Dismiss Notice

Welcome to Christian Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
  • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
  • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting after you have posted 20 posts and have received 5 likes.
  • Access to private conversations with other members.

We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Nephilim

Discussion in 'Spirit-Filled / Charismatic' started by Supplanter, May 29, 2009.

  1. Supplanter

    Supplanter There is no charge for awesomeness.

    Messages:
    2,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Word-of-Faith
    The killing thread made me think of this. Is it possible that Nephilim still exist today? Is it possible that fallen angels still produce offspring with the daughters of man? And if they did it once, then what stops them now?
     
  2. Elijah2

    Elijah2 No weapons formed against me will prosper.

    Messages:
    10,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Pentecostal
    Yep, they are sure well and alive today!
     
  3. Supplanter

    Supplanter There is no charge for awesomeness.

    Messages:
    2,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Word-of-Faith

    In what form?
     
  4. SharonL

    SharonL Senior Veteran

    Messages:
    9,636
    Likes Received:
    97
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Christian
    Elijah - could you expound on this a little more - I would like to learn more.
     
  5. Yekcidmij

    Yekcidmij Economist

    Messages:
    8,006
    Likes Received:
    3
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Libertarian
    Faith:
    Calvinist
    First, I don't think the Nephilim were fallen angels. Gen 6 only demands that the Nephilim were on the earth when that stuff happened. It appears that the Nephilim are distinguished from the sons of God:

    6:1 When humankind began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 6:2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humankind were beautiful. Thus they took wives for themselves from any they chose. 6:3 So the Lord said, “My spirit will not remain in humankind indefinitely, since they are mortal. They will remain for 120 more years.” 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days (and also after this) when the sons of God were having sexual relations with the daughters of humankind, who gave birth to their children. They were the mighty heroes of old, the famous men.


    Nephilim are only mentioned once more:

    Num 13:33 We even saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak came from the Nephilim), and we seemed liked grasshoppers both to ourselves and to them.”
     
  6. Supplanter

    Supplanter There is no charge for awesomeness.

    Messages:
    2,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Word-of-Faith

    Good point, but then who were the offspring of the daughters of man and the angels? And if the was happening then, then what is to prevent it from happening now?
     
  7. Allen1901

    Allen1901 King's Knight

    Messages:
    13,710
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Word-of-Faith
    It's My understanding that the offspring would have died in the flood.

    God Bless!
     
  8. Questioning Christian

    Questioning Christian New Member

    Messages:
    5,648
    Likes Received:
    129
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Others
    Faith:
    Christian
    They all moved to West Virginia.

    One of them was Sloth from The Goonies.

    [​IMG]
     
    Yekcidmij likes this.
  9. Supplanter

    Supplanter There is no charge for awesomeness.

    Messages:
    2,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Word-of-Faith
    Still, what prevented the angels from mating with women again after the flood?
     
  10. Supplanter

    Supplanter There is no charge for awesomeness.

    Messages:
    2,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Word-of-Faith


    HA!
     
  11. Tamara224

    Tamara224 New Member

    Messages:
    13,408
    Likes Received:
    62
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Charismatic
    Some people believe that's what the whole UFO and alien abductions phenomena are. The theory is that so-called aliens are fallen angels and they abduct people and do "reproductive experiments" on them to produce a hybrid race, or Nephilim.

    I don't know if it's true, but I think it's plausible.
     
  12. Supplanter

    Supplanter There is no charge for awesomeness.

    Messages:
    2,468
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Word-of-Faith

    hmmm . . . I've never heard that before. Interesting.
     
  13. Questioning Christian

    Questioning Christian New Member

    Messages:
    5,648
    Likes Received:
    129
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Others
    Faith:
    Christian
    Is it possible for spirits to even HAVE sex with humans? :scratch:
     
  14. Tamara224

    Tamara224 New Member

    Messages:
    13,408
    Likes Received:
    62
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Charismatic
    Yes. The Bible says they did.
     
  15. Elijah2

    Elijah2 No weapons formed against me will prosper.

    Messages:
    10,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Pentecostal
    Human form!
     
  16. Elijah2

    Elijah2 No weapons formed against me will prosper.

    Messages:
    10,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Pentecostal
    You learn from personal experience and revelation through our spiritual eyes.

    It's a hard one to go into detail but I started from looking at the Sons of God. This is an artcile I started as an expoundation of were it began.

    What are they, are they “fallen angels”?

