Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis  (Read 3457 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8621
  • Reputation: +5212/-1632
  • Gender: Male
Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
« Reply #45 on: August 18, 2022, 05:25:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    This has become my understanding. When I heard it I was surprised to find out that some angels in service to man apparently await the fullness of their place in heaven because of their mission on earth. Can't remember where I read this.  Do you have sources? 
     No, I'm sorry, I have no sources.  I don't remember where I heard this.

    Offline Cera

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4536
    • Reputation: +1908/-978
    • Gender: Female
    • Pray for the consecration of Russia to Mary's I H
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #46 on: August 18, 2022, 05:55:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yeah, evidence here is pointing right back to the "sons of God" being either the sons of Seth, or something else entirely.
    It's clear freom these verses from the Book of Job.that the sons of God were angels, and some of them (1/3 we are told elsewhere) fell. The "sons of God" are fallen angels
    "Now on a certain day when the sons of God came to stand before the Lord, Satan also was present among them."
     [Job 1:6]
    "And it came to pass, when on a certain day the sons of God came, and stood before the Lord, and Satan came among them, and stood in his sight,"
     [Job 2:1]
    "When the morning stars praised me together, and all the sons of God made a joyful melody?"
     [Job 38:7]



    Genesis 6 is clear.
    "The sons of God seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair, took to themselves wives of all which they chose."
     [Genesis 6:2]
    "Now giants were upon the earth in those days. For after the sons of God went in to the daughters of men, and they brought forth children, these are the mighty men of old, men of renown."
     [Genesis 6:4]



    It is clear that they married the human women who bore giants, which correlates with the "myths" of the ancient Greeks and Romans.




    Pray for the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary


    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7954
    • Reputation: +4491/-744
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #47 on: August 18, 2022, 06:49:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's clear freom these verses from the Book of Job.that the sons of God were angels, and some of them (1/3 we are told elsewhere) fell. The "sons of God" are fallen angels
    "Now on a certain day when the sons of God came to stand before the Lord, Satan also was present among them."
     [Job 1:6]
    "And it came to pass, when on a certain day the sons of God came, and stood before the Lord, and Satan came among them, and stood in his sight,"
     [Job 2:1]
    "When the morning stars praised me together, and all the sons of God made a joyful melody?"
     [Job 38:7]



    Genesis 6 is clear.
    "The sons of God seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair, took to themselves wives of all which they chose."
     [Genesis 6:2]
    "Now giants were upon the earth in those days. For after the sons of God went in to the daughters of men, and they brought forth children, these are the mighty men of old, men of renown."
     [Genesis 6:4]



    It is clear that they married the human women who bore giants, which correlates with the "myths" of the ancient Greeks and Romans.
    I am aware of that, but what I am saying is that it is contrary to what the Church teaches on angelic natures. So, to say that these were, in fact, traditional angels in the sense of heavenly intelligences, doesn't add up.

    As we also have Our Lord and the Apostles in the New Testament using the same term to refer to the saints:

    Quote
    "But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name."
    [John 1:12]

    "For whosoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God."
    [Romans 8:14]

    "For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God."
    [Romans 8:16]

    "And not only it, but ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body."
    [Romans 8:23]

    "Behold what manner of charity the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called, and should be the sons of God. Therefore the world knoweth not us, because it knew not him. Dearly beloved, we are now the sons of God; and it hath not yet appeared what we shall be. We know, that, when he shall appear, we shall be like to him: because we shall see him as he is."
    [1 John 3:1-2]


    It is in light of this that I am going to stand more in line with St. Augustine in saying that these "sons of God" referred to in Genesis were, in fact, the just men, the line of ante-Diluvian patriarchs, the sons of Seth (or Shem); not angels in the sense that Job states. That's not to say Job is wrong, but it's clearly unreasonable, based upon the teaching of Ss. Dionysius and Thomas, to think that immaterial angels somehow procreated directly with material women. If you want to take the angle that demons possessed them and did so in order to tamper with the genetics of man, I would agree with that myself.
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline Seraphina

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2163
    • Reputation: +1429/-153
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #48 on: August 18, 2022, 08:01:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Could “the Watchers” be what people call Sasquatch or Big Foot?  

