Recent Comments

Last Days Christian Messenger

This Is My Other Blog. Geared Towards Helping The Unsaved Find God


Click this link HOMEPAGE for the latest articles on this blog
Click this link MENU LIST to find an entire list of ALL Articles within this blog (as at 30 Nov 2011)
Click this link Articles Carrying Most Comments as at 30 November 2011 a league table of articles carrying the most comments.

Search this blog by entering KEY WORDS In box below

Tuesday, 11 May 2010

Are The Global Leaders Nephilim?

I was asked the question whether I thought the global leaders were Nephilim. This question was asked on my post Who Runs The World? An Investigation Into The Global Scheme Of Things. Completed Report (Revised) on http://watchmanforjesus.blogspot.com/2010/04/who-runs-world-investigation-into_20.html
I have decided to copy/paste my comments (from there) into this post. I think it would be better to continue the chat here:
As an introduction to the comments I would like to first give a brief answer here:


There seem to be a lot of organisations jumping onto the bandwagon of the Nephilim. Whilst I was putting my report together I noticed David Icke (new age alien conspiracist) was leading a lot of people towards the idea that the World leaders were all from the Nephilim/Alien/dinosaur seed. As New Ageists like David Icke and other weird groups are preaching this, we should be very wary.  There are also many watchman who endorse Chuck Missler (because he is very insightful on many topics) but I have reservations because he also puts forward the Nephilim "mixed seed" teaching.


The reason I have reservations on the Nephilim seed topic is because of these questions: "is it important and is it helpful to know?", "how will it change our witness, faith and service to the Lord to know whether it is true or not?", "if it is satanic teaching, could it harm christians to get caught up in this whole thinking?", "is it mere speculation?". Note: scripture teaches us that we should not build doctrines (or conspiracy theories or systematic theology) just on mere speculations on a few isolated verses.


I take the position that if the scripture gives a clear message (on a specific subject) then we need to take it seriously. Of course we should take the WHOLE of the Bible seriously because all scripture is inspired by God. However, if a few isolated verses in scripture (difficult to understand on their own) speaks on a subject shrouded in mystery (because very little is spoken on it) then it is probably NOT vital for our salvation, faith and conduct and is certainly not enough to build a conspiracy theory on.  Also I take the stand that we should NEVER make a doctrine or presumption based on a few isolated verses of scripture if


 the main teachings of scripture speaks otherwise, ie a few verses of scripture cannot counter what large chunks of scripture teach as a whole. If the few verses of scripture seem to speak in contradiction to the majority of the bible then maybe the interpretation (not the verses)are incorrect. Maybe we should consider those verses in the light of other scripture.

I wonder if the teaching about Nephilim is one of the subjects the person of God should not get caught up in re Titus 3:9 "But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain".

Okay, having said all that, I did contact Bodie Hodge of Answers In Genesis, who is a specialist on the Nephilim subject. Please see the comments attached for the full contents of that email. 



After taking that email into account, this is my very short answer to the question:
I would say that world leaders are not Nephilim but they are normal sinful human beings (like any of us would be without Jesus)influenced by satan and his hoards. "our battle is not against flesh and blood but against principalities ......" Eph 6.

In Daniel we see that the Archangel Michael was hindered by the princes of Persia and Greece. He wasn't talking about men (or flesh and blood) but the demonic forces (principalities in the heavenly places) working over and through these men.

Incidentally how could Obama be of the same genealogic Nephilim seed?

21 comments:

John Chingford said...

This was the reply I received to my first email to Bodie. I have to put it into several comments as it is very large:

Part 1:
Bodie: Thank you for contacting Answers in Genesis. It is always a pleasure hearing thoughts about the Nephilim.

John: If it is true that any Godly offspring or chosen by God (whether from Seth or not) who followed God's ways, could be considered as sons of God, why would they want to intermarry/mingle with ungodly women?

Bodie: I see your point, but even today, Christians who are called “sons of God” (Galatians 3:26) marry ungodly people.

