Excellent insight. At least I've entertained myself for 40+ years studying the Bible and creating notes. No fear!

@@GalynWiemers Hmmmm. I have entertained myself for 80+ years studying: computer science, special relativity, quantum mechanics, karate, two hand sword, downhill skiing, golf, several religions, reincarnation, hot cars, (no hot women, no time), magic deception (world renown expert), and some I cannot remember. Know fear!

@@alschneider5420 Why know fear? There's nothing to fear. We die and we are done. The quicker we die, the quicker we are gone. Nothing to fear!

Legit Wiki page! Nice work. Well done! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Schneider_(magician)

@@GalynWiemers Would you feel fear if you were to enter a ring and fight a fifth degree black belt full contact? Would you feel fear on top of a frozen mountain about to slide down on an ice path 10' wide? Would you feel fear lying on an operating table about to have your chest opened like a book? I know fear. And I do not need an imaginary clown that lives in a cloud.

false assessment of the class. 1) Genesis 6:6 is not presented here as evidence for or against the "good boys" (Seth's line) marrying the "naughty girls" (Cain's line). Genesis 6:1-2, talking about the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" is not connected to the philosophical, theological implications of Genesis 6:6 - "the LORD regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart." 2) Genesis 6:6 is used by some people to support the idea that God does not know the future. Which the presenter here clearly rejects and uses phrases like "the alpha and the omega" to refute this false idea. 3) The "good boys" (Seth's line) marrying the "naughty girls" (Cain's line) is presented as one of three possible understanding of the phrases "sons of God" and "daughters of men". This IS dismissed by the presenter as the weakest of the three possible interpretations. The second option interprets "sons of God" as royal children of the kings forming harems of women from the common, middle class ("daughters of men"). This is also rejected because royal kings were considered throughout the ancient world as a "son of God", but the sons of a king were never referred to in the ancient world or in Scripture as plural "sons of God". The third option is hard to accept, but is the most intriguing, which is the "sons of God" (bene elohim) were angelic beings. This is not a solid interpretation, but does allow the reader to make some connections to a wide variety of verses and concepts in the Bible. 4) The presenter makes it clear that these verses are hard to come to a solid, unarguable position due to apparently missing information or a lacking of the original author's perspective. 5) It is hard to sustain the position that God regretted making mankind because good boys married naughty girls. And, because of these marriages, and the resulting sin, God destroyed the whole earth (except Noah and seven others). - Today we still have the godly marrying into the families of the unbelievers. - We also still have, as they did throughout the Old Testament period, royal sons with harems filled with women. - So, Noah's flood did not resolve either of those problems. - But, if the angels infiltrated the blood line of the seed of woman that was promised in the Garden to be the source of humanities' salvation, then the Flood did put an end to that corruption and preserved the pure line of humanity through Noah. Thus, keeping alive the promise that the seed of the woman would bruise the serpent's head through Shem, Abraham and the nation of Israel. 6) Again, the presenter has a preference, but several times admits he does not have all the answers to these verses which include apparently four separate groups: - sons of God - daughters of men - offspring of the union of the sons of God and the daughters of men which were the "heroes of old, the men of renown" - and, a fourth, separate group, called Nephilim which literally means "the fallen ones" that are not sons of God, daughters of man, nor their offspring 7) Stay tuned, I'll be talking about this more next week...but, I will still be wishing for more insight. But, whoever wrote this comment reminds me of the mainstream media reporting the news. Did you even listen to the message without talking on the phone in the drive-through ordering coffee while scrolling through social media to post memes. This statement made in the comment above is itself ridiculous since I did not teach it and it would be a "ridiculous mistake" for me to teach this: "His reason that this position means that God didn't know what would happen is ridiculously mistaken." 8) Also, all the so called "godly men of Seth's line" (which would have been in the millions by Noah's generation) all perished in God's Flood judgment. So, they were not all that godly. At least, God wasn't impressed with Seth's line, other than Noah and, maybe, Shem, Ham and Japheth. Seth's line died right alongside Cain's line of Jabal, Jubal, Tubal-cain and Namah. Let's try again next week! Thanks for listening.

@@GalynWiemers 42:20 You specifically say that the first option is "ridiculous". Yet it is the correct option. . I will not be watching another video from you, as I value the Holy Bible. Please repent and humble yourself, and ask the Holy Spirit to give you insight into the holy words, as all the Bible is breathed in by the Holy Spirit.

@@earlysda thank you for considering my reply with an open mind. I appreciate your fervor for the Lord, the Word of God and holiness. Thank you being willing to speak to me with conviction. This is very much needed in our Western world and in our institutional church. Sincerely, thank you. I would like to add to your comment by saying that I did not only call the first option "ridiculous", I think I followed that by also saying it was stupid. I guess I wanted to make sure no one thought I believe God sent the Flood because good boys married the naughty girls. Surely, something bigger than that was going on. We will know soon, that I am sure! Hang on!! Stay strong, and thank you for giving my Bible teaching an honest, open minded hearing.