    Offline Philothea3

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 340
    • Reputation: +124/-45
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #49 on: August 18, 2022, 08:08:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm thinking that back then nephilims took the shape of giants because they were most powerful, but now could they be taking a normal size but rule from the top by intelligence? Do you think some of the elites there can be nephilims? I guess nephilims are usually cannibals too, that explains those elites' behaviour. Perhaps some "humans" we see today in our daily life are not even humans? :confused:
    THY WILL BE DONE ON EARTH AS IT IS IN HEAVEN
    so that we may love you with all our heart, by always having you in mind; with all our soul, by always longing for you; with all our mind, by determining to seek your glory in everything; 
    and with all our strength, of body and soul...


    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7954
    • Reputation: +4491/-744
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #50 on: August 18, 2022, 08:52:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm thinking that back then nephilims took the shape of giants because they were most powerful, but now could they be taking a normal size but rule from the top by intelligence? Do you think some of the elites there can be nephilims? I guess nephilims are usually cannibals too, that explains those elites' behaviour. Perhaps some "humans" we see today in our daily life are not even humans? :confused:
    I don't believe that. The purpose of the Flood, some speculate, was to kill off these abominable Nephalim, which God succeeded in doing. You can still see some traces of giantism in people today (and even in some like Goliath), but that wouldn't be from the Nephalim as, presumably, Noah's line was pure in body and soul. Hence why he and his progeny were saved, because they were continuing the pure Messianic bloodline from Adam, as well as preserving the true Faith, to bring forth Our Lord Jesus Christ. Rather, I would speculate that before the Deluge the fallen angels manipulated certain genetic markers in these "sons of God" to bring forth the Giants/Nephalim.

    What I said previously about the size depictions in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, etc., I argue, comes from a memory of these giants of the ante-Diluvian world. Which is also contained within the feats associated with the deities of the various Indo-European religions.

    This idea that the bloodline of the Nephalim persists today gets into the weird Protestant errors of the "Serpent seed" and whatnot.

    I also wanted to post what Anne-Catherine Emmerich saw in regard to the ante-Diluvian giants:
    Quote
    We must not picture to ourselves the earth before the Deluge as it is now. Palestine was by no means so broken up by valleys and ravines. Plains were far more extensive, and single mountains less lofty. The Mount of Olives was at that time only a gentle rising. The Crib Cave of Bethlehem was as later a wild cavern, but the surroundings were different.

    The people of those early times were larger. though not out of proportion. We would regard them with astonishment, but not with fright, for they were far more beautiful in form than people of a later period. Among the old marble statues that I see in many places lying in subterranean caves, may be found similar figures.

    Cain led his children and grandchildren to the region pointed out to him, and there they separated. Of Cain himself, I have never seen anything more that was sinful. His punishment appeared to consist in hard, but fruitless labor. Nothing in which he was personally engaged succeeded. I saw that he was mocked and reviled by his children and grandchildren, treated badly in every way. And yet they followed him as their leader, though as one accursed. I saw that Cain was severely punished, but not damned.

    One of Cain's descendants was Thubalcain, the originator of numerous arts, and the father of the giants. I have frequently seen that, when the angels fell, a certain number had a moment of repentance and did not in consequence fall as low as the others. Later on, these fallen spirits took up their abode on a high, desolate, and wholly inaccessible mountain whose site at the time of the Deluge became a sea, the Black Sea, I think. They were permitted to exercise their evil influence upon men in proportion as the latter strayed further from God. After the Deluge they disappeared from that region, and were confined to the air. They will not be cast into Hell before the last day.

    I saw Cain's descendants becoming more and more godless and sensual. They settled further and further up that mountain ridge where were the fallen spirits. Those spirits took possession of many of the women, ruled them completely, and taught them all sorts of seductive arts. Their children were very large. They possessed a quickness, an aptitude for everything, and they gave themselves up entirely to the wicked spirits as their instruments. And so arose on this mountain and spread far around, a wicked race which by violence and seduction sought to entangle Seth's posterity likewise in their own corrupt ways. Then God declared to Noe His intention to send the Deluge. During the building of the ark, Noe had to suffer terribly from those people.