John: If the Godly were Sons of God, wouldn't that act of disobedience to God in intermarrying render them as no longer a son of God? I mean, if they were Godly, how is it they were no different from the unGodly in that they did the same things?

Bodie: That is exactly the point, they fell away in the same way Solomon did. Further, they permitted to let their children be trained in the ungodly ways. If people were living nearly 900 years, as per the lineage from Adam to Noah, and God’s countdown to the Flood when discussing these sons of God and their children, was 120 years before (Genesis 6:3). Then this means that by the time of the Flood, these people who were called by a godly title traded that in for “wickedness”. For many of these godly people, “sons of God”, as they were previously known, died in the Flood.

Wouldn't that mean that the Sons of God could not be sinful humans, even though they may have been chosen by grace as flag bearers for God.

This would make them no less human than Solomon. Keep in mind that being called “sons of God” didn’t make them perfect or sinless in their actions. Adam was called a son of God (Luke 3:38), Israelites (Hosea 1:10, sons of the living God) and Christians are called sons of God (Galatians 3:26). However, Adam made his mistakes and we make ours. There is no reason to assume these sons of God in Genesis 6 were without their mistakes but that doesn’t make them any less human.

But this argument actually hurts other views worse, like the fallen angel view. Why would fallen angels be dubbed sons of God – especially with their blatant hate and continual sin against God?

Besides God did not say "be fruitful but only with the Godly".

Keep in mind that when God originally made this command it was in a perfect world where there were no ungodly (Genesis 1:28). J

Therefore, was it a sin say for Seth to marry one of Cain's daughters? Were they not instructed to fill the earth with children? How could they do it without intermarrying in the early days?

Even Cain, being a murderer, still had semblance of God and even spoke to the Lord. So we need to be careful of assuming that these initial generations were rather ungodly. God didn’t wipe them out. In fact, it took 10 generations for that to happen. So marring among each others lineages wouldn’t have been crossing much of a godly versus ungodly line – especially off the start (remember Adam was alive to teach them too).

The biggest distinction between Cain’s line and others lines, if any, would have been distance. Recall that Cain was banished to the land of wandering (Nod – Genesis 4:16) where he built a city (v. 17). Most likely his descendants were isolated so intermarrying may have been limited at first.

Though there is no reason to assume they didn’t intermarry later on – after all something from Cain’s line must have made it through – there are people who play the harp, like David did, and flute; Genesis 4:21 His brother’s name was Jubal. He was the father of all those who play the harp and flute. Jubal is of Cain’s lineage and perhaps some of the wives of Noah’s sons have him as an ancestor.

John Chingford said...

Part 2:

John: Although I like the case you present I have problems seeing why simple marriage between fallen human beings (for all have sinned) would be SO bad that God would need to exercise such a terrible judgement on ALL mankind, beasts etc.

Bodie: The Bible doesn’t say that marriages between them were the reason for the judgment. Genesis 6:5 says: Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

So the reason was such great sin and wickedness. But the sheer fact that marriages and the types were mentioned in context reveals that this played a part. Recall what God later reveals to Malachi (2:15): But did He not make them one, Having a remnant of the Spirit? And why one? He seeks godly offspring. Therefore take heed to your spirit, And let none deal treacherously with the wife of his youth.

The Lord was seeking godly offspring and Malachi takes this reference back to the beginning (making them one – Genesis 2:24). Paul affirms this too when he said to the Corinthians:

2 Corinthians 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?

A consistent God would seek godly offspring in each generation. So a marriage to the ungodly resulted in ungodly offspring. The fact that the godly fell from their godliness (remember they were not seen as righteous either and died in the Flood) and their children and grandchildren weren’t either.

Exodus 20:3 says: "You shall have no other gods before Me.

The 10 Commandments are transcendent laws (e.g. it was wrong for Cain to murder, even prior to Moses being presented with the 10 Commandment, etc.) So it would have been wrong for anyone to have other gods besides God. And finding a wife among the ungodly and letting one’s children grow in ways that opposed God easily accounts for such wickedness and sin that God ultimately judged with a Flood.

