Nephilim: Giants of the Bible

[BPPLEE]

I said in my post that strange flesh is no where mentioned in Jude 1:6 KJV.

You came back with Jude 1:7 KJV, however, you cannot use the fact that the strange flesh the men of Sodom and Gomorrha went after relates to the angels who left their first estate in Jude 1:7 KJV, and then connect these angels with Genesis 6:4 KJV. It’s a complete misuse of scripture.

Jude 1:6 KJV and Jude 1:7 KJV are two different wicked events in the Bible. One event is regarding the wickedness of men being with men. The other event is about Satan and the one third angels leaving their first estate.

You don’t know what “in like manner “ means?
Satan is not in everlasting chains under darkness. To quote you;

“Revelation 12:9 KJV
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” (Not to mention the other scriptures you quoted showing that Satan walks the earth)
Satan didn’t just leave he was cast out to where?
The earth.
Eph 2:2 - Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world,according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh inthe children of disobedience:
He couldn’t be the prince of power of the air if he was in everlasting chains under darkness.
How could he tempt Jesus if he was chained in darkness?
He’s not chained until the millennium (Rev. 20)
You accuse me of misusing scripture yet you ignore what it says.

 

[biblelesson]

You don’t know what “in like manner “ means?
Satan is not in everlasting chains under darkness. To quote you;

“Revelation 12:9 KJV
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.”
Satan didn’t just leave he was cast out to where?
The earth.
Eph 2:2 - Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world,according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh inthe children of disobedience:
He couldn’t be the prince of power of the air if he was in everlasting chains under darkness.
You accuse me of misusing scripture yet you ignore what it says.

How do you know whether Satan could not be the prince of the power of the air being in everlasting chains under darkness?

Do you have a clue what defines the Prince of the power of the air? You give a lot of credit to yourself regarding the operation of angels.

We must go with what the Bible says:

First of all, a spiritual being under chains, is not the type of chains placed on fleshly humans. You must think with the spirit. Satan is in a domain where he is bound. However the Bible says he is reserved in everlasting chains under darkness…


Being reserved under everlasting chains prevents Satan from entering heaven, his original domain. Satan is bound, in the air, under heaven, being given control of the world, he’s god and ruler of this world, and has this position until he is bound during the thousand years, where he will have no control, then finally the final judgment. Until then, he is kept out of heaven, but allowed to reign as god of this world.

Satan is described as the bright and morning star, the son of the morning, before his fall, being named Lucifer. He is now called the Prince of the power of the air (and many other names) and resides in darkness, where we have been delivered from, that is, we have been delivered from the power of darkness, Colossians 1:13 KJV. We have been taken out of Satan’s domain of darkness and translated to the kingdom of Christ, into light.

 

[BPPLEE]

How do you know whether Satan could not be the prince of the power of the air being in everlasting chains under darkness?

Do you have a clue what defines the Prince of the power of the air? You give a lot of credit to yourself regarding the operation of angels.

We must go with what the Bible says:

First of all, a spiritual being under chains, is not the type of chains placed on fleshly humans. You must think with the spirit. Satan is in a domain where he is bound. However the Bible says he is reserved in everlasting chains under darkness…


Being reserved under everlasting chains prevents Satan from entering heaven, his original domain. Satan is bound, in the air, under heaven, being given control of the world, he’s god and ruler of this world, and has this position until he is bound during the thousand years, where he will have no control, then finally the final judgment. Until then, he is kept out of heaven, but allowed to reign as god of this world.

Satan is described as the bright and morning star, the son of the morning, before his fall, being named Lucifer. He is now called the Prince of the power of the air (and many other names) and resides in darkness, where we have been delivered from, that is, we have been delivered from the power of darkness, Colossians 1:13 KJV. We have been taken out of Satan’s domain of darkness and translated to the kingdom of Christ, into light.

Your reply does not address the issue. Jude 1:6 isn’t talking about Satan and 1/3 of the angels. They are not in everlasting chains under darkness and it’s obvious.
You said “Being reserved under everlasting chains prevents Satan from entering heaven, his original domain.” Did you not read the scripture from Job you quoted?
Job 1:6 - Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Job 1:7 - And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comet thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
Is the LORD not in heaven?

