Note: Numbered items below are from
Donna Danna. A:
= are the replies.
1) "No where in the Bible does it
say that we believers called the sons
of God, who would be saved in the
future, ever existed with God before
being born on Earth. (A:
Job 38:7 alludes to it where it
says: "...all
the sons of God shouted for joy."
Jeremiah 1:5 supports that
also.) If that fact was true,
where were the unsaved people at
the beginning of creation who
would be born in the future if the
saved people were already with God
before creation?
A:
The unsaved were pure prior to
creation and with God but made
bad choices, sad to say, when
they came here to Earth on
assignment. A few decades
ago a missionary -- who had been
to Heaven -- reported seeing
baby spirits born out of God's
mouth every time He breathes
out. The baby spirits
asked for the opportunity to
come to Earth as humans because
they believed they could perform
well for God. Sadly that
isn't always the case and God
knows that, but He reluctantly
allowed them to come and prove
themselves. He told them
that His preference is that they
would remain in Heaven with
Him. You would say that is
'hearsay.' I say that
since neither of us were there
when it happened and have no
knowledge of how spirits are
born, we will have to chalk it
up to "certainly possible."]
2) "And just
because you say numerous people
claimed
that before they came to Earth that God let
them pick who would be their parents doesn't
mean that
God actually talked to them. It is
hearsay evidence. For
all we know it could have been a demon
spirit or fallen angel disguised as
God talking to them."
A: I had to
laugh -- not at you -- but at your
very creative idea. ;0
We have to be careful not to give
too much credit to demons and fallen
angels as to do so would be ascribing to Satan and
his hierarchy that which is God's
-- considered by the Jews to be the
'unpardonable sin.'
For example, a Jewish man
explained to my brother that their
tradition teaches that a man who is
both deaf and dumb cannot be healed
because by not being able to hear or
speak, there was no way to command
the deaf and dumb spirit to come out
and, therefore, only Satan could
make it come out. So when
Jesus healed a man who was both deaf
and dumb they accused Jesus of being
of Satan's kingdom, thereby
attributing to Satan that which is
God's. Jesus reply to such
nonsense was "A kingdom divided
against itself cannot stand."
[Matt. 12:25/Mark 3:24/Luke 11:7]
Logic dictates that God
would not allow
demon spirits or fallen angels to
talk to them in Heaven.
Only Satan has limited access to
Heaven now for the purpose of
accusing people in the Court of
Heaven. Besides, the Bible
says the fallen angels are locked up
in Hell until Judgment Day [Jude 1:6 & 2
Peter 2:4] which
means they couldn't have been there
and demon spirits aren't welcome in
God's Heaven. )
3) "I am also sure that there [are] a
number of people who would have picked
different parents if they had known what
their parents would actually be like and
if they could have chosen who their
parents would be."
A: Who knows how God
goes about it? We come here to
Earth for learning experiences which
are decided for each person,
apparently, in Heaven before we even
come. Like Rachel Whitmore, the
woman whose husband killed both her
and her son and daughter [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDFVWt7M_qs
]. She asked Jesus why this
happened to her children (begin at
12:27). Jesus explained "They
chose this. Their souls made
this decision before they were born
(as humans, implied).
They were ready to come home."
She couldn't fully understand
it. So He said, "Every
soul makes a contract before coming
to Earth. All souls are born
pure. Evil is the
result of choices made
by those given free will and
even those souls, when they pass, must
face what they've done."
So who
knows what crazy things go on up in
Heaven before coming here.
Apparently God gives some the chance
to choose between different parents
depending on what experiences they
need to gain while here. They
might pick someone just because being
within that family, though not all
good, will lead to experiences they
need; not necessarily want.
You stated you don't believe
in NDEs anymore because of what
happened re the Rapture call last
year. However, we can't
discredit all NDE
testimony since it wasn't our
experience and we weren't there when
the information was given to the
individual. Also,
time is fluid/changeable.
Members of the occult are
experimenting with portals and hadron
colliders which are purportedly
permitting supernatural evil entities
into our time from other
dimensions. Also, numerous
nations have hadron colliders (the
US/Russia/China/Israel/
UK, perhaps
more). There are time portals
all over the world that some go in and
out of, including our Secret Space
Force for time travel experiments to
Mars, etc. Dr. Michael Salla, at
https://exopoliticstoday.com/
interviewed a US Army man (named J.D.)
who told about advanced alien
technology that uses this capability
to change time which will eventually
be revealed through disclosure.
We know
there were time travel experiments
admittedly done by the US Navy
(Philadelphia Experiment) that sent
some sailors into the future and
back. Time can also be shrunk;
for instance, the US has 3
Deep Space Star Ships capable
of DPQT = Deep
Protocol Quantum Tunneling shrinking
space travel time
from 100s
or 1,000s of years to just
hours or weeks.
So, who knows, perhaps someone
messed around with time last year
causing the delay.
It's not out of the realm of
possibility since a minister put out a
video last year claiming God revealed
through his son's NDE during church
that the Rapture would be "delayed"
and it was though, in retrospect, not
for the amount of time
specified. Would God allow
that? All we can do is
speculate.
