Biblical Studies

With this 3rd paper, we are going to show that there is more to the story of “the angels that sinned” which are “chained in darkness” than meets the eye. The angels that sinned are presently among us on earth as walking, genetic, Biblical violations in shoeleather (today probably in football or basketball shoes).

With this issue, we will continue to scrutinize a 31 page booklet entitled The Angels That Sinned, written in 1929 by Clifton L. Fowler, and reprinted by Dan Gayman of the Church of Israel in 1992. While the author gets a lot of things right, he falls slightly short of understanding the sexual seduction of Eve in the garden of Eden which brought about “the seed of the serpent” at Gen. 3:15. He divided his booklet into seven subchapters thusly:

“I. The Angels That Sinned Were At One Time Angels Of Righteousness And Glory.

“II. The Angels That Sinned Were Disobedient In The Days Of Noah.

“III. The Angels That Sinned Are The Same As The Sons Of God Of Genesis Six.

“IV. The Angels That Sinned, Sinned In Like Manner To Sodom And Gomorrha.

“V. The Angels That Sinned Became The Progenitors Of The Giants.

“VI. The Angels That Sinned Particularly Aimed At The Pollution Of The Women Of The Race.

“VII. The Angels That Sinned Are Now Imprisoned In Tartarus Awaiting Judgment.”

On pages 5-8, Fowler (although with a couple of errors which I will address), stated thusly:

“I. The Angels That Sinned Were At One Time Angels Of Righteousness And Glory:

“The sentient creation of God falls into three great groups – angels, demons, and men. All three were created perfect, because God being perfect produces only that which is harmonious with His perfection. For that which is imperfect to spring from a perfect source is unthinkable.

With this second paper, we are going to explore more thoroughly the topic at hand. It’s a serious subject, not to be passed over lightly! Inasmuch as a sin is a transgression against Yahweh’s law, we must inquire as to what kind of violation these angels were guilty of committing? As we go along, we will find that it was an “unforgivable sin”, as there can be no rectifying the disastrous result which happened in the past, presently, or at any time in the future. With this issue, we will scrutinize a 31 page booklet entitled The Angels That Sinned, written in 1929 by Clifton L. Fowler, and reprinted by Dan Gayman of the Church of Israel in 1992. While the author gets a lot of things right, he falls slightly short of understanding that the sexual seduction of Eve in the garden of Eden, brought about “the seed of the serpent” at Gen. 3:15. He divides his booklet into seven subchapters thusly:

“I. The Angels That Sinned Were At One Time Angels Of Righteousness And Glory.

“II. The Angels That Sinned Were Disobedient In The Days Of Noah.

“III. The Angels That Sinned Are The Same As The Sons Of God Of Genesis Six.

“IV. The Angels That Sinned, Sinned In Like Manner To Sodom And Gomorrha.

“V. The Angels That Sinned Became The Progenitors Of The Giants.

“VI. The Angels That Sinned Particularly Aimed At The Pollution Of The Women Of The Race.

“VII. The Angels That Sinned Are Now Imprisoned In Tartarus Awaiting Judgment.”

Of these seven categories, number six is the most significant, as a criminal very seldom changes his “method of operation”, and Satan and his angels are no exception. Satan’s “MO” from the very beginning, until this very day, is to racially pollute the pure genetics of Yahweh’s White Adamic children, and replace them with Satan’s racially-mixed, unclean peoples. Anyone who can’t see this very thing going on at the present time, in every White Israel nation today, has to be blind-as-a-bat, for it is an obvious no-brainer!

We are informed at these two passages that there are angels “reserved in everlasting chains under darkness” and that God “cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.” But, what is the nature of the binding power of the “chains”? Too often, it seems, the authors of sundry Biblical commentaries envision some kind of dungeon-like cave deep below the surface of the earth, a holding chamber for these dreadful creatures until the day of judgment.

To prepare us for a word study on these two passages, I will quote from the E-Sword program which matches all of the Strong’s numbers to the text:

2 Pet. 2:4: “For¹⁰⁶³ if¹⁴⁸⁷ God²³¹⁶ spared⁵³³⁹ not³⁷⁵⁶ the angels³² that sinned²⁶⁴, but²³⁵ cast them down to hell⁵⁰²⁰, and delivered³⁸⁶⁰ them into chains⁴⁵⁷⁷ of darkness²²¹⁷, to be reserved⁵⁰⁸³ unto¹⁵¹⁹ judgment²⁹²⁰ ...”

Jude 1:6: “And⁵⁰³⁷ the angels³² which kept⁵⁰⁸³ not³³⁶¹ their¹⁴³⁸ first estate⁷⁴⁶, but²³⁵ left⁶²⁰ their own²³⁹⁸ habitation³⁶¹³, he hath reserved⁵⁰⁸³ in everlasting¹²⁶ chains¹¹⁹⁹ under⁵²⁵⁹ darkness²²¹⁷ unto¹⁵¹⁹ the judgment²⁹²⁰ of the great³¹⁷³ day⁰²²⁵...”

If the reader will take notice here, the Strong’s number for “darkness” is 2217, and the numbers for “chains” are 4577 and 1199. However, the Strong’s Greek Dictionary is so abbreviated on these words, it’s about as useless as a tit on a boar, and in this instance I will not waste my time in citing it! On the other hand, The Complete New Testament Word Study by Spiros Zodhiates does much better, but one must be careful, as he will sneak some nominal churchianity dogma into his definitions. To his credit, though, in addition to his Greek definitions, for which he is usually quite honest, he also includes synonyms and antonyms which are very helpful.

This investigation of the Beast Of The Field is turning into quite a detective story. In part #1 of this series, I told you: “About two years ago, a very good friend of mine gave me a copy of a video presentation by pastor Allen Campbell of Belfast, Ireland entitled Who Are The Beast of the Field?” As I explained in that first paper on this subject, initially I was very much in agreement with Campbell’s premise.

This debate has come up around me several times this week, and I thought I'd share a few notes on the topic.

All definitions below are from either The American Heritage College Dictionary, 3^rd edition, or Liddell & Scott's Greek-English Lexicon, or The New College Latin & English Dictionary, depending on the language of the word being defined. They are abridged, and some of my own comments are added.

Propitiate: to conciliate, appease.

Propitiation: The act of propitiating. Latin propitius, a disposition of favor (one can think pro-pity, a setting forth of pity or mercy). The Greek word translated propitiation in the New Testament is hilasmos, which is a means of appeasing, a conciliation.

In part #’s 1 through 4 of this series, I have addressed the many errors in identifying who “the beast of the field” are. In part #3, I gave substantial evidence that the name of the devil actually [also] means “ape” in Arabic, according to Adam Clarke. Also in part #3, with data from the Greek passed on to me by William Finck, I came into substantial evidence that indeed we are dealing with the idea of an “ape”:

IDENTIFYING THE “BEAST OF THE FIELD”, #4

In pamphlet #’s 1 and 2 on this subject I have given substantial evidence that the Biblical phrase “beast of the field” (often meaning four-footed/quadruped animals, domesticated or wild) is sometimes used as a Hebrew idiom for two-legged/biped creatures appearing as men. In paper #1, I showed adequate documentation that neither Strong’s Hebrew word #2423 “chêyvâ”, nor #2416, “chay”, could support, or be translated or interpreted as a two-legged/biped “beast of the field”.

IDENTIFYING THE “BEAST OF THE FIELD”, ^#2

Clifton A. Emahiser’s Teaching Ministries