I see no need to debate this further with you, you seem to value your opinion over the plain meaning of scripture.
There is a case for the Sons of God being men as there is a case for them being fallen angels, but it looks as though you are trying to cherry pick Jude to make it fit your view.
You are entitled to your opinion but you should understand that yours is not the only interpretation.
God bless

 

[biblelesson]

Your reply does not address the issue. Jude 1:6 isn’t talking about Satan and 1/3 of the angels. They are not in everlasting chains under darkness and it’s obvious.

I apologize, I should be more considerate of your interpretation. Today I’m not feeling well, but that’s no excuse.

I do see Jude 1:6 KJV as Satan and the one third angels. They were punished and due to their sin against God, they were kicked out of heaven. Their sin did in fact cause them to leave their first estate. No they did not volunteer to leave because they basically were fighting with the Arch Angels and the other angels hoping to take over heaven, but when they lost the fight, they were forced to leave - throne out.

It’s not obvious to me that they are not in everlasting chains. Chains on earth are made front earthly things: metal, rope, etc. Chains in heaven are not the chains we know of on earth. They are spiritual chains - and for a powerful cherub angel, and other angels, so we really don’t know what type of chains. Chains can keep someone from entering a certain place also. So we don’t know!

Also, Satan is chief of the angels that fell with him. It sounds like you are saying there was another set of angels that married women on earth, that were not part of the one third that fell with Satan. Yet, the Bible does not speak of a separate group of angels who fell or left heaven outside of those who fell with Satan.

So, Jude 1:6 KJV must be talking about Satan and the one third angels.

 

[BPPLEE]

I apologize, I should be more considerate of your interpretation. Today I’m not feeling well, but that’s no excuse.

I do see Jude 1:6 KJV as Satan and the one third angels. They were punished and due to their sin against God, they were kicked out of heaven. Their sin did in fact cause them to leave their first estate. No they did not volunteer to leave because they basically were fighting with the Arch Angels and the other angels hoping to take over heaven, but when they lost the fight, they were forced to leave - throne out.

It’s not obvious to me that they are not in everlasting chains. Chains on earth are made front earthly things: metal, rope, etc. Chains in heaven are not the chains we know of on earth. They are spiritual chains - and for a powerful cherub angel, and other angels, so we really don’t know what type of chains. Chains can keep someone from entering a certain place also. So we don’t know!

Also, Satan is chief of the angels that fell with him. It sounds like you are saying there was another set of angels that married women on earth, that were not part of the one third that fell with Satan. Yet, the Bible does not speak of a separate group of angels who fell or left heaven outside of those who fell with Satan.

So, Jude 1:6 KJV must be talking about Satan and the one third angels.

No need to apologize. You didn’t address your claim that being in everlasting chains means Satan has no access to heaven. Job 1 indicates that he does have access
No the fallen angels of Genesis 6 are not a separate group they are part of the 1/3 that fell.
Jude 1:6 I believe is speaking of these angels that had relations with women.
You interpret things differently, that’s fine. I would never claim that there’s no other explanation than mine.

 

[biblelesson]

You didn’t address your claim that being in everlasting chains means Satan has no access to heaven. Job 1 indicates that he does have access

God is a Spirit, so we don’t know how God communicate with angels. We don’t even know how God communicates with us by His Spirit, other than what we read in scripture, and what the Spirit make known to us.

The Bible tells us Satan was thrown out of heaven, and heaven is no longer his home. However, because he is God’s creation, and need God’s permission, there has to be communication.

The question is does he actually go to heaven to communicate with God? How does that work? Believe me, we don’t know. We cannot see into heaven. The Bible tells us there are three heavens.

However, God does ride on cherubims, Ezekiel 1:26-28 KJV, Psalms 18:10 KJV, so we don’t know how He communicates with Satan.