John: The only thing which could be so terrible would be that the whole world had become so rebellious against God with great hatred for God led by the one who hates God the most.

Bodie: We agree completely here. Satan surely played his part didn’t he? But consider this point, against the angelic view where fallen angels bred with women. According to that view those angels who did this are sent under judgment in chains, etc. (These verses are commonly used:

2 Peter 2:4 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment;
Jude 1:6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;)

If Satan were leading this cause of impregnating women, why is Satan not bound like this in Hell? For we see Satan’s actions later with Job and even tempting Christ.

John Chingford said...

Part3

John: Therefore there must have been terrible occultic/magic practices going on which resulted in corrupted and demonic humanity with humans becoming deformed/unnatural.

Bodie: I wouldn’t discount that some of this was indeed happening (it was even happening in Christ’s day with demonic possession), however, they would still be human since they would be influencing man to be with women. The human kind has boundaries, and demons are not part of the human kind.

But with this, it pushes the responsibility of sin to fallen angels/demons as opposed to people. Let’s face it people can be downright sinful without the need to say “demons made me do it”. J So with this, the view leads to people being the “innocent” vessels, whereas demons should have been judged. But God still punished physical people with a physical Flood that would not have affected spiritual demons in the least.

John: Could that be the reason why Nephilim still appeared in later times because of black magic practices?

Bodie: I wouldn’t discount that this may have been a contributing factor. What I’ve found is interesting is that the Nephilim appear post-Flood, without the need of sons of God to be their fathers. This goes to show that Nephilim can appear without even the possibility of appealing to sons of God being fallen angels or influenced by fallen angels. The Nephilim in Numbers, for example, would have had parents strictly by humans. So if they come about by humans here, then it makes sense that the sons of God in Genesis 6 would require nothing more.

John: I know that the word Nephilim is not used later in the bible but you do read of giants like Goliath. In Greek Mythology you read of giants.

Bodie: True and they were in other mythologies too, such as Norse.

John: Even today there are some incredibly tall people still existing. Could this be the affect of the mix in past generations still affecting us today?

Bodie: It seems more likely that they are merely humans with genes for being very tall. Remember, we have people who are equally short. So with the filtering of genes throughout the human population would should get some variation. Another factor to helps reveal the genetic connection to giantism:

2 Samuel 21:20 Yet again there was war at Gath, where there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also was born to the giant.

The son of giant here, also inherited that great stature (the fingers and toes are for another discussion J). Keep in mind that giants were not as common as we might think in ancient times. Otherwise, why was there a need to single them out, like Goliath. I hope this helps, and thanks for great discussion. God bless to you as well.

Bodie

John Chingford said...

Part 4

2nd email to Bodie:

John: Thanks so much for your quick response! I think you have misunderstood what I was asking or the direction I was going.

1) I was not saying I believed that angels interbred with humans. I do not believe this, at the moment.

Bodie: I didn’t think you did, sorry if I gave you that impression.

John: What I was suggesting is that satan being jealous of the human beauty wanted to deform what God had made beautiful. I believe he was jealous because he lost his beauty and standing before God.

Bodie: I wouldn’t discount that this was one of Satan’s motives either. But I suggest that this would have been more for supplemental motivation to get Adam and Eve to sin in the Garden. Since Satan’s fall, he is limited, so it wouldn’t surprise me if he no longer has the ability to see true beauty because his mind is “poisoned”.

John: I believe the way that he tried to achieve this was by sending his angel servants in to mess them up with demonic possession - not demonic seed! So the HUMANS born from the daughters of men were also possessed with powers and deformity. They were totally human as they were born naturally but demonic activity messed them up "the thief comes to steal, kill and destroy".

Bodie: I would definitely leave this option open. There is no doubt that demons have inhabited people and messed with both their mind and bodies. We see examples of that in Jesus’ own day.

