Genesis 6:1-4, Sons of God, Giants in the earth, (Nephilim) are not angles who had relations with daughters of men!

[GenemZ]

I am passed that. I know sons of God are not angels.

Have you read Job? Specifically, Job 38?

In Chapter 38 the Lord was bracing Job for having become arrogant, and was speaking to Job as to humble him.

The Lord took Job back to the time of the very creation of the earth to set the narrative.

When we get to verse 7?
We see angels being called "sons of God."

The angels were witnessing to God's creation of the planet in verses 4-5.

4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?


The angels were already created and existing at that point in time when the earth was being created!
Man came afterwards!

God was calling certain angels "sons of God."


Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Job 38:5-7

The "morning stars" were special angels who were created to bear light.
Lucifer was one of light bearing angels.

And? The regular angels were called? "Sons of God!" (Job 38:7)

Man is not referred to as sons of God until man in the church age was made to be a "new creation in Christ!"


........ grace and peace ...............

 

[Job 33:6]

People say the Nephilims are the giants whose fathers are angle that married women during those days.

This issue has always caused me to wonder how can an angle who is spirit, marry a woman who is flesh and have a baby.

I ask this question especially because Jesus explained in Luke 20:34-36 that those resurrected from the dead neither marry, nor are giving in marriage; that they are equal to the the angles and cannot die anymore.

So Jesus is saying the angels cannot marry nor be givin in marriage, and that they are spirit because they cannot die. So how can a spirit posses a fleshly male seed to produce a baby? Well according to Jesus that can’t happen.

Because there is a flesh and blood creation and there is a spiritual creation - angels, you can’t mix the two. Only a man made of flesh can have relations with a woman made of flesh.

So to understand what Genesis is saying we have to look at God’s creation of man and where the woman fit in.

God created man, not woman. Woman was made from a man that God had already created; from the rib of Adam - Adam was God’s creation, not Eve.

Genesis 6:1 says,….when men (God’s creation) began to multiply…and daughters were born unto them, 2 The sons of God saw the daughter of men…and took them wives…

The sons of God in Genesis 6:1-2 is God’s creation - man

The daughters of men are those women born who are patterned after Eve in creation.

The women could not be called the sons of God. They could only be called the daughters of men because as I pointed out earlier women were not created, they were made from an already existing creation - man. And it is man who holds the title sons of God. Women holds the title, daughters of men.

And although 2 Corinthians 6:18 says,
“And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty,” man’s position is still considered over the woman in title. This is why in 1 Corinthians 11:3 the man is the head of the woman, but Christ is the head of man.

The Sons of God are angels. The rebelled against God in Genesis 6, and are referenced further in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6-8.

There are many sons of God's references elsewhere in Job and Psalms as well. Among other places.

In The ancient Near East, people would build temples and ziggurats. And their gods would come down. And, to try to explain this as PG as I can, the god would engage in a 3-some with a man and woman. The god would inhabit the body, typically of a male king, and they would give birth to a child that was 1/3 God, 1/3 mand and 1/3 woman.

And that's how the supernatural would have babies.

And you can see this elsewhere in the Bible too. Og of Bashan had a giant bed. The Anakim and Canaanites were tall as cedars. The remnants of Gath, including Goliath, or the Egyptian giant who's spear was like a weavers beam. There are lots of pagan giants in the Bible. And if you read about ancient history, you will find literature that describes these 3-somes that result in giant kings.

A Land of Giants | Ancient Faith Ministries

I would also recommend psalm 82 and Psalm 89. That refer to the sons of God as "in the skies" and they will "die like men". Further suggesting a divine nature to them.

 

[GenemZ]

The Sons of God are angels. The rebelled against God in Genesis 6, and are referenced further in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6-8.

Satan and his angels rebelled during prehistoric times.

In the Satanic rebellion two thirds of the angels stayed with the Lord. Only one third went with Lucifer.
As we even see today some men make a choice based solely upon where the majority wants to be. The true
issue is not the issue in that case. That way, some angels who not truly for the Lord could choose only because
of the majority opinion. Jesus does not want people following Him on that basis, but on how we perceive
Him as He is to the person.

In Genesis 6 we find certain angels who went with the majority opinion of angels, but were still not with God 100% in their hearts.

These angels at the time for deciding between the Lord and Lucifer decided to stay with the Lord, not because they loved the Lord so much. But they saw that a majority was formed, and they chose based upon the safety in numbers.

The Lord always knew these angels' hearts were not with Him in a right way for the right reason.

So, in Genesis 6? The Lord exposed their hearts and weeded them out. They failed the test and took the beautiful women that
were forbidden otherwise by God. They are not like the regular fallen angels that stayed with Satan. That is why they have their own special prison separate from the other fallen angels.

And He has kept, with eternal chains in darkness for the judgment of the great day ​

the angels who did not keep their own position but deserted their proper dwelling. ​

In the same way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them committed sexual ​

immorality and practiced perversions, just as angels did, and serve as an example by ​

undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:6-7​

Now, concerning angels, please keep this in mind!