You interpret things differently, that’s fine. I would never claim that there’s no other explanation than mine.

All I know is there cannot be two explanations regarding God’s word, and we are taught by the Holy Spirit. Each believer who is truly taught by the Holy Spirit does not experience ambiguity because the revelations and wisdom of scripture is given by another Power. The Holy Spirit cannot be mistaken.

 

[Paul4JC]

Hello Paul4JC, I hope you have been enjoying all the blessing God has given you.

In regard to you providing the translastion from the Septuagint. It would appear that you provide this as more evidence toward a claim that Genesis 6:2 is referring to angels and not humans. The most important qeustion I have is do you consider the Septuagint your Bible? For example, my Bible is the NKJV, KJV, ESV.

Also, there is a Hebrew Bible that exists today, called the Masoretic text, that the Jewish people us as their scripture. If you consider the Septuagint as your Bible, then this debate takes a turn toward which ancient text should be used. Because the Septuagint (the particular Greek tanslation you chose) is at odds with the Masoretic text of the Jews and the other tranlastions I said that I use regarding Genesis 6:2.

There are a couple of points I would like to make.

(1) It is valuable to everyone, not just those that hold that 6:2 are humans, to know what people thought the text should be translated too in various time periods regarding the tranlastion of the Hebrew text. So my point here is that your evidence, in my view, has some value. I am of the camp, however, that think the translators of the manuscript used for this Septuagint translation you presented for Genesis 6:2 did not render an exact word for word translation of the text. The exact word for word translation, in my view, is "sons of God".

(2) Many think that the Septuagint is a whole, one, intact, Greek version of the OT. However, it is actually a collection (from multiple discoveries) of what is considered best, and thought to be the most reliable, Greek manuscripts reconstructed to represent the OT in one book from Hebrew to Greek. So when scholars refer to the ‘Septuagint’ they are referring to this collection of various writings. This does not mean, however, the Septuagint is without value or that some do not consider it THE primary source above all others. Some do, I myself do not consider it a primary source.

(3) It is very important for everyone to know, the Septuagint is a translation of the Hebrew to Greek. So when one reads the English form of the Septuagint they are reading a translation of a translation of the original Hebrew text (we assume). In my view, it is difficult enough to try and translate Hebrew to English. Let alone try and translate Hebrew to Greek and then Greek to English and keep to the true Hebrew meaning. Different languages present different language barriers. Also, if one is familiar with the fact that there are many different English translations in circulation today, then one is probably familiar with the fact that some versions of the Bible are ‘paraphrases’ (like the living Bible) that state what the translator thinks the text is saying, while others try to translate exact word for word. Which brings me to the problem I have with the Septuagint regarding Genesis 6:2.

(4) In regard to the various Greek manuscripts considered for your presentation of the Septuagint stating "angels of God" in Genesis 6:2. Only one manuscript (the Codex Alexandrinus) reads "angels of God". The critical editions of the Septuagint (as well as two other ancient Greek tranalsations) read "sons of God", not angels of God in Genesis 6:2. Therefore, not even a review of Greek translations have a consensus. Which leads us back to what I stated in a previous post, "I will also point out that many Jews of Jude and Peter's day thought that the book of Enoch was truth. But, we have evidence that many did not think it was true." And more to our topic of this post, we have a Greek manuscript that says "angels of God" and others that say "sons of God". In regard to Christian doctrine, details matter. And in this case, they matter a great deal.

(5) There are many differences, changes, and additions in the Septuagint when campared to the Masoretic text. As I understand it, there are more than 148 major differences. One of those differences is in Genesis 6:2. So is the Septuagint, in regard to Genesis 6:2, a paraphrase of a concept the translators of the time thought it should read OR is it an exact word for word translation of the Hebrew? I tend to hold the former and place more credibility on the Masoretic text (today's Jewish version) which reads "sons of God" in Genesis 6:2. And the offical Jewish position of today, of the Masoretic Text, is that Genesis 6:2 is speaking about humans when translating "sons of God".


Piece to you and may God do a fruitful work through you.