John: Anyway, even if angels did put their seed inside women (which I find hard to accept) it doesn't mean that the children would not be totally human. Mary had "normal" children after having Jesus.

Bodie: This may not be a good comparison though. First, there is a difference between good angels and God and second, there is a bigger difference between fallen angels and God. If you recall, God created Adam (and subsequently Eve) and breathed life into him, so God own all human life and if the Creator of the universe wants to become a man that is not a problem for Him. Angels, especially fallen angels cannot create life as God does, and so we need to be cautious about giving qualities to angels, especially the fallen ones, that God has.

John Chingford said...

Part 5:

John: Couldn't women have also been incarnate with angelic seed also?

Bodie: The Bible never says of angels to be fruitful and multiply, so there is no reason to assume they would have seed of any form. And since Jesus makes it clear angels do not marry in heaven, this is further confirmation (Matthew 22:30). There is no reason to assume that when the fallen angels sinned, they mutated to have seed either. So I would lean against this argument.

John: This would not mean necessarily that everyone born of those children would also have the mixed seed. We do not read that post-flood activity by angels stopped. The only difference after the flood is that God said He would not judge the world again in this same manner.

Bodie: We do see their activities up to the time of Christ. I’ve tried to step back and look at the spiritual aspects of this. Let’s assume for a moment that the nephilim (offspring) were the way they were due to fallen angels (be it by interbreeding or merely demonic possession). Would the people be entirely to blame for their actions then – especially enough for God to exercise judgment with a Flood? Consider Christ, the Son of God – did He judge those who had demons, or help them?

John: 2) Like you, I do not believe that God judged the world just because of intermarriage and agree that it was because of such wickedness of men.

Bodie: Good. I guess it was just the way it was typed.

John: However, I am suggesting that the great wickedness evolved through the worship of demons etc and probable mass demonic possession.

Bodie: The Bible does say this though. And it wouldn’t surprise me if some of this was going on.

John: Why would it mention in Genesis 6 about the sons of God intermarrying as a forerunner to then discuss how wicked man had become, if it were not related together in some way?

Bodie: Like you, I believe it was related. Consider how God instructed the Israelites (sons of the living God – Hosea 1:10) not to intermarry with pagans surrounding them (Deuteronomy 7:3-4). The reason was to keep them and their children from being led astray to these false pagan deities. Even the wisest of all men, Solomon was led astray by his pagan wives (1 Kings 11:1-4).

Paul even reaffirms this with Christians (sons of God – Galatians 3:26) in 2 Corinthians 6:14-16, not to be yoked with unbelievers.

John Chingford said...

Part 6:

John: In the context it seems that the sons of God going in to the daughters of men brought the wickedness on earth to a climax.

Bodie: I think the stark contrast that God uses e.g. “sons” versus “daughters” and “of God” versus “of men”, stand diametrically opposed. This is significant. Consider Christianity (God is the authority) versus humanism (man is the authority – remember humanism goes back to Eve when she elevated herself, a human, above God and His Word).

“Of man” in this instance reveals who the ultimate authority was for these daughters – pagan, i.e. humanistic. So the spiritual heads, sons, were giving up their spiritual privilege as the head to the pagan women (daughters) (1 Corinthians 11:7-9) and being led astray to false gods, particularly humanistic thought – just like Solomon. And this makes sense in light of the context, where these people were men of renown – i.e. making a name for themselves among men. Contrary to their hopes, not one of their names is remembered by God. I believe this was designed by God to show what this philosophy leads to.

John: It was obviously important enough to mention as a key to the judgement. This is why I believe there must have been terrible occultic practices going on, resulting in men being so corrupted by evil that even their human bodies became deformed - not necessarily because of angelic seed.

Bodie: Like I said, I wouldn’t discount this entirely, but it is not necessary.

John: 3) You mentioned God was seeking godly offspring. Remember in 1 Cor 7 Paul stated that even the children of an unbelieving partner could be sanctified by the faith of one parent. Obviously that doesn't mean the child is saved until they make a decision for Christ themselves, but it does give the impression of being a godly offspring. So I am not sure it is correct to say that intermarriage necessarily brings about an ungodly offspring.