    I have seen many things connected with the race of giants. They could with ease carry enormous stones high up the mountain, they could accomplish the most stupendous feats. They could walk straight up trees and walls just as I have seen others possessed by the devil doing. They could effect the most wonderful things, they could do whatever they wished; but all was pure jugglery and delusion due to the agency of the demon. It is for that reason that I have such horror of every species of jugglery and fortune-telling. These people could form all kinds of images out of stone and metal; but of the knowledge of God they had no longer a trace. They sought their gods in the creatures around them. I have seen them scratch up a stone, form it into an extravagant image, and then adore it. They worshipped also a frightful animal and all kinds of ignoble things. They knew all things, they could see all things, they were skilled in the preparing of poisons, they practiced sorcery and every species of wickedness. The women invented music. I saw them going around among the better tribes trying to seduce them to their own abominations. They had no dwelling houses, no cities, but they raised massive round towers of shining stone. Under those towers were little structures leading into great caverns wherein they carried on their horrible wickedness. From the roofs of these structures, the surrounding country could be seen, and by mounting up into the towers and looking through tubes, one could see far into the distance. But it was not like looking through tubes made to bring distant objects into view. The power of the tubes to which I here allude, was effected by satanic agency. They that looked through them could see where the other tribes were settled. Then they marched against them, overcame them, and lawlessly carried all before them. That same spirit of lawlessness they exercised everywhere. I saw them sacrificing children by burying them alive in the earth. God overthrew that mountain at the time of the Deluge.

    Henoch, Noe's ancestor, opposed that wicked race by his teachings. He wrote much. Henoch was a very good man and one very grateful to God. In many parts of the open fields, he raised altars of stone and there the fruits of the earth flourished. He gave thanks to God and offered sacrifice to Him. Chiefly in his family was religion preserved and handed down to Noe. Henoch was taken up to Paradise. There he waits at the entrance gate, whence with another (Elias) he will come again before the last day.

    Cham's descendants likewise had similar relations with the evil spirits after the Deluge, and from such connection sprang so many demoniacs and necromancers. so many mighty ones of the world, so many great, wild, daring men.

    Semiramis herself was the offspring of demoniacs, consequently she was apt at everything save the working out of her salvation.

    Later on, there arose another people esteemed as gods by the heathens. The women that first allowed themselves to be ruled by evil spirits were fully conscious of the fact, though others were ignorant of it. These women had it (the principle of possession) in them like flesh and blood, like original sin.
    -Anne-Catherine Emmerich, Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, II.5. p.30-33

    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8621
    • Reputation: +5212/-1632
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #51 on: August 18, 2022, 09:12:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    One of Cain's descendants was Thubalcain, the originator of numerous arts, and the father of the giants. I have frequently seen that, when the angels fell, a certain number had a moment of repentance and did not in consequence fall as low as the others. Later on, these fallen spirits took up their abode on a high, desolate, and wholly inaccessible mountain whose site at the time of the Deluge became a sea, the Black Sea, I think. They were permitted to exercise their evil influence upon men in proportion as the latter strayed further from God. After the Deluge they disappeared from that region, and were confined to the air. They will not be cast into Hell before the last day.
    I don't see how Anne Catherine Emmerich is contradicting Enoch's story, whom she praises as a holy man.  It's unclear what she means when she says "when the angels fell".  Is she talking about satan's revolt against God vs St Michael?  I don't see how because she says they won't be cast into hell before the last day.  But satan and his angels are already in hell.  So she must be talking about fallen angels in the same way that Enoch was, which means, angels fell a 2nd time.  She uses the term (assuming the translation is accurate) of "fallen spirits".  But satan and co are not fallen spirits but demons who are in hell.  So, it appears that the "sons of god" does mean actual angels.

    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7954
    • Reputation: +4491/-744
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #52 on: August 18, 2022, 09:31:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't see how Anne Catherine Emmerich is contradicting Enoch's story, whom she praises as a holy man.  It's unclear what she means when she says "when the angels fell".  Is she talking about satan's revolt against God vs St Michael?  I don't see how because she says they won't be cast into hell before the last day.  But satan and his angels are already in hell.  So she must be talking about fallen angels in the same way that Enoch was, which means, angels fell a 2nd time.  She uses the term (assuming the translation is accurate) of "fallen spirits".  But satan and co are not fallen spirits but demons who are in hell.  So, it appears that the "sons of god" does mean actual angels.

    Yeah, in a way, it almost confuses things again. As she goes on to say:

    Quote
    I saw Cain's descendants becoming more and more godless and sensual. They settled further and further up that mountain ridge where were the fallen spirits. Those spirits took possession of many of the women, ruled them completely, and taught them all sorts of seductive arts. Their children were very large. They possessed a quickness, an aptitude for everything, and they gave themselves up entirely to the wicked spirits as their instruments. And so arose on this mountain and spread far around, a wicked race which by violence and seduction sought to entangle Seth's posterity likewise in their own corrupt ways. Then God declared to Noe His intention to send the Deluge. During the building of the ark, Noe had to suffer terribly from those people.