If your want to debate about the LXX vs Masoretic you can do so elsewhere. I'm just quoting these versions.

Interestingly, the word angels was used in Alexandrian LXX. Masoretic text is about 1000 years after the Septuagint. Do you think New Testament authors used Masoretic? It did not exist at the time. They relied mostly on LXX. What did the Lord Jesus Christ use? "Jesus and the Apostles: studied, memorized, used, quoted, and read most often from the Bible of their day, the Septuagint. Since Matthew wrote primarily to convince the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed their promised Messiah, it follows as a matter of course that his Gospel is saturated with the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament in Matthew, He uses the Hebrew text only 10% of the time, but the Greek LXX translation—90% of the time! 1

Fallen angel view held by earlier church fathers.

• Philo of Alexandria
• Josephus
• Tertullian
• Clement
• Justin Martyr
• Bardaisan
• Irenaeus
• Papias of Hierapolis
• Athenagoras
• Marcus Minucius Felix
• Origen
• Cyprian of Carthage

The Angel view was the only view. The Sethite view does not come until later, about 250 A.D. "The fact that, "the first known Sethites-interpretation is found in Julius Africanus, to be dated to the first half of the third century." 2 "Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages. It is still widely taught today among many churches who find the literal "angel" view a bit disturbing." 3 So you throw away what all the church fathers taught before this?

[Reminds me of JW New World Translation, which 2000 years later is supposed to be the correct translation. We know it's not in any way.]

Indeed, it was very convenient to some to both rid of the angel view and the book of 1 Enoch in one sweep. It becomes clear that those who accepted the authority of the book of 1 Enoch held the angel view, while those who later opposed 1 Enoch held Sethite view.

The Sethite view promotes Calvinism. The Sethites were 'chosen' the Cainites were not.

Daughters of men are not Cainites, but Adamites. "...the Sethite view declares that the daughters of men were simply the daughters of Cain. This is a problem. Again, when looking at the original Hebrew words, the daughters of men are translated as hā-’ā-ḏām, or more directly the daughters of Adam." 4


God bless you.

 

[BPPLEE]

God is a Spirit, so we don’t know how God communicate with angels. We don’t even know how God communicates with us by His Spirit, other than what we read in scripture, and what the Spirit make known to us.

The Bible tells us Satan was thrown out of heaven, and heaven is no longer his home. However, because he is God’s creation, and need God’s permission, there has to be communication.

The question is does he actually go to heaven to communicate with God? How does that work? Believe me, we don’t know. We cannot see into heaven. The Bible tells us there are three heavens.

However, God does ride on cherubims, Ezekiel 1:26-28 KJV, Psalms 18:10 KJV, so we don’t know how He communicates with Satan.


All I know is there cannot be two explanations regarding God’s word, and we are taught by the Holy Spirit. Each believer who is truly taught by the Holy Spirit does not experience ambiguity because the revelations and wisdom of scripture is given by another Power. The Holy Spirit cannot be mistaken.

The Holy Spirit cannot be mistaken but you can. And let me guess, you don’t use any other versions of the Bible, only the KJV, right?

 

[biblelesson]

The Holy Spirit cannot be mistaken but you can. And let me guess, you don’t use any other versions of the Bible, only the KJV, right?

Yes that’s true - King James Version.

 

[BPPLEE]

Yes that’s true - King James Version.

And which denomination is the correct one?

 

[Paleouss]

There is a case for the Sons of God being men as there is a case for them being fallen angels, but it looks as though you are trying to cherry pick Jude to make it fit your view.

Sorry for my intrusion upon your conversation with someone else.

I just wanted to say that I agree that there are three reasonable options when reading Genesis 6:2. Although we differ on which we think is the most reasonable.

To me, this is not a core tenant. It shouldn't affect how I intermingle with other Christians of the faith that hold the basic pillars of faith. I look forward to agreeing with you on other issues in the future.

Peace be to you.

 

[BPPLEE]

Sorry for my intrusion upon your conversation with someone else.