Angel - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words​

​

Angel​

[ 1,,G32, angelos ]​

a messenger" (from angello, "to deliver a message"), sent whether by God or by man or by Satan, "is also used of a guardian or representative in Revelation 1:20, cp. Matthew 18:10; Acts 12:15 (where it is better understood as = 'ghost'), superior to man, Hebrews 2:7; Psalms 8:5, belonging to Heaven, Matthew 24:36; Mark 12:25, and to God, Luke 12:8, and engaged in His service, Psalms 103:20. "Angels" are spirits, Hebrews 1:14, i.e., they have not material bodies as men have; they are either human in form, or can assume the human form when necessary, cp. Luke 24:4, with Luke 24:23, Acts 10:3 with Acts 10:30.​

​

"They are called 'holy' in Mark 8:38, and 'elect,' 1 Timothy 5:21, in contrast with some of their original number, Matthew 25:41, who 'sinned,' 2 Peter 2:4, 'left their proper habitation,' Jude 1:6, oiketerion, a word which occurs again, in the NT, only in 2 Corinthians 5:2. Angels are always spoken of in the masculine gender, the feminine form of the word does not occur."* [* From Notes on Thessalonians, by Hogg and Vine, p. 229.] ​

​

Angels in the Bible are always in the masculine gender.

Not only that, we see in Genesis 6 those rebellious angels were capable of procreating sexually. There were no female angels created for them because Satan's rebellion called off God from blessing them with a mate.

What came of it? After watching Adam and the women in the garden having glorious sex it triggered their desire. Out of intense lust and frustration... homosexuality originated with them. Not with man.

Adam had finished his work assigned him and was blessed with his woman. The angels faced a horrible rebellion around Lucifer before their prehistoric work assigned by God could be finished. As a result, they were left (unknowingly) without a female counterpart. Adam finished his work assigned him before the Lord removed the rib from his side.

When Adam and the woman were displayed in all their glory in the garden having fantastic sexual relations God showed the angels what they were missing because the the rebellion that put a halt on such a blessing.

God's angels are fine, because of the grace given to them by God to be celibate. But, the arrogant proud fallen angels? They had their noses rubbed in the dirt after seeing what God would have given them if they did not assumed they could do better without God in their lives.

The fallen angels suffered from a sense of mega self sufficiency, needing God for nothing. That is why they fell. They deluded themselves to think they could create their own happiness for themselves without God.... That delusion was cut short by God once they got a gander on the likes of the beautiful women being born to man.. It triggered their latent sexuality and drove them insane with lust!

God's denial of giving them their own females infuriated them. But, they do not need God for their needs. Right? So they created their own substitutes. For example: The goddesses of the pagans were actually drag queen fallen angels! Weird stuff was coming out of the world of demonic megalomania. Inevitably, it then overflowed into the lives of men. (Romans 1:18-28)

enuf said................

 

[The Righterzpen]

People say the Nephilims are the giants whose fathers are angle that married women during those days.

This issue has always caused me to wonder how can an angle who is spirit, marry a woman who is flesh and have a baby.

I ask this question especially because Jesus explained in Luke 20:34-36 that those resurrected from the dead neither marry, nor are giving in marriage; that they are equal to the the angles and cannot die anymore.

So Jesus is saying the angels cannot marry nor be givin in marriage, and that they are spirit because they cannot die. So how can a spirit posses a fleshly male seed to produce a baby? Well according to Jesus that can’t happen.

Because there is a flesh and blood creation and there is a spiritual creation - angels, you can’t mix the two. Only a man made of flesh can have relations with a woman made of flesh.

So to understand what Genesis is saying we have to look at God’s creation of man and where the woman fit in.

God created man, not woman. Woman was made from a man that God had already created; from the rib of Adam - Adam was God’s creation, not Eve.

Genesis 6:1 says,….when men (God’s creation) began to multiply…and daughters were born unto them, 2 The sons of God saw the daughter of men…and took them wives…

The sons of God in Genesis 6:1-2 is God’s creation - man

The daughters of men are those women born who are patterned after Eve in creation.

The women could not be called the sons of God. They could only be called the daughters of men because as I pointed out earlier women were not created, they were made from an already existing creation - man. And it is man who holds the title sons of God. Women holds the title, daughters of men.

And although 2 Corinthians 6:18 says,
“And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty,” man’s position is still considered over the woman in title. This is why in 1 Corinthians 11:3 the man is the head of the woman, but Christ is the head of man.

You make an interesting point of Eve created out of Adam that I'd never thought of before: (in regards to "daughters of men"). Yet both Adam and Eve were stated to be created in the image of God.

I do agree with you that as God "made everything after it's own kind" that angels do not bear the capacity to reproduce materially. God is the author of life and I see no evidence whatsoever that He would have relinquished that authority to fallen angels. That would make no sense at all!

There are some interesting verses that add some nuance to what "giants" and "might men of renown" is probably referring to. And we certainly have the biological phenomena of giantism. Which isn't solely limited to humans. Which would raise the question that if one was simply arguing from "angel mating creates big things"; would that have included "Sons of God" participating in beastiality. For we know from humans who may even attempt hybrid species in a laboratory; no one has ever proven a credible combination of man and beast hybrid. The difference in genetics just prevents that from happening. Thus everything "made after it's own kind".

Now knowing that God has been "kind of tricky" in how He wrote the Bible. This has certainly led to people coming to faulty conclusions for their not taking the whole body of Scripture into account when considering a doctrinal position.