Bodie: This command by Paul was specifically regarding a couple that was already married, and one the two gets saved:

…If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her. And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace. For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?

Also note that Paul permits the unbeliever to depart. But this is not a command given to those who are single. They are not to marry an unbeliever as Per 2 Corinthians 6:14-16. The children are clean and sanctified, but not saved, as with the husband.

John Chingford said...

Part 7:

John: Look at Bathsheba, David and Solomon. David's act with (probably?) a gentile woman and the subsequent later birth of Solomon through this "daughter of men" did not stop Solomon being a "son of God"?

Bodie: Bathsheba was an Israelite, not a gentile, who would be under the term “sons of the living God – Hosea 1:10). Bathsheba was the daughter of Eliam (2 Samuel 11:3). Elaim was the son of Ahithophel the Gilonite (2 Samuel 23:34). Those from Giloh (Gilonites) were Israelites who inhabited that area after the conquest of Joshua and was specifically given to the Israelites that were from the tribe of Judah – the same tribe David came out of.

Bathsheba’s husband however, was a Hittite, some of the few descendants of Canaan that were not wiped out by Joshua. And since, assimilated into the Israelite clans and fought beside them. In fact, Bathsheba’s husband was one of David’s 30 fighting men (1 Chronicles 11:41).

John: In fact, the line of Jesus came through a gentile Ruth.

Bodie: Prior to Ruth marrying an Israelite, she became an Israelite though (religious change, not by birth of course – Ruth 1:16). This is not forbidden – the same happened with Rahab and she too can be found in the lineage of Christ. This is also acceptable for Christians – for example, if an unbelieving man becomes a Christian, then a Christian woman can marry him and vice versa.

John: As long as one partner is right with God at some stage in their life, the child can be sanctified.

Bodie: Sanctification doesn’t necessary mean they will be godly or be saved. We find in today’s church parents who are both Christians and the children are quite sinful, rebellious, and unsaved. Sanctification is but the start for them and it is a good start otherwise, there would be no reason for Paul to have them remain in the marriage, if the unbeliever is willing to stay.

Bodie: Well…I hope this helps explain it a bit more. I think I’ve read so much on the nephilim in the past few years, I’m now ready for something easier - maybe evolution ha ha ha.

John Chingford said...

In summary, I would say that world leaders are not Nephilim but they are normal sinful human beings (like any of us would be without Jesus)influenced by satan and his hoards. "our battle is not against flesh and blood but against principalities ......" Eph 6.

In Daniel we see that the Archangel Michael was hindered by the princes of Persia and Greece. He wasn't talking about men (or flesh and blood) but the demonic forces (principalities in the heavenly places) working over and through these men.

Incidentally how could Obama be of the same genealogic Nepholim seed?

Expected Imminently said...

I didn't know he was a 'Nephilim' man, but that is ok by me as I am as well!!!

The Sethite view is a weak argument published by those determined to hide from the horrible truth.

If you want me to,when I have time, I will show you the relevant Scriptures and argument. I am totaly confident that you will quickly realise that as unpleasant as it is, the Nephlim account is the correct Biblical one.

Must dash, spuds to bash!
Sue

John Chingford said...

Thanks EI

I would be very interested in seeing your material and the scriptures. However, I have listened very intently to Chuck Missler's exhaustive report on the Nephilim, so am probably aready aware of the teaching and all the scripture verses.

My problem is that the word "Nephilim" only appears in scripture 2 or 3 times. I do not believe we should make a doctrine from such isolated appearances.

The doctrine of "fallen angels" is also based on just a few isolated verses, which the Word Faith groups have abused in yet another way.

I have to say that when Jesus said "as in the days of Noah" he did not say anything about the return of the Nephilim. Nowhere in Revelation or most other prophecies does it say such. Only in Daniel is there a very vague possibility that it could be loosely referring to Nephilim, but there are better interpretations of the word "mingled".

