America: Flirting With Tyranny

Now you are totally ridiculous. Language and concepts is a bad comparison
How can you have a Bible if you do not have languages?

If you throw out language, then you have to throw out the Bible. The originals, and the many translations, are all written in human languages. If you reject human languages then you reject the Bible.
 
.
I wasn't seriously alarmed until social media began blocking former US
President Donald Trump. And then the Government began fighting Covid
data that differs with Dr. Anthony Fauci's "science" and condemned it as
misinformation.

The military began weeding out dissidents, private enterprise began
politicizing their business models, parents are being gradually removed from
parenting, school children are being indoctrinated with Critical Race Theory
which is nothing more than a take-off on some of Vladimir Lenin's ideology,
and the Communist Chinese are working with US governments to set up
police stations in America.

But what really, really scares me is the FBI's conduct. Its become a US
version of the Ministerium für Staatsicherheit, a.k.a. the Stasi. Sadly, our
"old reliable" law enforcement agency has become politicized too right along
with the Teacher's Union and local school districts all across America. When I
heard of questions about the FBI's involvement in the Russian collusion hoax
and Hunter Biden's laptop, that did it.
_
 
.
I agree that we're headed for tyranny, but what do the Bible verses add to that
observation?

• Gen 6:4 . .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.

One of the Bible's Hebrew words for "giant" is rapha' (raw-faw') which appears in
numerous places throughout the Old Testament and typically always indicates brutish
people of large physical stature. But that's not the word for giants here. Instead it's
nephiyl (nef-eel') which appears in only two verses in the entire Old Testament; one
here and the other in Numbers 13:33.

The word is somewhat ambiguous, but in this context it pertains to bullies: especially to
men famous for tyranny, e.g. Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Mao Tse
tung, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, Robert Mugabe, Muammar Gaddafi, Xi
Jinping, and Kim Jong Un.

The ambition of nephiyl is to quite dominate others. Those kinds of men don't just want
power: they want to own your soul.

Men who seek to dominate others are often the least suitable to do so; and back there
in Noah's day that was certainly true. The spiritual quality of the world built by the
governance of the nehiyl was so poor that the situation required God to step in and do
something about it.

• Gen 6:5 . . And the Lord saw that the evil of man was great in the earth, and every
imagination of his heart was only evil all the time.

That's pretty much the end result of tyranny because in order for the nephiyl's
management practices to succeed; any and all moral values but their own have be
suppressed. We don't have to look very far in our own time to see that in action; for
example Communist China's hostility towards Falun Gong.


There is currently a really informative series on NetFlix called "How To Become A
Tyrant". It's chilling to see just how many things going on right now, right here in the
USA, are in accord with the Tyrant's playbook. The last twenty-one months in my
country have been disturbing; and to think there are yet twenty-seven more to go with
the current administration.

Let me say just say this: Folks who don't think tyranny can't happen in the USA are like
a frog boiling to death by bringing its water temperature up gradually so the poor stupid
critter doesn't become alarmed.

(Better?)
_
 
How can you have a Bible if you do not have languages?

If you throw out language, then you have to throw out the Bible. The originals, and the many translations, are all written in human languages. If you reject human languages then you reject the Bible.
Nobody has said they are rejecting languages. Could you try to address what is actually being said for a change.
 
I wasn't seriously alarmed until social media began blocking former US
President Donald Trump.
False. Donald Trump has not been blocked by Truth Social. Some, but not all social media companies have blocked him for breaking their terms of service. Or are you one of those socialist types who want to destroy capitalism by not allowing private companies to set their own terms and conditions.

And then the Government began fighting Covid
data that differs with Dr. Anthony Fauci's "science" and condemned it as
misinformation.
Then why was the Covid death rate greater in anti-vax states compared to pro-vax states? Or are you one of those environmentalists who is working to reduce the human population?

The military began weeding out dissidents
So, you have no problem with undercover antifa being allowed to join the military to get training? Not many people will agree with you there, I'm afraid.

private enterprise began politicizing their business models,
Again with the socialism, trying to tell private enterprise what to do, rather than leaving it to the markets. Do you take a copy of Marx to bed with you every night?

Why should I listen to a socialist, pro-antifa, anti-capitalist environmentalist who wants to reduce the human population for ecological reasons?
 
Nobody has said they are rejecting languages. Could you try to address what is actually being said for a change.
We are discussing the different meanings given to "son" in the Bible, specifically: "sons of God" and "son of God". That is a discussion about language, and about the translation of the original Hebrew and Greek into English.
 