    If that’s what they are, then how could they produce “sons” or “daughters” as to do so, they need to have sex with other beings; and angels are neither “male” nor “female”, therefore, that becomes impossible.

    God’s judgment of the “Flood” was against the “sons of God”, and if they are angels, then they are “spiritual beings”, then how could they possibly drown?

    It’s also believed that they are “sons of Seth”, who is of the “godly line”, then how could the “godly line” become so totally corrupt that they were responsible for the Flood?

    Could the “sons of God” actually be “rulers” or “princes”, self-made “gods”, human beings?

    Now, perhaps a combination of “spiritual beings” of humanoid form and “human beings” of earthly form could have produced such “rulers” or “princes”, who were the tyrannical “divine” kings and princes of the past Ancient, historical civilisations that also have a similar documented myths of “Creation” and “gods” in the Sumero-Babylonian epic tradition.

    These “divine” kings, princes or rulers have been documented at difference levels of civilisation with claims to divinity, in defiance of the authority of Jehovah, our Almighty God. Instead of them acknowledging HIS Lordship, they established their own “authority” as supreme head or god of whatever religious, political system they could fabricate that held their subjects in gross spiritual darkness and physical slavery, such as Egyptian reigns of the Pharaohs. They all claimed to be a “son of the patron god or goddess” of their city or empire. Nero was the same during the Roman Empire. Other words they self-proclaimed representative of the local god on earth.

    There are many well-established “post-Flood” patterns that are historically recorded, but these records don’t explain pre-Flood conditions historically. We cannot parallel the Biblical record with the well-known accounts like the Sumerian list of Kings and the Gilgamesh Epic that records pre-Flood and post-Flood situations; but only the Bible gives a detail and accurate description that give a true picture literally.

    The “divine Kingship” was possibly “gods without kings” or “kings without gods”. We know from history that when a “divine kingship” begins, which Genesis 6 seems to indicate that “kings” were acting like “gods” before the beginning of history as we know it in the established archaeology records, before the beginning of Sumer.

    “Kingship” is not the same as being a “king” being a person, or a “kingdom” as the king’s domain of people and property. “Kingship” is the authority to rule, in the same way as our political system. But, when anyone desires “absolute authority”, such as in the ancient Near East, they get it by force or deception, or a combination of both, which is the most usual method.

    Thus, “divine kingship” does not evolve, but it is fabricated deliberately and formulated through a group of “priest-like” nobles, who supports one person in power. They were clever men who manipulated the populace’s religious instincts to cause them to follow and obey the local gods “son”, that is, “sons of God”. They owned the people and land, in theory, and they acted as “god”, such as the Pharaohs of Egypt, or as their representative in Mesopotamia and other cultures that is well and truly documented through ancient scrolls and documents found over many past decades.

    When all the “kingdom’s” literature and monuments were used to glorify and exalt this man as the “son”, or “representative”, of god, religion became the binder and blinder of the people.

    Manipulation of religion for political purposes began in Sumer, was picked up in Akkad (Old Babylon), revised with the same themes in Assyria and New Babylon, was enjoyed by Persian monarchs, captivated Alexander and his successors, such as Antiochus “Epiphanus” that had a meaning: “the revelation of god”, and was copied by Rome. This theme was also found in Africa, the Far East, and the Americas.

    We can recall that Nebuchadnezzar was a “divine” emperor, whose name translates something like “Nebo has protected the succession-rights” who had a vision in which “kingdoms” having “divine kingship”, which were finally smashed by the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, the true King who was truly Divine (Daniel 2).

    We can see that from history how divinely the “kingship” worked and that it had absolute power and control.

    Every individual has the inclination to worship someone, even if it is only themself. If someone were able to trick a group of people into believing that the Creator had made them king as their “son” and get them to worship him, he could make the people his slaves. In most of the epic stories of ancient Near East literature we find that the “gods” chose the kingdom’s heroes. Monuments were fabricated to create an impression on the people, and the people were created for the purpose of serving the gods and their emissaries.

    In Scripture, adherents of a religious system were called “sons”, for an example, the “sons of Hamor” in Genesis 33:19 must have belonged to a cult in which donkeys were sacrificed while making a covenant. The word “benei haelohim” of Genesis 6 and Job means not “sons of god(s)”, but “beings” of the class of “elohim”.

    As in many cases the reference to “sons” through the Bible, we find that they are followers of a “temple-order”, including the “priest-king”, and we could say “son of the god so and so…”

    Therefore, I believe that the “sons of god” are temple adherents and the writer of Genesis is using the term in the “oriental” sense, and not labelling them as being “divine”, only that they were adherents of another “religious system”.