    There's mention of the fallen angels on the mountain (the Watchers), but also how they possessed the women to seduce the seed of Seth, much like is stated in Genesis 6:2:

    Quote
    The sons of God seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair, took to themselves wives of all which they chose.

    But there's also the correlation of the possession of these women by the fallen spirits in Genesis 6:4:

    Quote
    For after the sons of God went in to the daughters of men, and they brought forth children, these are the mighty men of old, men of renown.


    Now, "went in to" has the obvious meaning used elsewhere in Genesis of the sɛҳuąƖ act; but, given that these are spirits, one could see the DR English of "went in to" as meaning possession as well. And then there's the Latin of ingressi, which, as a feminine participle(?) of ingressus, means "entry, going in or embarking on, point of entry, steps".

    And then, further, we come to the Hebrew, which is בּוֹא (bo), as in יָבֹ֜אוּ (yā·ḇō·’ū) which means "To come in, come, go in, go"; as a sort of movement, rather than the conjugal act, as evidenced how it is used elsewhere in Scripture: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_935.htm

    Given that it appears to mean more that of a movement on the part of the sons of God (fallen angels, presumably), it does sound more like possession on the part of these spirits, with the conjugal act occurring between the other "sons of God" (Seth's progeny) and the possessed women to produce the Nephilim. As Anne-Catherine's vision relates.

    So, what I'm seeing here is that "sons of God" is being used both in the sense of Job to mean angels, but also in the sense of the just men of that age, Seth's progeny.
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]


    Offline Philothea3

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 340
    • Reputation: +124/-45
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #53 on: August 19, 2022, 12:06:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I definitely have to study this list of Father's opinions a bit more, it is really interesting. I still have a problem with the idea that fallen angels actually produced human/angelic children. Angels simply don't have the capacity. They have no matter of their own to work with.  Devils can use "appearances only" bodies, but those bodies don't actually function.  The biggest problem in my mind is, if fallen angels could procreate, then the antichrist would be the devil incarnate.  But the antichrist will not be Satan incarnated, he will only "perfectly possessed".  If Satan can't do it, why would his minion be able to? Maybe the fallen angels used the people who first entered into impure unions by tempting them into rituals in which the devils participated, where the sperm from particular individual(s) who had the giant gene was used? I don't know. I also don't know if there's enough information to really come to a conclusion.
    Reply to Objection 6. As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xv): "Many persons affirm that they have had the experience, or have heard from such as have experienced it, that the Satyrs and Fauns, whom the common folk call incubi, have often presented themselves before women, and have sought and procured intercourse with them. Hence it is folly to deny it. But God's holy angels could not fall in such fashion before the deluge. Hence by the sons of God are to be understood the sons of Seth, who were good; while by the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain. Nor is it to be wondered at that giants should be born of them; for they were not all giants, albeit there were many more before than after the deluge." Still if some are occasionally begotten from demons, it is not from the seed of such demons, nor from their assumed bodies, but from the seed of men taken for the purpose; as when the demon assumes first the form of a woman, and afterwards of a man; just as they take the seed of other things for other generating purposes, as Augustine says (De Trin. ii.), so that the person born is not the child of a demon, but of a man.
    https://www.newadvent.org/summa/1051.htm#article2
    THY WILL BE DONE ON EARTH AS IT IS IN HEAVEN
    so that we may love you with all our heart, by always having you in mind; with all our soul, by always longing for you; with all our mind, by determining to seek your glory in everything; 
    and with all our strength, of body and soul...

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8621
    • Reputation: +5212/-1632
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #54 on: August 19, 2022, 09:44:39 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It seems that Emmerich is confirming that angels/watchers did fall, which St Augustine couldn’t rationalize.  She agrees with Enoch, while St Augustine doesn’t.  

    As far as genetics and reproduction goes, I also see an *apparent* contradiction between Emmerich/Enoch/Scripture and St Augustine.  The former imply that the angels did reproduce, because that’s the only way the giants came about.  While St Augustine is saying that the fallen angels used seed from men.  But St Augustine doesn’t explain how/why the fallen angels were able to create super-human giants from ordinary woman/man genes.  