So though we know angels can't produce material being "hybrids" with humans; though there is some evidence of "spiritual" offspring. Jesus told the pharisees they were "of their father the devil". There's also a passage that describes Judas as "a devil". Now obviously these individuals were 100% the offspring of Adam. They were fully biologically human. But were they spiritually "born of wickedness". That seems to be the implication from the statements made.

Now there's an interesting couple of verses in Numbers 16 which talk about "men of renown". In this story, a group of clerics are swallowed up by the earth for opposing Moses's authority. Those clerics were described as "men of renown". In other words; they were religious leaders; who were trying to supplant the authority of God's appointed prophet.

Now combining some concepts from Job and Genesis; plus a couple of passages from the NT. We know there are angelic entities (demons) who's transgression has caused them to be reserved in chains who's interactions have somehow affected the human race. Job does call them "sons of God". Though I think a distinction needs to be made between "Sons of God" prior to fall and "sons of god" post fall. After all, Satan is called "the god of this world". So just as Adam has forfeited his rightful position as head of creation; apparently fallen angels are now "the sons of god" As opposed to "the Sons of God".

Of course, not to be confused with the fact that once Adam was created; humanity now "out ranks" angels.

So now if there's been some "collaborative efforts" between human agents and demons; what does that become?
Personally, what I think happened with "the Nephilim incident" was that human parents bearing human children, entered into "a deal" with demonic forces, so as their children could attain knowledge from these demons outside of the natural progression of how humanity naturally advances.

Jude 1 does talk about demons; Sodom and Gomorra and "strange flesh". The human reference there is homosexuality. These demons proposed an agreement that was void of the capacity to produce biological offspring of their own; but using the human parents as surrogates; the goal was to "infect" the human race with "viral knowledge" that was intended to (probably) somehow corrupt the path of the Messiah. Which if this is true; that makes some sense as to why the necessity for Christ to be conceived by the Holy Spirit. Now there's other theological reasons why that was necessary; but one application of "Sons of God / sons of god" - "daughters of men" which could very well mean spiritually corrupt (besides just "plain fallen in sin") humans (who become clerics) and propagate demonic religion.

Not that humanity doesn't suffer from our own natural proclivity toward wickedness; but there seems to be an added layer here.

So anyways that's the conclusion I've come to, doing some study on this stuff.

 

[Job 33:6]

Satan and his angels rebelled during prehistoric times.

In the Satanic rebellion two thirds of the angels stayed with the Lord. Only one third went with Lucifer.
As we even see today some men make a choice based solely upon where the majority wants to be. The true
issue is not the issue in that case. That way, some angels who not truly for the Lord could choose only because
of the majority opinion. Jesus does not want people following Him on that basis, but on how we perceive
Him as He is to the person.

In Genesis 6 we find certain angels who went with the majority opinion of angels, but were still not with God 100% in their hearts.

These angels at the time for deciding between the Lord and Lucifer decided to stay with the Lord, not because they loved the Lord so much. But they saw that a majority was formed, and they chose based upon the safety in numbers.

The Lord always knew these angels' hearts were not with Him in a right way for the right reason.

So, in Genesis 6? The Lord exposed their hearts and weeded them out. They failed the test and took the beautiful women that
were forbidden otherwise by God. They are not like the regular fallen angels that stayed with Satan. That is why they have their own special prison separate from the other fallen angels.

And He has kept, with eternal chains in darkness for the judgment of the great day ​

the angels who did not keep their own position but deserted their proper dwelling. ​

In the same way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them committed sexual ​

immorality and practiced perversions, just as angels did, and serve as an example by ​

undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." Jude 1:6-7​

Now, concerning angels, please keep this in mind!

Angel - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words​

​

Angel​

[ 1,,G32, angelos ]​

a messenger" (from angello, "to deliver a message"), sent whether by God or by man or by Satan, "is also used of a guardian or representative in Revelation 1:20, cp. Matthew 18:10; Acts 12:15 (where it is better understood as = 'ghost'), superior to man, Hebrews 2:7; Psalms 8:5, belonging to Heaven, Matthew 24:36; Mark 12:25, and to God, Luke 12:8, and engaged in His service, Psalms 103:20. "Angels" are spirits, Hebrews 1:14, i.e., they have not material bodies as men have; they are either human in form, or can assume the human form when necessary, cp. Luke 24:4, with Luke 24:23, Acts 10:3 with Acts 10:30.​

​

"They are called 'holy' in Mark 8:38, and 'elect,' 1 Timothy 5:21, in contrast with some of their original number, Matthew 25:41, who 'sinned,' 2 Peter 2:4, 'left their proper habitation,' Jude 1:6, oiketerion, a word which occurs again, in the NT, only in 2 Corinthians 5:2. Angels are always spoken of in the masculine gender, the feminine form of the word does not occur."* [* From Notes on Thessalonians, by Hogg and Vine, p. 229.] ​

​

Angels in the Bible are always in the masculine gender.

Not only that, we see in Genesis 6 those rebellious angels were capable of procreating sexually. There were no female angels created for them because Satan's rebellion called off God from blessing them with a mate.

What came of it? After watching Adam and the women in the garden having glorious sex it triggered their desire. Out of intense lust and frustration... homosexuality originated with them. Not with man.

Adam had finished his work assigned him and was blessed with his woman. The angels faced a horrible rebellion around Lucifer before their prehistoric work assigned by God could be finished. As a result, they were left (unknowingly) without a female counterpart. Adam finished his work assigned him before the Lord removed the rib from his side.

