Nigel Tomes - LSM's Unorthodox Satanology

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Besides, most fundamental theologians don't believe demons are essentially different than fallen angels. I have a book of basic theology from Dallas Theological Seminary. And in case it's not known the overall widestanding belief by those in that school and I assume in like schools, is that demons and fallen angels are the same thing, except that demons are unconfined, not held "in chains" and thus are the ones which can influence us. So Hanegraaff really didn't need to define his terms bacause his belief is that demons are "free-roaming" fallen angels, which is the wide-standing belief.

Well, the debate about the beings in Gen. 6 is very much about the difference between all these terms. If he chooses to go with the fundamentalist view, why is he even arguing his point: they all agree with him. Is he prone to preaching to the choir?

At any rate, if he wants to be taken seriously by the crowd that believe the "sons of God" in Gen. 6 are fallen angels, not demons, he'd be wise to show that he knows the distinction they at least are making.


SC

[Cal]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Well, the debate about the beings in Gen. 6 is very much about the difference between all these terms. If he chooses to go with the fundamentalist view, why is he even arguing his point: they all agree with him. Is he prone to preaching to the choir?

At any rate, if he wants to be taken seriously by the crowd that believe the "sons of God" in Gen. 6 are fallen angels, not demons, he'd be wise to show that he knows the distinction they at least are making.

SC

Why would Genesis 6 be about the difference between angels and demons? If the the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 could be fallen angels, then why couldn't they be demons? If you want to believe that demons are pre-Adamic humanoids, then why not believe they were physically superior to current humans and so could mate with humans produce "giants." That argument would make more sense anyway, because its seems that pre-Adamic humanoids would have similar DNA to humans and so might be able to reproduce with them.

I assume you believe angels have the power to produce human DNA and sperm, a power given to them by God (which seems weird because we know God wants creatures to reproduce "after their kind") that God for some reason allowed them to use it for a short time (but not anymore) for what reason? So that we could have those couple of verses in Genesis which tell us the offspring of fallen angels became heros to men. I'm sorry, but none of that makes any sense to me, on any level.

By the way, I did Google the difference between fallen angels and demons, as you said. I didn't see anything from what seemed a world class theologian pushing the theory.

My favorite hit (really) was titled The Difference Between Fallen Angels, Demons, Aliens, Jedi, and the Watchers, in case anyone was wondering about the difference. If I remember correctly, the Jedi were members of a sincere but deeply confused pre-Adamic race of humanoids who followed Yoda, whom, quite interestlingly, they believed to be the minister of the age.