    It seems that St Augustine tries to downplay the fallen angel “father” theory because of the unexplainable lack of human matter but then creates the same problem with his fallen-angel-influence of normal human reproduction.  Either way, it seems to me, the fallen angels corrupted human matter and created the Giants.  Either they created/provided male genetic material or they corrupted/enhanced male genetic material.  Both situations are other-worldly, and supernatural events which are foreign to our concept of angels. 

    Offline Tradman

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 943
    • Reputation: +668/-240
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #55 on: August 19, 2022, 09:57:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Reply to Objection 6. As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xv): "Many persons affirm that they have had the experience, or have heard from such as have experienced it, that the Satyrs and Fauns, whom the common folk call incubi, have often presented themselves before women, and have sought and procured intercourse with them. Hence it is folly to deny it. But God's holy angels could not fall in such fashion before the deluge. Hence by the sons of God are to be understood the sons of Seth, who were good; while by the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain. Nor is it to be wondered at that giants should be born of them; for they were not all giants, albeit there were many more before than after the deluge." Still if some are occasionally begotten from demons, it is not from the seed of such demons, nor from their assumed bodies, but from the seed of men taken for the purpose; as when the demon assumes first the form of a woman, and afterwards of a man; just as they take the seed of other things for other generating purposes, as Augustine says (De Trin. ii.), so that the person born is not the child of a demon, but of a man.
    https://www.newadvent.org/summa/1051.htm#article2
    Thanks for this Philothea. I knew I read this somewhere, but now we all have access to it.  


    Offline Tradman

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 943
    • Reputation: +668/-240
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #56 on: August 19, 2022, 10:52:38 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • It seems that Emmerich is confirming that angels/watchers did fall, which St Augustine couldn’t rationalize.  She agrees with Enoch, while St Augustine doesn’t. 

    As far as genetics and reproduction goes, I also see an *apparent* contradiction between Emmerich/Enoch/Scripture and St Augustine.  The former imply that the angels did reproduce, because that’s the only way the giants came about.  While St Augustine is saying that the fallen angels used seed from men.  But St Augustine doesn’t explain how/why the fallen angels were able to create super-human giants from ordinary woman/man genes. 

    It seems that St Augustine tries to downplay the fallen angel “father” theory because of the unexplainable lack of human matter but then creates the same problem with his fallen-angel-influence of normal human reproduction.  Either way, it seems to me, the fallen angels corrupted human matter and created the Giants.  Either they created/provided male genetic material or they corrupted/enhanced male genetic material.  Both situations are other-worldly, and supernatural events which are foreign to our concept of angels.
    This thread is interesting and it's great to come back each time to find there's more meat on these bones.  I still favor Augustine's theory, except that it doesn't fit better with certain Fathers. Even then, it's difficult to know exactly what some of them meant in light of the problems with cross species procreation.  There really isn't enough proof to be sure demons were fathering babies. Perhaps demons understood a spiritual effect of a particular witchcraft, that illicit unions would be genetically disposed to becoming giants because it was the first time in history such pairings ever happened.     

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 34782
    • Reputation: +20235/-4254
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #57 on: August 19, 2022, 11:32:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • St. Augustine doesn't rule out angels that could assume a partially corporeal nature, but his issues with it are how these angels could fall.  Now, even if they could somehow assume a corporeal aspect, in order for any kind of lust to be in play, that would assume that these angels did have a sensible part of their being that could directly interact with this assumed body.

    I think that the inclination today to reject the notion that these were angels comes from our definition of angels as being pure spirit (without even a sensible part of their being).  But I don't know that we can preclude God's having created a type of angel that is in between the purely spiritual world and the material.  We see that in one of the Church Fathers who wrote about this that this was the lowest tier of angel charged with interacting with the material world ("to govern matter in all its forms") and stationed at the "first firmament", namely, at the physical boundary of our world.  So the Patristic quotes cited by Pax in the OP seem to indicate these Fathers before St. Augustine clearly believing that these were angels.

    If you think about the etymology of "angel," it means a messenger.  I look at that as meaning that they transition in hierarchical fashion down from God, to higher angels (who are the most like God), to lower choirs of angels, and ultimately to man and the physical world.  So they're transitional between God and the material world.  From what we know, Cherubim and Seraphim (the highest choirs) do not actually serve as "messengers" because they're constantly in the presence of God.  So to call them angels I think simply means that they're lower than God, but then at the top of a hierarchical ladder that extends ultimately to the material creation.