When Adam and the woman were displayed in all their glory in the garden having fantastic sexual relations God showed the angels what they were missing because the the rebellion that put a halt on such a blessing.

God's angels are fine, because of the grace given to them by God to be celibate. But, the arrogant proud fallen angels? They had their noses rubbed in the dirt after seeing what God would have given them if they did not assumed they could do better without God in their lives.

The fallen angels suffered from a sense of mega self sufficiency, needing God for nothing. That is why they fell. They deluded themselves to think they could create their own happiness for themselves without God.... That delusion was cut short by God once they got a gander on the likes of the beautiful women being born to man.. It triggered their latent sexuality and drove them insane with lust!

God's denial of giving them their own females infuriated them. But, they do not need God for their needs. Right? So they created their own substitutes. For example: The goddesses of the pagans were actually drag queen fallen angels! Weird stuff was coming out of the world of demonic megalomania. Inevitably, it then overflowed into the lives of men. (Romans 1:18-28)

enuf said................

None of the passages that I quoted are in relation to Satan's rebellion. They're in relation to the rebellion of the sons of God. A parallel of the mesopotamian apkallu.

This is why Jude quotes Enoch, and why the rebellion is referenced in relation to Noah, and why the rebellion occurs right before the flood. Because it's telling the same or nearly identical narrative as the rebellion of the mesopotamian apkallu. And this all has nothing to do with Satan.

The sons of God were some 200 angels that rebelled, took and oath and descended upon mount hernon. They taught mankind divinations and about technology. They also took human women and conceived the nephelim. And before anyone says that humans can't have children with supernatural beings, just look at what happened with Jesus. And in ancient times this was a common belief, that spirits would enter the body of a human host and then breed with another human, resulting in a child that is 1/3 male, 1/3 female, and 1/3 angel.

 

[GenemZ]

None of the passages that I quoted are in relation to Satan's rebellion. They're in relation to the rebellion of the sons of God.

Satan used to be an unfallen angel. Sons of God were angels who were about to fall in Genesis 6.

That's what I was covering.

 

[biblelesson]

You make an interesting point of Eve created out of Adam that I'd never thought of before: (in regards to "daughters of men"). Yet both Adam and Eve were stated to be created in the image of God.

I do agree with you that as God "made everything after it's own kind" that angels do not bear the capacity to reproduce materially. God is the author of life and I see no evidence whatsoever that He would have relinquished that authority to fallen angels. That would make no sense at all!

There are some interesting verses that add some nuance to what "giants" and "might men of renown" is probably referring to. And we certainly have the biological phenomena of giantism. Which isn't solely limited to humans. Which would raise the question that if one was simply arguing from "angel mating creates big things"; would that have included "Sons of God" participating in inappropriate behavior with animals. For we know from humans who may even attempt hybrid species in a laboratory; no one has ever proven a credible combination of man and beast hybrid. The difference in genetics just prevents that from happening. Thus everything "made after it's own kind".

Now knowing that God has been "kind of tricky" in how He wrote the Bible. This has certainly led to people coming to faulty conclusions for their not taking the whole body of Scripture into account when considering a doctrinal position.

So though we know angels can't produce material being "hybrids" with humans; though there is some evidence of "spiritual" offspring. Jesus told the pharisees they were "of their father the devil". There's also a passage that describes Judas as "a devil". Now obviously these individuals were 100% the offspring of Adam. They were fully biologically human. But were they spiritually "born of wickedness". That seems to be the implication from the statements made.

Now there's an interesting couple of verses in Numbers 16 which talk about "men of renown". In this story, a group of clerics are swallowed up by the earth for opposing Moses's authority. Those clerics were described as "men of renown". In other words; they were religious leaders; who were trying to supplant the authority of God's appointed prophet.

Now combining some concepts from Job and Genesis; plus a couple of passages from the NT. We know there are angelic entities (demons) who's transgression has caused them to be reserved in chains who's interactions have somehow affected the human race. Job does call them "sons of God". Though I think a distinction needs to be made between "Sons of God" prior to fall and "sons of god" post fall. After all, Satan is called "the god of this world". So just as Adam has forfeited his rightful position as head of creation; apparently fallen angels are now "the sons of god" As opposed to "the Sons of God".

Of course, not to be confused with the fact that once Adam was created; humanity now "out ranks" angels.

So now if there's been some "collaborative efforts" between human agents and demons; what does that become?
Personally, what I think happened with "the Nephilim incident" was that human parents bearing human children, entered into "a deal" with demonic forces, so as their children could attain knowledge from these demons outside of the natural progression of how humanity naturally advances.

Jude 1 does talk about demons; Sodom and Gomorra and "strange flesh". The human reference there is homosexuality. These demons proposed an agreement that was void of the capacity to produce biological offspring of their own; but using the human parents as surrogates; the goal was to "infect" the human race with "viral knowledge" that was intended to (probably) somehow corrupt the path of the Messiah. Which if this is true; that makes some sense as to why the necessity for Christ to be conceived by the Holy Spirit. Now there's other theological reasons why that was necessary; but one application of "Sons of God / sons of god" - "daughters of men" which could very well mean spiritually corrupt (besides just "plain fallen in sin") humans (who become clerics) and propagate demonic religion.