I just wanted to say that I agree that there are three reasonable options when reading Genesis 6:2. Although we differ on which we think is the most reasonable.

To me, this is not a core tenant. It shouldn't affect how I intermingle with other Christians of the faith that hold the basic pillars of faith. I look forward to agreeing with you on other issues in the future.

Peace be to you.

It’s not a hill to die on for me

 

[Paleouss]

Fallen angel view held by earlier church fathers.

• Philo of Alexandria
• Josephus
• Tertullian
• Clement
• Justin Martyr
• Bardaisan
• Irenaeus
• Papias of Hierapolis
• Athenagoras
• Marcus Minucius Felix
• Origen
• Cyprian of Carthage

The Angel view was the only view.

In regard to Philo, Wayne Grudem writes:

While Philo himself calls these 'sons of God' angels in one place, he later called them 'good and excellent men' (Q. Gen. 1.92).

The statement "the angel view was the only view" is interesting. I'll have to research this assertion. Thank you for the information.

I would like to point out that the Jewish beliefs of the day, according to discoveries, was mixed. There are writings that attribute them to angels and other writings to men.

The Sethite view promotes Calvinism. The Sethites were 'chosen' the Cainites were not.

I don't know about this. I would have to talk to my Calvinist friends. Myself, not being Calvinist but I am a Protestant, its simply about the exegesis of scripture. It has nothing to do with appling a theology to scripture. For example, for me the context of Genesis 6:1-2 starts with Genesis 3:15 with "her seed" and "thy seed", includes all of chapter 4 which describes both Abel and Seth as "seeds" (Gen 4:25), includes the complete geneology of "her seed" in Genesis chapter 5 for a reason (giving the lineage of one 'seedline'), and continues into Genesis chapter 6. To me, all of this is context for Genesis 6:1-2.

Daughters of men are not Cainites, but Adamites. "...the Sethite view declares that the daughters of men were simply the daughters of Cain.

I would first like to establish that, although I am of the mind that these "sons of God" were human. I believe that they were of "her seed" (Gen 3:15). And as I said above, the text tells us that Abel and then Seth were "seeds" (Gen 4:25). Further, Seth in Hebrew means 'anointed' and I could give other textual evidence within Genesis chapter 4 and in the NT that Abel and Seth are spoken of as in a spiritual familial group of "her seed". My point is that I, personally, don't need to hold that all the ungodly women came from the line of Cain (which by the way is described in 1John 3:12 as being "of the wicked one"). Ungodly women can come from the line of Seth just as easily. My view on this is similar to what Paul says (Rom 2:29), I would say, "her seed" (Gen 3:15) is one inwardly not necessarily genetically. Not all of the seeds of Seth are seeds of the spirutal familial group. As is clearly evidenced by Genesis 6:8,11. There was only one left.

This is a problem. Again, when looking at the original Hebrew words, the daughters of men are translated as hā-’ā-ḏām, or more directly the daughters of Adam." 4

This is interesting. I do believe that the phrase "daughers of man" (ESV) refer back to (1) Genesis 6:1 daughters and (2) is intended to be a imagery phrase like the common OT phrase 'son(s) of man'; which is imagery and description of humanity’s alienation from God. It describes fallen human beings as untrustworthy (Num 23:19), “full of evil” (Eccl 9:3), and helpless (Ps 146:3).

My view is that the "daughters of man" (ESV) is the proper translation. The NKJV, which I would also use, translates "daughters of men" (NKJ) which I think obscures what the author intended. I have many references for this but don't want to divert in a different direction in this post. My point is, the "daughters of..." are not referring to any genetic individual but is a spiritual designation. Which, btw, is contrasted against what I believe is an opposite spiritual designation, i.e., "sons of God".

God bless you.

Thank you. And may God bless you.

 

[biblelesson]

And which denomination is the correct one?

King James Version is correct and authorized.

Authorized because it is authorized by a king. None of the other versions have been authorized by a king in the manner the King James Version has.

The reason people don’t respect the KJV is because they don’t understand the power God give to kings and their authority to sanction something that God Himself will honor.