    So does it make sense for there to be one more step in the hierarchy?  I think it does.  It's typically been understood that man is the ultimate bridge between the purely spiritual (the invisible) to the purely material (the visible).  But that does seem to me to leave a bit of a gap that could be filled by these hypothetical angelic beings.

    So my hypothesis is that these beings were angels in the sense that they were transitional between God and ultimately man and then material creation, that they had a purely spiritual aspect, but also a sensible aspect, and that these were essential to the definition of their nature.  Yet, unlike it is for man, it was not of their essence to have this sensible aspect joined to a body, but they COULD assume bodies, of a more ethereal nature, not made from the clay of the earth, but from a more rarefied material (such as which St. Augustine describes), and that these rarefied bodies (optional for them, unlike for man) could then interact with this sensible aspect of their nature, and so they could, for instance experience sensations such as attraction for women and then, after their fall, lust.

    And this also would explain how they could fall in "time" as opposed to the angels who, being PURE spirit, had to decide to be either for or against God at the first instant of their creation.  Time and movement through space are related to matter, and so is the capacity to "change", so this material aspect of their nature could explain how they could change over time and thus fall at some point later, rather than at the instant they were created.

    These types of creatures would also explain all the ancient legends about these "gods" that came from the sky or lived in the sky (up in Olympus).  Those "Ancient Aliens" people point out that nearly every ancient culture had stories of these "gods" that came from the sky.  Of course, they misinterpret them as having come from other planets, but perhaps, as the one Church Father described it, they came from the lowest heaven (understood as the sky beneath the firmament by the Fathers), i.e. "the first firmament".  It would be interesting to re-examine the very interesting findings made by the Ancient Aliens crowd under the supposition that they refer to these types of beings.  Many of these stories speak of these gods mating with women, and that the result of this mating were the "heroes", such as Hercules, etc. were the result.  And Genesis mentions that in fact the offspring of these "sons of God" mating with "daughters of men" was in fact the "great men of renown" and "giants".  Every culture has these stories and legends.  So it all starts to make sense.  I've long been of the opinion that when cultures had stories like these, it wasn't because they were stupid, such as, "oh, look, lightning ... since I don't have a scientific explanation, it must be some god hurling it down from above" and that there's always something REAL to all these stories.  Sumerians have the Gilgamesh epic which is nearly identical to Sacred Scripture's account of the Great Flood, and they had this "god" named Enki (could that be Enoch?) who would go back and forth between the gods and them (precisely as the Book of Enoch describes Enoch ... and of course the name is similar).

    This is my current working hypothesis.

    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7954
    • Reputation: +4491/-744
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #58 on: August 19, 2022, 11:54:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Many of these stories speak of these gods mating with women, and that the result of this mating were the "heroes", such as Hercules, etc. were the result.  And Genesis mentions that in fact the offspring of these "sons of God" mating with "daughters of men" was in fact the "great men of renown" and "giants".  Every culture has these stories and legends.  So it all starts to make sense.  I've long been of the opinion that when cultures had stories like these, it wasn't because they were stupid, such as, "oh, look, lightning ... since I don't have a scientific explanation, it must be some god hurling it down from above" and that there's always something REAL to all these stories.  Sumerians have the Gilgamesh epic which is nearly identical to Sacred Scripture's account of the Great Flood, and they had this "god" named Enki (could that be Enoch?) who would go back and forth between the gods and them (precisely as the Book of Enoch describes Enoch ... and of course the name is similar).
    The error above by seculars and atheists only makes sense to them because they don't believe in first principles and think higher things (reason) come from lower things. When in reality, despite their paganism, the ancients were far more insightful than modern men. It was apparent to ancients that lightning was it's own thing that was governed by something else. And this logic is a seed of the ancient wisdom of Adam and the truth about the one God.
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline Tradman

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 943
    • Reputation: +668/-240
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Enoch, Church Fathers and the Giants of Genesis
    « Reply #59 on: August 19, 2022, 12:24:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • St. Augustine doesn't rule out angels that could assume a partially corporeal nature, but his issues with it are how these angels could fall.  Now, even if they could somehow assume a corporeal aspect, in order for any kind of lust to be in play, that would assume that these angels did have a sensible part of their being that could directly interact with this assumed body.