Not that humanity doesn't suffer from our own natural proclivity toward wickedness; but there seems to be an added layer here.

So anyways that's the conclusion I've come to, doing some study on this stuff.

Another scriptures that identifies Adam as the son of God is Luke 3:38 KJV, which the genealogy of Jesus traces all the way back to creation, Luke 3:23-38 KJV. So in Genesis 6:2 KJV these sons of God were men born and were populating the earth, just as daughters were being born, thus called the daughters of men. The verse was not saying these men in Genesis 6:2 KJV were giants. The verse was speaking about the earth being populated and the sons of God marrying the daughters of men - men and women being born and marrying. Look closely at the scripture. It is not until two verses later that the Bible speaks of giants in the earth, men of renown, Genesis 6:4 KJV. However, when the men who were giants married the daughters of men, their children became mighty men, men of renown. The Bible says “the same became mighty men which were of old” Why would the Bible say which were of old? Well if you look at mighty men who hold status in a land and have children, that same statue is handed down to their children, and what they inherit would be of old, or goes back from the beginning of their line.

So these may not have been overly tall giant men at all in Genesis.

Renown means a state of being widely known and highly honored.
Giants in Genesis 6:2 KJV could simply mean mighty men with some sort of status, men of high honor.

 

[biblelesson]

Yet both Adam and Eve were stated to be created in the image of God.

They were. Male and female created he them, Genesis 1:27 KJV, So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Look at the scripture closely. God created “man” in his own image. The scripture now repeats “in the image of God created He him; then after the creation of man, the scripture now says male and female created he them.

First the scripture says God created man in his own image, and repeats to show man was God’s creation. Woman was made from God’s creation. After the woman was created from man, the bible makes the separation in the sexes - male and female created he them.

Genesis 5:1-3 KJV.
1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

God called their name Adam because the woman was made from Adam. God brought “her” to Adam to name.

Here is something else, Genesis 5:3 KJV, And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:

Considering the above scripture, male children are born in the image of their fathers who are born in the image of God. Female children are not born in the image of their fathers, and are not born in the image of God. They are born daughters of men. Which is why in a marriage, Christ is the head of the man, but man is the head of the woman, 1 Corinthians 11:3 KJV, But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

 

[The Righterzpen]

So in Genesis 6:2 KJV these sons of God were men born and were populating the earth, just as daughters were being born, thus called the daughters of men.

Yet if you look at Genesis 6:1; it already makes the statement that men began to multiply on the face of the earth. So to say "sons of God" simply means "male humans" is a redundant statement from Genesis 6:1. Thus "sons of God" has to mean something other than just "male humans".

Some have suggested that "sons of God" means the redeemed as opposed to the unredeemed. Which sounds good except for the first redeemed of human men named is not Adam, it's Abel. (Matthew 23:35) Thus we'd have to reconcile why Luke calls Adam "the son of God". I just looked that up and actually "son of" is not in the Greek. It's simply supplied by understanding that person X's lineage is from person Y. So a more accurate translation of Luke 1 would be "who was of Enos, who was of Seth, who was of Adam, who was of God".

Look closely at the scripture. It is not until two verses later that the Bible speaks of giants in the earth, men of renown, Genesis 6:4 KJV.

Genesis 6:4 says right in the passage "sons of God". So what your saying here isn't correct. The "giants in the earth" and "men of renown" were the direct results of the "sons of God". Now I don't think Genesis 6:4 is talking about "giants" as in "physically large humans". The phrase "giants in the earth" is qualified by the phrase "men of renown". "Men of renown" were cleric religious leaders. We get that piece of the puzzle out of Numbers 16. Which "were of old". This makes sense, going back in history; clerics were the sons of clerics. This is still true today.

Now go back to the hypothesis I posed about this human / demonic collaboration to bring into the human religious experience demonic knowledge. (I.E - "of your father the devil") The intent of demonic religion is to worship Satan. Thus the whole idea of what we'd loosely term "gnostic religion". (Gnostic means "secrete knowledge".)

The first Scriptural record of this in the people God gave written Scripture to; is the golden calf. And obviously as we get on between Moses and Jesus; we see two lines of religious beliefs. There's Biblical religion and than theres the copy cat. The copy cat is Satanic. We see this thread all the way through Scripture. It's "of old". Meaning; goes all the way back to Cain.

Now who was born first Cain or Abel; I don't know the answer to that. But if Cain was the first born; that wouldn't surprise me because Adam not being redeemed himself could only produce children who are spiritually dead. Thus to say "sons of God" ultimately comes to mean the elect is consistent and makes sense. Besides the fact that the only offspring humans can create are those who are spiritually dead. It's only through the atonement does one become spiritually alive.

Considering the above scripture, male children are born in the image of their fathers who are born in the image of God. Female children are not born in the image of their fathers, and are not born in the image of God. They are born daughters of men. Which is why in a marriage, Christ is the head of the man, but man is the head of the woman, 1 Corinthians 11:3 KJV, But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

To say that human females aren't created in the image of God would be to negate the incarnation. And if you negate the incarnation; you've just excluded all male humans from the possibility of redemption. Because Jesus is not the seed of Adam.

Then you have Galatians 3:28. In Christ there's no male or female.

