FOR FAIR USE AND EDUCATION AND DISCUSSION PURPOSES





This one is not for everybody. Those who have done intensive studies on Jude and Zechariah may find it quite fascinating and enlightening. It's just another view (of which there are many) of interpretation and understanding. Yet, it might put another piece of the puzzle in place for those Christians who are always "searching" for more "meat"...

I, for one, am fascinated in all the ways that today's "Church" has become more and more apostate.



http://www.tidings.org/2001/05/not-giving-heed-to-jewish-fables-7-michael-the-devil-and-the-body-of-moses-2/



Piece of link article but not the main subject)


3. Now let’s put the shoe on the other foot and consider the position of the false teachers. We can see they had some following because Jude says they had succeeded in dividing the ecclesia (Jude 19, apodiorizontes which means “who create divisions” rather than “who separate themselves” KJV). The divisions were not yet a clear break, however, as both sides were still breaking bread with each other (Jude 12). It may not have been clear exactly who supported whom, and there would, as always, have been a large number of undecided (which explains the caution advised in Jude 22-23). If the ecclesia was divided, it means that those loyal to the memory of Peter were still putting up stiff resistance. They were probably able to counter the fallen-angel teachers with the very same verses and reasoning from the Old Testament which Christadelphians use today.

4. Imagine for a moment that you were a false teacher preaching “angels that sinned.” Some of the ecclesia have already accepted the authority of the Book of Enoch, but those loyal to Peter say the book is a fake. The undecided (Jude 22) demand evidence from the Old Testament. You, false teacher, have a problem.

Not everyone, by any means, accepts your assertion that “Sons of God” in Genesis 6 are angels. It is likely that the Gospel of Luke was already widely distributed by the late ‘60s AD (II Cor. 8:18; I Tim.5:18 cf. Luke10:7), and any claims about Genesis 6 will be immediately countered by Luke 20:36 where “sons of God” is defined by Christ as believers, rather than angels who marry (both KJV and NIV are inaccurate here; the Greek is huioi “sons,” not teknoi “children” .

*******************

When studying about these things, we really can't argue "right" and "wrong" interpretation because few have come to any definitive conclusions...but we're getting closer...

Arlene