirmation required.