So if Christ has supplanted Adam as the Head of the lineage of the redeemed. The head of the church is Christ. "She" is the "bride". Yet "she" isn't composed of only female humans. Thus why both Adam and Eve were created in God's image. The image of God Adam was created in, was the image of Christ. This is why Jesus was incarnated as a human male; yet was still not the seed of Adam. This is only possible because both Adam and Eve are considered "man" "created in God's image".

And here's where your assertion that Eve only created in the image of Adam falls short too. By default because Eve came from Adam; she would also have to be created in the image of God. And that thread would run through the incarnation. If Jesus had produced literal children; they also would have been God incarnate. And materially speaking, obviously Jesus was capable of doing that. Thus the "sons of God" and "daughters of men". The theme is the same. Jesus could have picked a human wife to have human children; but he chose not to do that because it would not have served the purpose of the atonement.

The atonement negates the position of Satanic religions that Satan holds over all the descendants of Adam; both male and female. Adam as a consequence of the fall became a slave to Satan. Satan is the "god of this world". So thus we have "sons of God" and we have "sons of god".

Both God and god are "spiritual" Father / father of humanity. But because god (Satan) can't produce material life; the power of death can be broken by the One who can produce material life. Thus the "breath of life" comes from God. Now if Jesus had his own wife created out of his own body; such as was the case with Adam. That would have been a pointless endeavor because God has no need to prove to Himself that He can obey His own law. And this is why Jesus never produced material children.

 

[biblelesson]

Yet if you look at Genesis 6:1; it already makes the statement that men began to multiply on the face of the earth. So to say "sons of God" simply means "male humans" is a redundant statement from Genesis 6:1. Thus "sons of God" has to mean something other than just "male humans".

Some have suggested that "sons of God" means the redeemed as opposed to the unredeemed. Which sounds good except for the first redeemed of human men named is not Adam, it's Abel. (Matthew 23:35) Thus we'd have to reconcile why Luke calls Adam "the son of God". I just looked that up and actually "son of" is not in the Greek. It's simply supplied by understanding that person X's lineage is from person Y. So a more accurate translation of Luke 1 would be "who was of Enos, who was of Seth, who was of Adam, who was of God".

Genesis 6:4 says right in the passage "sons of God". So what your saying here isn't correct. The "giants in the earth" and "men of renown" were the direct results of the "sons of God". Now I don't think Genesis 6:4 is talking about "giants" as in "physically large humans". The phrase "giants in the earth" is qualified by the phrase "men of renown". "Men of renown" were cleric religious leaders. We get that piece of the puzzle out of Numbers 16. Which "were of old". This makes sense, going back in history; clerics were the sons of clerics. This is still true today.

Now go back to the hypothesis I posed about this human / demonic collaboration to bring into the human religious experience demonic knowledge. (I.E - "of your father the devil") The intent of demonic religion is to worship Satan. Thus the whole idea of what we'd loosely term "gnostic religion". (Gnostic means "secrete knowledge".)

The first Scriptural record of this in the people God gave written Scripture to; is the golden calf. And obviously as we get on between Moses and Jesus; we see two lines of religious beliefs. There's Biblical religion and than theres the copy cat. The copy cat is Satanic. We see this thread all the way through Scripture. It's "of old". Meaning; goes all the way back to Cain.

Now who was born first Cain or Abel; I don't know the answer to that. But if Cain was the first born; that wouldn't surprise me because Adam not being redeemed himself could only produce children who are spiritually dead. Thus to say "sons of God" ultimately comes to mean the elect is consistent and makes sense. Besides the fact that the only offspring humans can create are those who are spiritually dead. It's only through the atonement does one become spiritually alive.

To say that human females aren't created in the image of God would be to negate the incarnation. And if you negate the incarnation; you've just excluded all male humans from the possibility of redemption. Because Jesus is not the seed of Adam.

Then you have Galatians 3:28. In Christ there's no male or female.

So if Christ has supplanted Adam as the Head of the lineage of the redeemed. The head of the church is Christ. "She" is the "bride". Yet "she" isn't composed of only female humans. Thus why both Adam and Eve were created in God's image. The image of God Adam was created in, was the image of Christ. This is why Jesus was incarnated as a human male; yet was still not the seed of Adam. This is only possible because both Adam and Eve are considered "man" "created in God's image".

And here's where your assertion that Eve only created in the image of Adam falls short too. By default because Eve came from Adam; she would also have to be created in the image of God. And that thread would run through the incarnation. If Jesus had produced literal children; they also would have been God incarnate. And materially speaking, obviously Jesus was capable of doing that. Thus the "sons of God" and "daughters of men". The theme is the same. Jesus could have picked a human wife to have human children; but he chose not to do that because it would not have served the purpose of the atonement.

The atonement negates the position of Satanic religions that Satan holds over all the descendants of Adam; both male and female. Adam as a consequence of the fall became a slave to Satan. Satan is the "god of this world". So thus we have "sons of God" and we have "sons of god".

Both God and god are "spiritual" Father / father of humanity. But because god (Satan) can't produce material life; the power of death can be broken by the One who can produce material life. Thus the "breath of life" comes from God. Now if Jesus had his own wife created out of his own body; such as was the case with Adam. That would have been a pointless endeavor because God has no need to prove to Himself that He can obey His own law. And this is why Jesus never produced material children.

We have different opinions about the subject.