    I think that the inclination today to reject the notion that these were angels comes from our definition of angels as being pure spirit (without even a sensible part of their being).  But I don't know that we can preclude God's having created a type of angel that is in between the purely spiritual world and the material.  We see that in one of the Church Fathers who wrote about this that this was the lowest tier of angel charged with interacting with the material world ("to govern matter in all its forms") and stationed at the "first firmament", namely, at the physical boundary of our world.  So the Patristic quotes cited by Pax in the OP seem to indicate these Fathers before St. Augustine clearly believing that these were angels.

    If you think about the etymology of "angel," it means a messenger.  I look at that as meaning that they transition in hierarchical fashion down from God, to higher angels (who are the most like God), to lower choirs of angels, and ultimately to man and the physical world.  So they're transitional between God and the material world.  From what we know, Cherubim and Seraphim (the highest choirs) do not actually serve as "messengers" because they're constantly in the presence of God.  So to call them angels I think simply means that they're lower than God, but then at the top of a hierarchical ladder that extends ultimately to the material creation.

    So does it make sense for there to be one more step in the hierarchy?  I think it does.  It's typically been understood that man is the ultimate bridge between the purely spiritual (the invisible) to the purely material (the visible).  But that does seem to me to leave a bit of a gap that could be filled by these hypothetical angelic beings.

    So my hypothesis is that these beings were angels in the sense that they were transitional between God and ultimately man and then material creation, that they had a purely spiritual aspect, but also a sensible aspect, and that these were essential to the definition of their nature.  Yet, unlike it is for man, it was not of their essence to have this sensible aspect joined to a body, but they COULD assume bodies, of a more ethereal nature, not made from the clay of the earth, but from a more rarefied material (such as which St. Augustine describes), and that these rarefied bodies (optional for them, unlike for man) could then interact with this sensible aspect of their nature, and so they could, for instance experience sensations such as attraction for women and then, after their fall, lust.

    And this also would explain how they could fall in "time" as opposed to the angels who, being PURE spirit, had to decide to be either for or against God at the first instant of their creation.  Time and movement through space are related to matter, and so is the capacity to "change", so this material aspect of their nature could explain how they could change over time and thus fall at some point later, rather than at the instant they were created.

    These types of creatures would also explain all the ancient legends about these "gods" that came from the sky or lived in the sky (up in Olympus).  Those "Ancient Aliens" people point out that nearly every ancient culture had stories of these "gods" that came from the sky.  Of course, they misinterpret them as having come from other planets, but perhaps, as the one Church Father described it, they came from the lowest heaven (understood as the sky beneath the firmament by the Fathers), i.e. "the first firmament".  It would be interesting to re-examine the very interesting findings made by the Ancient Aliens crowd under the supposition that they refer to these types of beings.  Many of these stories speak of these gods mating with women, and that the result of this mating were the "heroes", such as Hercules, etc. were the result.  And Genesis mentions that in fact the offspring of these "sons of God" mating with "daughters of men" was in fact the "great men of renown" and "giants".  Every culture has these stories and legends.  So it all starts to make sense.  I've long been of the opinion that when cultures had stories like these, it wasn't because they were stupid, such as, "oh, look, lightning ... since I don't have a scientific explanation, it must be some god hurling it down from above" and that there's always something REAL to all these stories.  Sumerians have the Gilgamesh epic which is nearly identical to Sacred Scripture's account of the Great Flood, and they had this "god" named Enki (could that be Enoch?) who would go back and forth between the gods and them (precisely as the Book of Enoch describes Enoch ... and of course the name is similar).

    This is my current working hypothesis.
    Interesting for sure. Two things come to mind. Have we exhausted the possibilities regarding angels falling "in time"?  Is it certain that some angels fell after the big spiritual battle and after man was created? Another theory is, it's possible that after all the angels fell, some were afforded a delayed punishment to be met out later (a lighter sentence as it were) and during their semi freedom, committed these other crimes and were punished with an additional punishments, yet spared a full-on hell until the end?  Secondly, while such interspecies beings (mangels?) could exist, do the Fathers or other saints talk about, or maybe describe them?  The ancient aliens theory isn't as persuasive because the legends from one pagan source from way back could have extended itself throughout the races who rejected God, and was just maintained in various ways.  Yea, that isn't a likely scenario, but technically possible. Let's keep going. It's like peeling an onion and stuff keeps coming.