We are discussing the different meanings given to "son" in the Bible, specifically: "sons of God" and "son of God". That is a discussion about language, and about the translation of the original Hebrew and Greek into English.
And then you complained about how different meaning of the same word was confusing to you.
 
We are discussing the different meanings given to "son" in the Bible, specifically: "sons of God" and "son of God". That is a discussion about language, and about the translation of the original Hebrew and Greek into English.
They were at different times thousands of years apart. You left that out. The idea is to clarify what they meant, what they were attempting to convey to their audience and us from across time and culture. Not on how some yahoo interprets it from thousands of years into the future filtered thru their bias. They were supernaturalists, so the idea of nonhuman angels mating and producing offspring with human females was not all that far fetched with them. This will all bounce off your head.

4For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, (Gen. 6) but held them captive in Tartarus with chains of darkness and handed them over to be kept for judgment, 5and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, (Gen 7) a proclaimer of righteousness, and seven others when

Heiser, Michael S.. Reversing Hermon: Enoch, the Watchers, and the Forgotten Mission of Jesus Christ (p. 15). Kindle Edition.
 
Last edited:
And then you complained about how different meaning of the same word was confusing to you.
I am complaining about how different meanings of the same word give different interpretations of the Bible. Does God have one or many sons? Both positions can be justified in the text.
 
They were at different times thousands of years apart. You left that out.
How is that relevant? Both are part of the Bible. Or did God change His mind between the two times?

Are we to ignore the older parts of the Bible and only accept the later parts?
 
I am complaining about how different meanings of the same word give different interpretations of the Bible. Does God have one or many sons? Both positions can be justified in the text.
Youn have to differentiate between adopted sons and natural sons.
 
I am complaining about how different meanings of the same word give different interpretations of the Bible. Does God have one or many sons? Both positions can be justified in the text.
Well we are all sons of God
Galatians 4:6
Because you are his sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.”

but we are not God the Father, Son or Holy Spirit

You need revelation of who God is.
Sometimes we say the OT is the NT concealed and The NT is the OT revealed
 
How is that relevant? Both are part of the Bible. Or did God change His mind between the two times?

Are we to ignore the older parts of the Bible and only accept the later parts?
Ah interesting because same sex acts are only ever condemned in both OT and NT yet that didn't bother you. Why would you be concerned with an apparent contradiction when you pick and choose anyway
 
Youn have to differentiate between adopted sons and natural sons.
How can I differentiate? In the passages we are discussing, neither the word "adopted" nor the word "natural" are used. Those are external assumptions interpreters make. That makes them a lot less reliable. There are a lot of different interpretations of the Bible.
 
Why would you be concerned with an apparent contradiction when you pick and choose anyway
This is not merely an "apparent" contradiction. It is a real contradiction between many sons and one son. That is a genuine mathematical contradiction: 1 ≠ 2.

Asserting a contradiction can be very dangerous, since it allows a 'logical' proof of any statement whatsoever.
 
I am complaining about how different meanings of the same word give different interpretations of the Bible.
Because you are a bible and historical illiterate. Word meaning can change over time. Idiot is an example that was a medical term earlier and became a slur later on. Historical linguistics. Words can mean one thing at one time and change meaning over time according to that culture. Cultures change. Go back and look at pictures from 50 yrs ago and language usage, or music. They change with time. Historians can probably identify the time period of a picture by the clothes they are wearing. Cars, even cement, buildings etc. They all reflect their time period.
Does God have one or many sons?
Sons of God because they came from God. Son of God with Jesus is a relational or functional term conveyed to humans. Both Jesus and the Nephilim had in common they did not have human but nonhuman fathers and human mothers.
Both positions can be justified in the text.
Jesus existed prior to His human birth and the Nephilim did not. You don't want to learn anything anyway. Your bias gets in your way of learning. That is why you will always have a schoolboy-distorted understanding. It is your own fault because you cannot or will not look at it detached.
 
Last edited:
How is that relevant?
Sons of God is mostly used in earlier writings from the Bible. Genesis and Job are early.
Both are part of the Bible.
So? Different authors and different times.
Or did God change His mind between the two times?
Humans wrote it according to their times
Are we to ignore the older parts of the Bible and only accept the later parts?
You ignore the whole thing as is your right. You prefer darkness to light and relish in your ignorance.
 
This is not merely an "apparent" contradiction. It is a real contradiction between many sons and one son. That is a genuine mathematical contradiction: 1 ≠ 2.

Asserting a contradiction can be very dangerous, since it allows a 'logical' proof of any statement whatsoever.
No its not a contradition, Jesus is God the Son and we are sons as in inheriting the Kingdom.
 
Back
Top