I don’t have time to look up all the relating scriptures right now, but it’s in the Bible. So you can also research this Bible truth.

- Kings are set up by God on earth and have the same respect due them just as God
- We are admonished to honor and respect kings and their authority
- A King’s prayer toward God in carrying out God’s salvation plan is recorded in heaven and no other person without a title can overstep it

There is more. You have to study your Bible. So, this is the reason the King James Version is the correct one, and all others are not sanctioned nor are they acceptable to God.

This is why you find so many errors in the other bibles that came after the KJV.

This is my belief!

 

[BPPLEE]

King James Version is correct and authorized.

Authorized because it is authorized by a king. None of the other versions have been authorized by a king in the manner the King James Version has.

The reason people don’t respect the KJV is because they don’t understand the power God give to kings and their authority to sanction something that God Himself will honor.

I don’t have time to look up all the relating scriptures right now, but it’s in the Bible. So you can also research this Bible truth.

- Kings are set up by God on earth and have the same respect due them just as God
- We are admonished to honor and respect kings and their authority
- A King’s prayer toward God in carrying out God’s salvation plan is recorded in heaven and no other person without a title can overstep it

There is more. You have to study your Bible. So, this is the reason the King James Version is the correct one, and all others are not sanctioned nor are they acceptable to God.

This is why you find so many errors in the other bibles that came after the KJV.

This is my belief!

This explains a lot.

 

[MForbes]

King James Version is correct and authorized.

Authorized because it is authorized by a king. None of the other versions have been authorized by a king in the manner the King James Version has.

The reason people don’t respect the KJV is because they don’t understand the power God give to kings and their authority to sanction something that God Himself will honor.

I don’t have time to look up all the relating scriptures right now, but it’s in the Bible. So you can also research this Bible truth.

- Kings are set up by God on earth and have the same respect due them just as God
- We are admonished to honor and respect kings and their authority
- A King’s prayer toward God in carrying out God’s salvation plan is recorded in heaven and no other person without a title can overstep it

There is more. You have to study your Bible. So, this is the reason the King James Version is the correct one, and all others are not sanctioned nor are they acceptable to God.

This is why you find so many errors in the other bibles that came after the KJV.

That's plain idiotic and unacceptable. Check this out from the Forum Rules:

"Promotion of King James Version Onlyism (KJVO) or King James Bible Only is not allowed. "

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

www.christianforums.com

 

[biblelesson]

That's plain idiotic and unacceptable. Check this out from the Forum Rules:

"Promotion of King James Version Onlyism (KJVO) or King James Bible Only is not allowed. "

Terms and rules

You must agree to these terms and rules before using the site.

www.christianforums.com

If you read my post and the subsequent ones, you will see that I was asked the question about my preference for KJV. In my post, I did say that is what I believe. No one has to believe as I do. I only believed in the KJV, and I provided my reasons, however no one has to believe as I do.

 

[MForbes]

If you read my post and the subsequent ones, you will see that I was asked the question about my preference for KJV. In my post, I did say that is what I believe. No one has to believe as I do. I only believed in the KJV, and I provided my reasons, however no one has to believe as I do.

You stated:

"So, this is the reason the King James Version is the correct one, and all others are not sanctioned nor are they acceptable to God." (Emphasis mine).

Plain and simple, that is considered promotion of KJVO.

 

[biblelesson]

You stated:

"So, this is the reason the King James Version is the correct one, and all others are not sanctioned nor are they acceptable to God." (Emphasis mine).

Plain and simple, that is considered promotion of KJVO

I could not have been promoting the KJV if I stated in post #114, “This is my belief!”

And I believe in the KJV for the reasons stated, and it will remain my belief!

 

[zippy2006]

The idea that angels had sex with human women and gave rise to a race of human-angel hybrids is a very silly idea. Which is why it isn't the mainstream view of either Christianity or Judaism in how either religion interprets the text here.

It was the mainstream view for centuries until the strawman that "angels had sex with humans" took hold. See: "A Land of Giants."