I don't
have trouble believing Rachel's
experience since I've read too many
testimonies from different people, who
didn't know each other, who all claim
to have had a similar experience
before coming here. I
weigh in on the belief that there
has to be something to it.
For instance, here's a
similar story of a lady who had an
early encounter with Jesus as a
child, then appears to have gotten
off track into the occult and into
healings, etc. She
tried to end her life but was
told she had made an
agreement before coming to
Earth and had to go back and
fulfill it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2NthQP09R4)
4) "Please show
us the actual verses in the Jewish Talmud
that states the above facts word for word."
A: That was an explanation
given by a commentator at the beginning of
the book of Enoch. I read it some
years ago. If it's not in the Talmud,
it must have been some other Jewish book,
the name of which I won't second
guess. If I run across it, I will send
it to you.
5)
"Also consider the fact that the sons of God
can't be what you claim the Talmud said
about Genesis 6:1-4 and at the same time be
saved people who would be born in the future
who existed with God before creation in Job
38:7 which you also said."
A: The "sons of God" were
considered "righteous," like Abraham was
counted as "righteous" for believing God before
salvation by Jesus was even available.
Good angels don't need saving and the bad
ones can't be saved and are already locked
up. Salvation is for those who have
sinned, who are descendants from Adam's
sin seed. Angels don't qualify.
6)
"Adam was
also called the "son of God" in Luke 3:38,
but he wasn't one of the sons of God in Job
38:7 who were with God before the creation
of the Earth. However, Adam was called
the son of God because God created him just
like the angels who were also called the
sons of God because God created them.
A: The claim that Adam wasn't
one of the sons of God in Job 38:7 is an
opinion disproved by Jeremiah Chapter 1:5
that proves God knew
us before He formed us in the
womb.
The Bible says God never
called angels His "son(s)" [Hebrews
1:5]. "To which
of the angels said He (God)
at anytime, 'thou
art My son, this day have I begotten
thee?.." He never has and He
never will. The Bible states they
are, instead, "ministering spirits"
who minister to the sons
of God." [Hebrews 1:14]
A: First of all, the
word "giants" was added in (about
women bearing children in Gen. 6:1-4)
based on one's Enochian opinion/belief
system. To be honest, that's what
one might want it to say, but
it is most important to note that the
Holy Bible doesn't
say that.
Secondly, the above beliefs about
the book of Enoch and Jubilees are built,
so to speak, on shaky ground.
Neither the book of Enoch nor Jubilees has
God's supernatural signature on it and is,
therefore, considered Apocryphal books
which is why they were not included in the
Bible as we have it today.
In other words, it isn't something to
stake Christian doctrine
on. Just
because it is mentioned in Jude doesn't
make it worthy of being considered as
"Divine" for doctrinal purposes, just like
the mention of "baptism for the dead"
being mentioned in the Bible doesn't make
it worthy of being considered as doctrine
to be practiced by the church.
That's a rule taught in Theological
Seminaries and also what my dad, who had
his Doctor of Theology degree, explained
to me. Remember, a lot of false
religions and their "gods" are mentioned
in the Bible too, but we don't teach them
as having validity over the Word of God,
the Holy Bible.
Ivan Panin, discoverer of "The
Signature of God," found only in the
Hebrew and Greek versions of the Bible
because they are alpha/numeric, studied
the Apocryphal books and could
not find any that had the
"Signature of God" on them. That's
why apocryphal books are not included in
the books of the Bible as we know it today
and doctrine isn't and shouldn't be based
on it. Even the early church
fathers denied
(disapproved of) the
book of Enoch.
Following is a quote:
"The Fathers all,
with possibly the one dissenting voice
of Tertullian (De Cult. Fem. I. 3) deny the canonicity of
this book (Enoch), and
properly regard it as apocryphal; some
going even so far as to deny the
canonicity of Jude because he
had dared to quote
an apocryphal work.¹¹
The precedent for this step
was given in the Apostolic
Constitutions, vi. 16, in strong words
(underlined emphasis added)."
¹ Cf. on 2:1;
15:5; 19:2; 25:5; 61:10; 89:50.
² Their
references have been collected and
discussed in Fabricius, Codex
Pseudepigraphus Vet. Test. vol. I. 1722,
pp. 160-224, and in Philippi, Das Buch
Henoch, 1868, p. 102-118.
3 Cf. on 15:8,
9; 16:2.
4 Cf. on 8:3;
16:2; 19:3.
5 Cf. on 6:5,
6; 19:1, 3;
21:1. 6 Cf. on 10:3; 14:7.
7 Cf. on 8:2;
16:2; 19:1; 82:3; 99:6, 7.
8 Cf. on 6:6.
9 Cf. on 6:6;
16:2.
10 Cf. the
discussion of these in Hoffmann, Das
Buch Henoch, 1830-38, pp. 887-916.
11 Cf. Jerome,
Catal. Script. Eccles. 4"
8) "So
the giants weren't on the Earth before the
sons of God came to Earth. The sons of
God came down on Mt. Hermon before the
giants were procreated by them and the
daughters of men."