    If “the sons of the gods” are despots pretending to be “divine kings”, then who are the “daughters of men”? Could they possibly the children of Seth, and by the practices of the ancient Near East, they were tyrants who took or snatched away, whomever they chose of the daughters of the common man. They became their “property”,as the Hebrew word “laqach” means “to take, to grab and pull away”, even though the modern Hebrew meaning is simply “to marry”.

    Therefore, in Genesis 6, it could likely mean that the “sons of the Gods” forcibly took the “daughters of men”, whenever they chose. In the historical period of Ancient times “divine kings” followed in their footsteps, for it is here we learn that the kings, in the name of their “god-father”, claimed to own all the people. Of course, this meant the women really belonged to him since he was “son of the creator”.

    The very early example of such practices are portrayed in the epic of Gilgamesh, were he ravished the wives and daughters of his kingdom. We can see the same, when Sarah is taken from Abraham by the Egyptian Pharaoh (Genesis 12:12f). Abimelech of Gerar took Rachel from Jacob. The “prince” of Shechem took Dinah from Jacob. Later, Esther was chosen from among the most beautiful, illustrating that the “ruler” could have whatever women he wished. David took plural wives and ended with Abigail, the fairest in the land. Solomon then went “all out” in the kingly tradition of “wife-getting” that finally ruined Israel.

    Further consideration to Genesis 6 refers to “human tyrants”, who are “divine kings”, who are “flesh and blood”. The Hebrew word “basar” means today for “meat hanging on a hook in the meat market” that we could say is just plain, perishable flesh, which can only point to “flesh and blood”. Therefore, I believe that our Almighty God isn’t making a reference at all in regards to “divinity” of the “sons of the gods”.

    The “giants” in verse 4 may mean tall men or even giant animals or birds, such as dinosaurs. The word “nipha” refers to men of large stature, but it also means “to fall”. Therefore, it has a double meaning of tall men who have fallen from Jehovah's favour, men who have sinned grossly.

    The “tyrants” of old are the “mighty men” of old who “made a name for themselves”, like the heroes of old, and Gilgamesh. They were renowned for their infamy and were “idolised” for it and that is what caused their rebellious way in Genesis 11:4.

    Verse 5 refers to the total state of corruption, as they made a god in their own image and then worshipped it.
     
  17. Elijah2

    Elijah2 No weapons formed against me will prosper.

    Messages:
    10,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Pentecostal

    Here is another thought:

    What are they, are they “fallen angels”?

    If that’s what they are, then how could they produce “sons” or “daughters” as to do so, they need to have sex with other beings; and angels are neither “male” nor “female”, therefore, that becomes impossible.

    God’s judgment of the “Flood” was against the “sons of God”, and if they are angels, then they are “spiritual beings”, then how could they possibly drown?

    It’s also believed that they are “sons of Seth”, who is of the “godly line”, then how could the “godly line” become so totally corrupt that they were responsible for the Flood?

    Could the “sons of God” actually be “rulers” or “princes”, self-made “gods”, human beings?

    Now, perhaps a combination of “spiritual beings” of humanoid form and “human beings” of earthly form could have produced such “rulers” or “princes”, who were the tyrannical “divine” kings and princes of the past Ancient, historical civilisations that also have a similar documented myths of “Creation” and “gods” in the Sumero-Babylonian epic tradition.

    These “divine” kings, princes or rulers have been documented at difference levels of civilisation with claims to divinity, in defiance of the authority of Jehovah, our Almighty God. Instead of them acknowledging HIS Lordship, they established their own “authority” as supreme head or god of whatever religious, political system they could fabricate that held their subjects in gross spiritual darkness and physical slavery, such as Egyptian reigns of the Pharaohs. They all claimed to be a “son of the patron god or goddess” of their city or empire. Nero was the same during the Roman Empire. Other words they self-proclaimed representative of the local god on earth.

    There are many well-established “post-Flood” patterns that are historically recorded, but these records don’t explain pre-Flood conditions historically. We cannot parallel the Biblical record with the well-known accounts like the Sumerian list of Kings and the Gilgamesh Epic that records pre-Flood and post-Flood situations; but only the Bible gives a detail and accurate description that give a true picture literally.

    The “divine Kingship” was possibly “gods without kings” or “kings without gods”. We know from history that when a “divine kingship” begins, which Genesis 6 seems to indicate that “kings” were acting like “gods” before the beginning of history as we know it in the established archaeology records, before the beginning of Sumer.