True, I agree. I know nothing about "voices" and I do not defend books written under the inspiration of "voices". I agree a voice in my head that is not mine would most likely be a mental disease or, more likely, demonic activity. What I teach and defend are historical documents written by people who had some kind of actual encounter or interaction with YHWH. The list is extensive, but here are a few that can be considered much more than a mystical voice caused by mental illness or demons: 1- Adam encounters the actual Lord in Genesis 2 2- Abraham meets, eats and spends time with a physical manifestation of YHWH in Genesis 18 3- Moses on several occasions saw the Lord, spoke with the Lord, took dictation from the Lord who appeared to him beginning in Exodus 2 4- A group of Israelites were confronted by the Lord at Bokim and physically saw and heard him speak in Judges 2 5- Ezekiel was terrified (as was Daniel and others) when the glory of the Lord moved into their physical reality and they recorded the encounter, the appearance and the words in Ezekiel 1. This discussion can go on and on along with illustrations and examples including the most important being the Lord taking on flesh to engage the human experience in order to save mankind from death and the forces of darkness (such as demonic voices in your head). I teach from the text of these books with actual encounters with YHWH (Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Psalms, Jeremiah, Matthew, Acts, Romans, Revelation). I do not teach modern day "voices" or books written by demon possessed humanity. These deviant types of books existed in the ancient world and people who are demon possessed or mentally sick are still writing these types of books. Thank you for drawing a clear distinction between the text of Scripture and mere mystical books written under the inspiration of Satan or sickness. Great comment!

Nah you need to shine your glasses. :D

Thanks, good advice. Plus, I spell a lot of words wrong or end up scribbling because I can't spell the word.

I am familiar with your position and points, but I disagree and am presenting the opposite. My position is scientifically, linguistically and historically defendable in spite of the light bulb analogy. The late date for the original writing of the Old Testament is not defendable when the text is examined. The idea that the origin of the OT text was in 500 BC Babylon is a fanciful date presumptuously set by the higher textural critics to begin their deconstruction of biblical history. It is an erroneous academic position. Indeed, there were scribes such as Ezra at work in that age, but they were in possession of ancient texts from the earliest days of mankind, including the writing and records of Noah.

@GalynWiemers again if you have evidence of writings from Noah I would love to see it because you are the only person on the planet with such proof. The earliest surviving text is in the dead Sea scrolls which are third century. The Enuma Elish is 1500 bce ! Again everything you have mentioned is simply your own point of view. It is not an historical point of view unless you have new information that other historians are not aware of ? Even the name El Shaddai can be traced back to Sumerian, ILU,KUR,GAL means "Lord of the mountain" The Akkadian is ISHA SHADDU " The high lord" Hewbrew EL SHADDAI " one god " It all predates the bible. Basically the bible is rip off from previous religions. Surely you can see that !

I do not understand your comment. Do you mean nothing was said that was understandable? or, nothing was said that was useful? or, nothing was said that is "true"? or, there was no sound in the video? or, you are missing the last 51 minutes of the two hours (120 minutes) since the video is only 69 minutes long? I certainly hope (and, assume) you did not listen to and watch the entire 69 minutes, since if you did I want to apologize for wasting your time.

on Amazon here - www.amazon.com/Framework-Christian-Faith-Galyn-Wiemers/dp/0979438217 but, I gave all these copies away for free originally. I have a couple "Framework" books left. If you have an address in the USA email me a shipping address and ask for the "Framework" book. I will send you a copy no charge.

Many things. 1) Jesus Christ and the Spirit of God must have something to do with the continuation, longevity of any ministry. 2) For me it is necessary to stay focused on teaching the Word of God. Other "ministry" pursuits not in line with the calling and gifting of God will cause burnout and then, a fading away. 3) Through test and trials I know I am called to do this. If I wasn't I would quit and be doing what God called me to do which could be many, many other good and noble things: construction, coaching, business or homeless ministry, pastoral ministry, visitation ministry, children's ministry. I am called to teach. 4) Every time I teach the Word of God or finish a class I am refreshed, reignited and do not want to stop. Many times when I get my study books out to prepare for class or I have to start reading the biblical text there is a negative energy that is wearing on me and expressing my unmotivated innerself that instead wants something "more entertaining", or "relaxing", or "fun." But, I have learned that if I can break through that shell and engage the study of the Word of God the negative shell falls away and I experience the joy, the light, the excitement, yes, even the entertainment of the Word of God. 5) IF I am CALLED and GIFTED by God, and IF I can DISCIPLINE myself and FAN INTO FLAME my spiritual gift I will endure to the end and finish the race. But, if I am not called, not gifted, not discipline and do not fan the gift of God into a flame I will fade away and move on to another life pursuit. God bless and strengthen you in your life and in your gift!

Thanks for the reply will keep it in my books as help on this path of carrying out the lords work

he said he dipped it

Protestant, and could be considered evangelical and fundamental. I have pastored E. Free and Grace Brethren churches. Now I teach the Bible three times a week at local Bible studies with the intent of teaching verse by verse with a historical setting. Thanks for listening/watching.

thanks

at least an hour, but I have never tested the full length of time.