Sorry I cannot find anything conclusive in scripture about a return of the Nephilim.

However, I value you as a lovely sister in Christ, so will not push this.

But, if you can conclusively prove it to me or show that it is a vitally important doctrine, then I am all ears. God bless.

Expected Imminently said...

John
Just a quick note.
There is no way I consider knowledge of the Nephilim etc as an 'essential doctrine'in any way, shape or form. A believer in Jesus could live and die without ever having to understand a thing about it.

Just to add that my first understanding came many, many years ago (decades)from no person other than the leading of The Holy Spirit when I noticed these facts on my own and asked Him about it.

I have since read Chuck Misslers book and found it to be largely compatible with my own understanding. In particular the error of the Sethite view.

That's it for now.
God bless you for your courage and faithful witness to tell out the Truth.
Sue

Expected Imminently said...

P.S. Sorry, must say there is no Biblical evidence, that I know of, that today's global leaders are 'Nephilim'.

It MAY happen during the Tribulation once the Church has gone, but as The Holy Spirit is restraining evil until then, I cannot see that applies today? That they are here, somewhere, just like AFTER the flood is possible 'Goliath and bros.)

David slew most if not all of the Giants in the area, but so what? 'They' have always been around spiritually hidden (demons and spiritual powers) if there are physical one's around they must be hidden away somewhere as it is rare to find 10ft plus folk wandering the streets, in my neighbourhood at least.

Yes there are stories, there alway's are and will be, it is a human trait I fear. Then there are the U.F.O. incidents! Mostly fabricated or genuine mistakes, but there ARE the unanswerable one's - just like the one that I reported to the police with my family as it flew low over our roof without a sound. What was it? The Police and the R.A.F didn't have any idea, which of itself is worrying.

So I cannot brush some things away as nonsense because I know what the six of us all saw at the same time.??? Spooky.

Jesus Is Lord!
Sue

John Chingford said...

Hi EI

What you experienced is no need for concern. Sometime ago I wrote an article on this whole subject. I then found an article on Tony Pearce's website "Light For The Last Days" which gives a wonderful explanation and backs up my reasoning (in a better way than I could present).

As it is a bit long for this comment, I will now copy/paste it into a new post entitled "UFO sightngs, Abductions etc are they evidence of Life on other Planets (aliens) or the Return Of Nephilim or some other explanation"

John Chingford said...

Regarding your experience of seeing but not hearing. It could be a top secret government event that they cannot admit to or it could be satan appearing as an angel of light. You saw it but did not hear anything.

As long as you understand that satan cannot harm you and this is all it is an appearance but nothing else. I am sure you called out on the Name of Jesus. he just appeared as an angel of light - that is all.

My post (as given by experts) will prove this.

Expected Imminently said...

John
My boys were frightened, so I spent time talking and praying with them. They are middle aged now, but one refered to it recently with no concern (We saw another together about five years ago in Wales).

My husband, always strong and silent tried to look cool and said "I'ts from a giant frisbee throwing contest"; and refused to talk about it. (It was just like a huge round, pitch black frisbee I could have hit with a stone).

Me! I was bloomin indignant, not afraid at all. If it was the enemy, how dare he bother us knowing what we know. Or that it could have been a Russian spy vehicle of sorts (silent but deadly) and the authorities knew nothing about it. (Various Police units and public had also reported it) This was in the early 70's, unlikely to have been a Stealth prototype back then?

John, I could add other things, but thats enough of promoting the enemy, just to say that these things CAN be real whatever they are. Those it happens to do not need putting down and being ridiculed, most are badly frightend and feel they have no where to go for help. The Church NEEDS to be ready to cope with this for the sake of those troubled.

I know Tony Pearce's ministry very well I am pleased to say. :)
God bless
Sue

John Chingford said...