    “Kingship” is not the same as being a “king” being a person, or a “kingdom” as the king’s domain of people and property. “Kingship” is the authority to rule, in the same way as our political system. But, when anyone desires “absolute authority”, such as in the ancient Near East, they get it by force or deception, or a combination of both, which is the most usual method.

    Thus, “divine kingship” does not evolve, but it is fabricated deliberately and formulated through a group of “priest-like” nobles, who supports one person in power. They were clever men who manipulated the populace’s religious instincts to cause them to follow and obey the local gods “son”, that is, “sons of God”. They owned the people and land, in theory, and they acted as “god”, such as the Pharaohs of Egypt, or as their representative in Mesopotamia and other cultures that is well and truly documented through ancient scrolls and documents found over many past decades.

    When all the “kingdom’s” literature and monuments were used to glorify and exalt this man as the “son”, or “representative”, of god, religion became the binder and blinder of the people.

    Manipulation of religion for political purposes began in Sumer, was picked up in Akkad (Old Babylon), revised with the same themes in Assyria and New Babylon, was enjoyed by Persian monarchs, captivated Alexander and his successors, such as Antiochus “Epiphanus” that had a meaning: “the revelation of god”, and was copied by Rome. This theme was also found in Africa, the Far East, and the Americas.

    We can recall that Nebuchadnezzar was a “divine” emperor, whose name translates something like “Nebo has protected the succession-rights” who had a vision in which “kingdoms” having “divine kingship”, which were finally smashed by the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, the true King who was truly Divine (Daniel 2).

    We can see that from history how divinely the “kingship” worked and that it had absolute power and control.

    Every individual has the inclination to worship someone, even if it is only themself. If someone were able to trick a group of people into believing that the Creator had made them king as their “son” and get them to worship him, he could make the people his slaves. In most of the epic stories of ancient Near East literature we find that the “gods” chose the kingdom’s heroes. Monuments were fabricated to create an impression on the people, and the people were created for the purpose of serving the gods and their emissaries.

    In Scripture, adherents of a religious system were called “sons”, for an example, the “sons of Hamor” in Genesis 33:19 must have belonged to a cult in which donkeys were sacrificed while making a covenant. The word “benei haelohim” of Genesis 6 and Job means not “sons of god(s)”, but “beings” of the class of “elohim”.

    As in many cases the reference to “sons” through the Bible, we find that they are followers of a “temple-order”, including the “priest-king”, and we could say “son of the god so and so…”

    Therefore, I believe that the “sons of god” are temple adherents and the writer of Genesis is using the term in the “oriental” sense, and not labelling them as being “divine”, only that they were adherents of another “religious system”.

    If “the sons of the gods” are despots pretending to be “divine kings”, then who are the “daughters of men”? Could they possibly the children of Seth, and by the practices of the ancient Near East, they were tyrants who took or snatched away, whomever they chose of the daughters of the common man. They became their “property”,as the Hebrew word “laqach” means “to take, to grab and pull away”, even though the modern Hebrew meaning is simply “to marry”.

    Therefore, in Genesis 6, it could likely mean that the “sons of the Gods” forcibly took the “daughters of men”, whenever they chose. In the historical period of Ancient times “divine kings” followed in their footsteps, for it is here we learn that the kings, in the name of their “god-father”, claimed to own all the people. Of course, this meant the women really belonged to him since he was “son of the creator”.

    The very early example of such practices are portrayed in the epic of Gilgamesh, were he ravished the wives and daughters of his kingdom. We can see the same, when Sarah is taken from Abraham by the Egyptian Pharaoh (Genesis 12:12f). Abimelech of Gerar took Rachel from Jacob. The “prince” of Shechem took Dinah from Jacob. Later, Esther was chosen from among the most beautiful, illustrating that the “ruler” could have whatever women he wished. David took plural wives and ended with Abigail, the fairest in the land. Solomon then went “all out” in the kingly tradition of “wife-getting” that finally ruined Israel.

    Further consideration to Genesis 6 refers to “human tyrants”, who are “divine kings”, who are “flesh and blood”. The Hebrew word “basar” means today for “meat hanging on a hook in the meat market” that we could say is just plain, perishable flesh, which can only point to “flesh and blood”. Therefore, I believe that our Almighty God isn’t making a reference at all in regards to “divinity” of the “sons of the gods”.