 

[biblelesson]

Yet if you look at Genesis 6:1; it already makes the statement that men began to multiply on the face of the earth. So to say "sons of God" simply means "male humans" is a redundant statement from Genesis 6:1. Thus "sons of God" has to mean something other than just "male humans"

Men in Genesis 6:1 KJV, are the same sons of God in Genesis 6:2 KJV. It’s not redundant. The distinction is in being made between sons of God and daughters of men in verse 2.

And here's where your assertion that Eve only created in the image of Adam falls short too. By default because Eve came from Adam; she would also have to be created in the image of God

I never said Eve was created in the image of Adam. I said Eve was made from man who was created in the image of God. Woman was not created in the image of God, woman was created as part of man that had already been created.

For the sake of argument, could woman have been made before man? No! Why? Because man had to be created first. Why? Because it’s man that was created in God’s image, not woman, or else woman would not have needed man to be created.

You can’t say woman was created in the image of God. You can’t say they both were created in the image of God. You can only say man was created in the image of God and woman was made as part of man’s creation.

 

[biblelesson]

And here's where your assertion that Eve only created in the image of Adam falls short too. By default because Eve came from Adam; she would also have to be created in the image of God. And that thread would run through the incarnation. If Jesus had produced literal children; they also would have been God incarnate. And materially speaking, obviously Jesus was capable of doing that. Thus the "sons of God" and "daughters of men". The theme is the same. Jesus could have picked a human wife to have human children; but he chose not to do that because it would not have served the purpose of the atonement.

Your point about the incarnation is not clear. Jesus was not born from a male seed like those born on the earth or else he could not have atoned for our sins. Jesus was not from the seed of Adam like all other human beings. Jesus was born in the likeness of sinful flesh from an holy seed; Jesus was born of the Holy Ghost, that is God’s seed. God’s seed fertilized Mary’s eggs and produced Jesus. With Jesus being God and man, I don’t believe he could have married.

 

[The Righterzpen]

We have different opinions about the subject.

What standing you have to disagree; (other than your own opinion) I don't know? What the passage itself states is pretty clear. "Sons of God" are named in the passage as when the "daughters of men" bore "giants" of "great renown". The passage says "sons of God" It doesn't say "men". It's making a distinction between verse 2 and verse 1.

You can’t say woman was created in the image of God. You can’t say they both were created in the image of God. You can only say man was created in the image of God and woman was made as part of man’s creation.

Yes you can. Because Scripture is very clear; that Adam and Eve were created in God's image.
Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. "Man" is "male and female" "Created He them" (Plural = two individuals) Not that Adam "just had a feminine side". "Man" is male and female. "Man" is "created in God's image".

If female humans were not created in the image of God; than God would not have to have made Adam a helper. He could have had a none human helper. But no animal was suitable as a helper for Adam.

Your point about the incarnation is not clear.

Maybe you should go back and reread what I wrote.

Because humanity was created in the image of God; the redeemer had to be incarnated in the likeness of a human being. And in order to be "born of a woman". Women would have to be included in the "image of God" that "man" was created in.

God’s seed fertilized Mary’s eggs and produced Jesus.

No, actually if you go take a really close look at the Greek; that isn't what happened either. Gabriel actually explains to Mary that the Holy Spirit is going to use her "stock". Today we call the "stock" of an organism it's chromosomes. All life has chromosomes. The "blueprint" of every living organism is it's DNA.

An egg before it's fertilized actually has all 46 chromosomes. God did not have to contribute genetic material to Jesus's flesh. He took the chromosomes that were present and "reconverted" the XX into and XY. Which is actually the reverse of what happened genetically with Eve. This is how Jesus was "fully human". Jesus was in essence a genetic male clone of his mother. Now obviously as the Creator of life; the Holy Spirit was able to reconstitute the genetics present to create a male human body.

Now why you think Jesus couldn't have gotten married; I don't know? Being both God and man is not what would have prevented that. After all if God can be incarnated as a human being; he could also get married and produce children. "Be fruitful and multiply" was actually the first command given to all of creation. So Jesus would not have been left without that capacity; nor was he left without that desire either.

He actually makes a reference to this in Matthew 19:12. Here's another one that's really fascinating to look at in the Greek.

This is literally what it says:
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: (but) one has made himself a eunuch in order to reign in the Kingdom of God. He empowered by God, who restrains him, let him continue in this command."

Now who reigns in the Kingdom of God but Christ. That could apply to no other human but him. And the rest of the verse says that Jesus is "empowered by God who restrains him"... the command that he's "let to continue in" is "be fruitful and multiply". He does that; he just doesn't do it in the flesh. He forsook that option for the sake of the atonement. Yet that option was his choice to forsake. So it wasn't that he couldn't have gotten married. It was just on account of the accomplishment of the atonement; he chose not to.

 

[biblelesson]

What standing you have to disagree; (other than your own opinion) I don't know? What the passage itself states is pretty clear. "Sons of God" are named in the passage as when the "daughters of men" bore "giants" of "great renown". The passage says "sons of God" It doesn't say "men". It's making

There is no argument her, just two diffrent opinions. I see men in Genesis 6:1 KJV the same as sons of God in Genesis 6:2 KJV. I see the giant, men of renown, in Genesis 6:4 KJV as part of the men in verse 1, who are populating the earth, who are called the sons of God verse 2. I don’t choose to make more out of the verses than what they are saying.