A: The
Bible says the giants were on the
Earth before
the sons of God came [Gen. 6:4] "and after that
when the sons of God came." To deny
that is to deny scripture that has God's
authority via His "signature" on it, as
proven by Ivan Panin. I've seen
evidence of the giants existing before God
recreated everything after Satan and his
rebellious angels destroyed the Earth
where God had cast them down to. I
suspect the giant's origins are alien;
some have 6 fingers and toes which is
typical of some aliens. Many of them
survived under the Earth from the Great
Flood in Noah's day where they live even
to this day and many are on islands like
the Solomon Islands, living in caves, per
natives, out of which UFOs are often seen
going in and out, lending credibility to
their possible origins as being alien.
Even Enoch claimed that in one of
his books, though he confuses the subject
by adding the so-called "fallen
angels did it"
theory. It can't be both! We
know it wasn't angels who mated with
Earth's women because it violates the
Bible that has God's signature on it where
Jesus told His disciples they erred
in thinking there was marriage (sex
implied) between angels. That's one
reason why the book of Enoch is
"apocryphal" and not to be considered as
doctrine, though many popular book authors
are messing up people's minds big time,
confusing the whole topic by not sticking
with the Bible and trying to throw the
book of Enoch into the mix. Angels
are not "sons of God" because the term
signifies the need for salvation (see John
1:12). Good angels don't need
salvation and bad angels can't be
saved. In ancient times people
considered aliens as angels because they
came from outside of Earth. The
Bible alludes to the idea that even the
so-called "star gods" the ancients
worshipped were actually alien beings from
other worlds. [Amos 5:26 & Acts
7:43]
I read an account from a vision of
the future Battle of Armageddon where
Jesus honors (Psalms
149:6-9) the "sons of God" by having them
ride the white horses into battle - not
the angels - "to execute upon them (heathen)
the judgment written" because of
the wrong that had been done to them by
Satan. The angels were walking
beside the horses - not
riding. By doing so, Jesus was
distinguishing the sons of God -- who will
"bind kings with chains and their
nobles with fetters of iron" --
from the angels.
To be a "son of God" you have to be
of the sin seed of Adam thus needing
salvation, per John 1:12
"To
those who receive Him (receive
Jesus for salvation) He
(God) gives
the power to become the
sons of God, even to those who believe
on His name (believe for what?
For salvation).")
9) "However, the 200 fallen
angels chained up in the abyss and the
rest of the 1/3 of the angels that are
fallen angels including Satan are not
ministering to the heirs of salvation.
We saved believers are wrestling
against them according to Ephesians
6:12, "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of
the darkness of
this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
A: Where do
you get the idea of "the rest of the
1/3rd angels?"
Also, where does it say in
the Bible that the fallen angels
were only "200?" If
it's from the book of Enoch, it isn't
Biblical and can't be considered
absolute since it lacks proof of Divine
authorship based on Ivan Panin's
mathematical discovery, an exact
science, which he dubbed "The Signature
of God," which he applied to the
apocryphal books and found them all
lacking proof of Divine origin.
Since the Bible says the fallen angels
(implying all of them and it
doesn't delineate) are
locked up, we aren't "wrestling
with them" as claimed. Instead, we
are wrestling with other remaining
spiritual beings in Satan's
hierarchy.
For all we know, those 200
mentioned in the book of Enoch could be
aliens mistaken as angels which the
ancients commonly did due to lacking
information and knowledge we have
today. Instead, we are wrestling
with other powers Satan has. Think
about it: The fallen angels, with
Satan's help, were powerful enough to
destroy God's first creation. If
they hadn't all
been locked up by God, Himself, they
would have destroyed the Earth again
(like they did between Gen. 1:1-2) and
God was smart enough not to allow it!
Hopefully you can see now
how the books of Enoch and Jubilees are
at odds with God's
*mathematically-proven words in the
Bible, dubbed "the *Signature of God,"
as we know it today and are, therefore,
considered Apocryphal books, not worthy
of inclusion in the Holy Bible, nor to
be used for Biblical doctrine;
regardless of what the Catholics and
sadly misinformed Christian authors do
with it.
Consequently, since we hold very
diverse and opposing views on the
apocryphal book of Enoch, we must agree
that the questions we wrestle with will
only be resolved by Jesus when we reach
Heaven. However, it's obviously
best to stick with Jesus's Word which
has been proven mathematically,
historically, astrologically,
scientifically, archaeologically, etc.,
true. Many of the apocryphal books
contain verses from the Bible, but fail
to show the amazing mathematical pattern
throughout of the #7 that proves Divine
inspiration/authorship.
Supportive opinions, for the book
of Enoch that has no mathematical proof
of Divine authorship, remains as just
man-made opinions and writings. I
use this same argument for Mormons who
try to persuade people to believe in the
book of Mormon that is purportedly based
on the testimony of an angel named
Moroni. It lacks mathematical
proof of the Divine "Signature of
God." They can believe it all they
want based on their "feelings," but they
are sadly deceiving not only themselves,
but others as well, which will have
negative eternal consequences for them
and all who go along with it.