    The “giants” in verse 4 may mean tall men or even giant animals or birds, such as dinosaurs. The word “nipha” refers to men of large stature, but it also means “to fall”. Therefore, it has a double meaning of tall men who have fallen from Jehovah's favour, men who have sinned grossly.

    The “tyrants” of old are the “mighty men” of old who “made a name for themselves”, like the heroes of old, and Gilgamesh. They were renowned for their infamy and were “idolised” for it and that is what caused their rebellious way in Genesis 11:4.

    Verse 5 refers to the total state of corruption, as they made a god in their own image and then worshipped it.
     
  18. Elijah2

    Elijah2 No weapons formed against me will prosper.

    Messages:
    10,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Pentecostal
    Here are some more thoughts:

    "The Sons of God (http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/scripts/watchers.html) saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose." (Gen. 6:2)

    “The Book of Giants” was a literary work by Enoch (http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/scripts/enoch.html). In the Roman empire, the “giants” were believed to be the offspring of fallen angels (the Nephilim; also called Watchers) and human women.

    In Robert Eisman and Michael Wise book, “The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered” and in “The Book of Giants”(i.e., 4Q531, 6Q8 Frag. 2 and 4Q530 Col. 2), “the name of one of the giants is Gilgamesh, the Babylonian hero and subject of a great epic written in the third millennium B.C.E.”

    Michael Wise, Martin Abegg, Jr., and Edward Cook, “The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation”(1996) p. 247: The root of Nephilim is nephel which means: “untimely birth, abortion, miscarriage”. The Biblical tradition says the Nephilim were on the earth before the “Great Flood”, and afterwards, but they appear to be missing during the Flood.

    “The Nefilim were upon the Earth in those days and thereafter too. Those sons of the gods who cohabited with the daughters of the Adam, and they bore children into them. They were the Mighty Ones of Eternity, the People of the Shem.” (Gen 6:4)

    “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they; bare children unto them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”(Gen.6:4 KJV)

    The Megalithic monuments, found by the Hebrews on their arrival in Canaan, will have encouraged legends about giants; as in Greece, where the monstrous man-eating Cyclopes were said by story-tellers ignorant of ramps, levers and other Mycenaean engineering devices, to have lifted single- handed the huge blocks of stone that form the walls of Tiryns, Mycenae and other ancient cities.

    Robert Graves and Raphael Patai, “Hebrew Myths: The Book of Genesis”, and on a parchment fragment 4Q201(En ara) copied ca. 200-150 B.C.E. found at Qumrum:
    13. [They (the leaders) and all ... of them took for themselves] wives from all that they chose and [they began to cohabit with them and to defile themselves with them]; and to teach them sorcery and [spells and the cutting of roots; and to acquaint them with herbs.] And they become pregnant by them and bo[re (great) giants three thousand cubits high ...]

    The Book of Enoch (from Translation by J. C. Greenfield: “Later Jewish tradition has it that their seduction was at least partly their own fault since they had taught the girls the art of cosmetics, and so had begun the awful progress of mankind to degeneracy and sexual abandon. More important, 'they taught them charms and enchantments, the cutting of roots, and make them acquainted with plants...” (Enoch 7:1ff).

    John M. Allegro, “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross”, “The Hebrew word for giants (nephilum) literally means the fallen-down-ones because these tall celestial beings fell from the sky. Their half-breed progeny and their descendants are often mentioned in the early books of the Old Testament until the last of them were finally killed off. They were known as the Rephaim [Hebrew for 'phantoms'], Emim, Anakim, Horim, Avim, and Zamzummim. Some scholars speculate that this tradition of giants born from the union of gods and humans formed the basis for the demigod of Greek mythology.”

    Raymond E. Fowler, “The Watchers”: “Those giants...are termed n'philim (lit. 'those who have fallen' or 'perished'). A similar tradition mentions such a race of primordial giants in the Rephaim.”

    John Gray, “Near Eastern Mythology”: “The Nefilim ('Fallen Ones') bore many other tribal names, such as Emim ('Terrors'), Repha'im ('Weakeners'), Gibborim ('Giant Heroes'), Zamzummim ('Achievers'), Anakim ('Long-necked' or 'Wearers of Necklaces'), Awwim ('Devastators' or 'Serpents'). One of the Nefilim named Arba is said to have built the city of Hebron, called 'Kiriath-Arba' after him, and become the father of Anak whose three sons, Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai, were later expelled by Joshua's comrade Caleb. Since, however, arba means 'four' in Hebrew, Kiriath-Arba may have originally have meant 'City of Four,' a reference to its four quarters mythically connected with the Anakite clans: Anak himself and his 'sons' Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai.”
     