Hi Brothers and Sisters

Since about November 2011 I have developed a good friendship with someone I believe I can trust. This person is still attached to Calvary Chapel (loosely) and has opened my eyes to the apostasy going on within Calvary Chapel. There is much evidence NOW out there of Chuck Smith's ecumenical links, but few people are aware how deeply involved in ecumenism is CHUCK MISSLER.

This friend, pointed me to an excellent blog which sounds very convincing. The author of that site goes into great lengths and depths to prove the Jesuit ecumenical links of Chuck Missler. I didn't just accept it but thoroughly checked out (for myself) this author's links, sources, material, including looking at Chuck's website and facebook. I have to come to the same conclusion as this author.

Please test it for yourselves too. The blog is called Ephesians 511, ie based upon Ephesians 5:11 which instructs us to expose the fruitful works of darkness.

The link address is
http://ephesians511blog.blogspot.com/

Please especially take a look at these articles:

http://ephesians511blog.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2012-01-30T10:07:00-08:00&max-results=1


http://ephesians511blog.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2012-01-04T08:42:00-08:00&max-results=1

I welcome any comments which disprove the findings of the author, but you MUST demonstrate that you have read and checked out the links, first. I would rather not see comments just simply "knocking" the argument because you "cannot believe it" or because "it cannot be true" or any other similar arguments. Please give REAL solid arguments.

I have not yet written a specific article on this subject because I would like to hear from others first about this BECAUSE it is serious indeed.

Bless you all

John Chingford said...

oops. The quote I gave said "exposing the fruitful works of darkness". Of course that should have read "exposing the UNfruitful works of darkness"

Anonymous said...

Hi John

I personally know the author to that site and I am creating a backup of his documents.

Here is some other info.

http://www.discerningtheworld.com/2010/02/17/dr-chuck-missler-swansat-and-the-auric%E2%84%A2-currency/

John Chingford said...

Thanks Anon

I also recommend my readers to take a look at the url link you have given. Very convincing.

God bless
John

John Chingford said...

Just remembered what clinched the deal for me regarding Chuck Missler. Please take a look at this link:

http://www.titus213hope.com/schedule.htm

which is the speaking schedule at the Red River Conference in March.

You will see that Chuck Missler is speaking 4 times. Notice his 4 topics:

The Macrocosm , The Microcosm, The Metacosm and Transhumanism: The Age of the Hybrids

What has all this got to do with the Bible?

I noticed that he has links with conferences to do with quantum leaps, i.e, the new age theory that humans are turning into gods which is the Latter Rain teaching of manifest sons of God, Joels Army etc. Latter rain has a long time ecumenical involvement. What is Chuck doing getting involved in all this new age, ecumenical, Jesuit claptrap?

I am aware of CM's obsession with Nephilim theory and support of extra terrestrial books like Enoch.

I also noticed that CM is also politically involved with CNP "Council For National Policy".You should check out CNP. Very worrying! Here is the link:

http://www.contendingfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/Chuck-Missler-CNP-Warning.pdf

Please be careful in communicating with Chuck Missler because quite a number of discernment ministries and (previously) sound preachers have suddenly fallen away or become ecumenical or kept very silent about CM. It seems like they may have been threatened in some way.

He seems to have hidden political and military powers at his disposal. You can see that by looking at his CV and checking the SWANsat site which reveals that he is very much behind the control of nations through satellites.

Further, he may in some way be involved with the occultic Galactic roundtable because he is a joint Director at SWANsat with William Welty who IS involved with Galactic Roundtable

Please (for the sake of our true brothers) be protective of our brethren. Remember Paul told us to be wary of false brothers who are seeking our harm.

Please be wise in how you communicate this message to others.

To me, the above seems very convincing. If I an not seeing something which excuses him, please let me know.

God bless

John Chingford said...

Chuck Missler has now spoken at the Red River Conference. The link I gave above http://www.titus213hope.com/schedule.htm has now been removed. However, I have been handed a review of Chuck Missler's messages. I think you will find that it is VERY disturbing.

This is the link:

http://rrrapostasyalert.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/review-of-chuck-missler-at-red-river.html