  19. JimB

    JimB Legend

    Messages:
    26,070
    Likes Received:
    314
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Others
    Faith:
    Christian

    Sure. Do you ever watch the NBA?

    FYI. Nephilim were the giants of the OT.

    ~Jim
    I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
     
  20. Yekcidmij

    Yekcidmij Economist

    Messages:
    8,006
    Likes Received:
    3
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Politics:
    US-Libertarian
    Faith:
    Calvinist
    Like I said, the Nephilim seem to be distinguished from the "sons of God" in Gen 6.

    I understand the argument about the "sons of God" being some sort of human ruler. I don't think this is the actual case for Genesis 6 though. There are only two groups of people and one individual in the OT who are called God's son. There is Israel who is called God's son (Ex 4:22, Hos 11:1, Deut 32), there is the King of Israel (the messiah 2 Sam 7:14, Ps 2, 89, 1 Chr 28:6) and then there are the "other" sons of God.

    I don't think that Gen 6 is talking about human rulers. We are given no indication in scripture that any group of people other than Israel are God's children. And we are given no indication that any individual ruler other than the representative of Israel (the king/messiah) is called God's son. There appears no group of people before Israel and no individual before the messiah of Israel that are adopted into God's family as His son or daughters.

    There are several things that seem to indicate that the "bene elohim" in Gen 6 are some other class of creation that isn't human. The phrase, as I'm sure you're aware, "bene elohim" (sons of god) is ALWAYS used to refer to this sort of creation. Besides Gen 6, this phrase shows up here:

    Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God (bene elohim) came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.
    Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God (bene elohim) came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them to present himself before the Lord.
    Job 38:7 when the morning stars sang together
    and all the sons of God (bene elohim) shouted for joy​

    Deut 32:8 When the Most High (Elyon) gave to the nations their inheritance,
    when he divided mankind,
    he fixed the borders of the peoples
    according to the number of the sons of God (bene elim).

    Psalm 29:1 Ascribe to the Lord, O heavenly beings (bene elim),
    ascribe to the Lord glory and strength.​

    Psalm 89:6 For who in the skies can compare to the Lord?
    Who is like the Lord among the heavenly beings (bene elim),​

    Psalm 82:6 I said, “You are gods (elohim),
    sons of the Most High (bene Elyon), all of you; ​


    In all of those cases "son(s) of god" is not refering to humans. In Job 38:7 we see that these "sons of God" were present at the moment of creation and we know it's not refering to humans here because of the poetic device of parallelism that has been used. "Son of God" parallels "morning stars" as "shouted for joy" parallels "sang together". The same with Psalm 89:6 where "sons of God" parallels "who in the skies" and "can compare to the Lord" parallels "who is like the Lord". Humans don't parallel things in the sky (humans don't fly). Likewise Deut 32:8 is not refering to humans (see DSS, LXX and vs 43). Psalm 29 and 82 are a little more difficult and lengthy to explain, but neither of those are refering to humans. ​

    Gen 6 would have to be proven to be an exception to the rule in order for it not to be refering to the same thing. The only objection that can possibly be raised is that if you are not human you can't reproduce. But I don't think anything in scripture demands this sort of understanding, no matter how counterintuative it is to our sensibilities. ​

    Genesis 6 seems to be communicating the idea that at some time before the flood, a class of non-human beings married human beings and bore children. I don't think this is the reason for the flood or even the cause of mans wickedness, but I could be wrong on that. The text explicity says the judgment of the flood was due to mans wickedness, not because of intermarriages, though the wickedness of these intermarriages may be implied. I think the story is trying to relate when the flood was by saying that the flood happened around the time the Nephilim were on the earth and at the time when the bene elohim were marrying humans and having children. This time reference may have been clear to the original audience of Genesis, almost as if upon hearing this time reference they would have thought, "Ah, gotcha, so that's when Noah's flood was. The Nephilim were there then too. Ah, that's who the mighty renown men of old were". ​

    This may have been useful/interesting information to Israelites who had a run in with the Nephilim just before entering the promised land. The people probably wondered who these Nephilim were and where they came from and why they were so mighty:​

    Num 13:33 We even saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak came from the Nephilim), and we seemed liked grasshoppers both to ourselves and to them.” ​


    I don't know for sure. In any case, I don't think the "sons of God" in Gen 6 are human.​
     
    Supplanter likes this.
Loading...