Yes you can. Because Scripture is very clear; that Adam and Eve were created in God's image.
Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. "Man" is "male and female" "Created He them" (Plural = two individuals) Not that Adam "just had a feminine side". "Man" is male and female. "Man" is "created in God's image"

Adam and Eve were not created in God’s image. Adam was. You are reading the scripture without considering why “created he him” is identified before “created he them.” What’s the significance of identifying him before them?

If female humans were not created in the image of God; than God would not have to have made Adam a helper. He could have had a none human helper. But no animal was suitable as a helper for Adam.

Your statement here doesn’t lead to the ability to reason what you are saying. It’s not clear.

You are forgetting that God put the man who he had created in his image to sleep and took his rib to make woman. She came out of man. How is this hard to understand, that she could not have been made in the image of God and the Bible does not say this. The Bible says “in the image of God created he him”, but then says “male and female created he them” because woman was taken from man that was in the image of God already. Woman is not made in man’s image, she is part of man’s image that is God’s image. It’s like creating something out of something that already exist.

o, actually if you go take a really close look at the Greek; that isn't what happened either. Gabriel actually explains to Mary that the Holy Spirit is going to use her "stock". Today we call the "stock" of an organism it's chromosomes. All life has chromosomes. The "blueprint" of every living organism is it's DNA.

An egg before it's fertilized actually has all 46 chromosomes. God did not have to contribute genetic material to Jesus's flesh. He took the chromosomes that were present and "reconverted" the XX into and XY. Which is actually the reverse of what happened genetically with Eve. This is how Jesus was "fully human". Jesus was in essence a genetic male clone of his mother. Now obviously as the Creator of life; the Holy Spirit was able to reconstitute the genetics present to create a male human body.

As far as how exactly Jesus birth was accomplished by the Holy Spirit, I can’t say. But in Luke 1:31 KJV, Mary was told by the angel Gabriel, “And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.”
What I do know is in order for a baby to be conceived, a female egg has to be fertilized with a male seed, and without a male seed in Jesus’s case, the fertilization process or conception process had to have taken place through God’s holy seed.

There is nothing that says Jesus’s body was a clone of Mary’s body, nor does the Bible say the Holy Spirit reconstructed the genetics to create a male human body by altering the chromosomes.

Now why you think Jesus couldn't have gotten married; I don't know? Being both God and man is not what would have prevented that. After all if God can be incarnated as a human being; he could also get married and produce children. "Be fruitful and multiply" was actually the first command given to all of creation. So Jesus would not have been left without that capacity; nor was he left without that desire either.

You have to hear what the scripture tells us about Jesus. He came in the likeness of sinful flesh, Roman’s 8:3 KJV. Although you can argue Jesus was a clone of Mary, that’s not true. We may not know how this was accomplished by the Holy Spirit, but Mary’s egg was actually fertilized by a seed, that is, God’s seed to start the life process.

How can we determine God’s chromosomes. We can only determine the chromosomes Jesus inherited from Mary.

Now why you think Jesus couldn't have gotten married; I don't know? Being both God and man is not what would have prevented that. After all if God can be incarnated as a human being; he could also get married and produce children. "Be fruitful and multiply" was actually the first command given to all of creation. So Jesus would not have been left without that capacity; nor was he left without that desire either.

He actually makes a reference to this in Matthew 19:12. Here's another one that's really fascinating to look at in the Greek.

I do think Jesus could not marry being God and man.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

People say the Nephilims are the giants whose fathers are angle that married women during those days.

This issue has always caused me to wonder how can an angle who is spirit, marry a woman who is flesh and have a baby.

I ask this question especially because Jesus explained in Luke 20:34-36 that those resurrected from the dead neither marry, nor are giving in marriage; that they are equal to the the angles and cannot die anymore.

So Jesus is saying the angels cannot marry nor be givin in marriage, and that they are spirit because they cannot die. So how can a spirit posses a fleshly male seed to produce a baby? Well according to Jesus that can’t happen.

Because there is a flesh and blood creation and there is a spiritual creation - angels, you can’t mix the two. Only a man made of flesh can have relations with a woman made of flesh.

So to understand what Genesis is saying we have to look at God’s creation of man and where the woman fit in.

God created man, not woman. Woman was made from a man that God had already created; from the rib of Adam - Adam was God’s creation, not Eve.

Genesis 6:1 says,….when men (God’s creation) began to multiply…and daughters were born unto them, 2 The sons of God saw the daughter of men…and took them wives…

The sons of God in Genesis 6:1-2 is God’s creation - man

The daughters of men are those women born who are patterned after Eve in creation.

The women could not be called the sons of God. They could only be called the daughters of men because as I pointed out earlier women were not created, they were made from an already existing creation - man. And it is man who holds the title sons of God. Women holds the title, daughters of men.

And although 2 Corinthians 6:18 says,
“And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty,” man’s position is still considered over the woman in title. This is why in 1 Corinthians 11:3 the man is the head of the woman, but Christ is the head of man.

I believe the Giants or the Nephilim mentioned in the Bible are fallen angels that mated with the daughters of men.

#1. Angels can appear as men (Genesis 18:2) and can even eat food (Genesis 18:8).
#2. Sons of God is referred to as angels elsewhere in the Old Testament (Job 1:6) (Job 2:1) (Jon 38:7) and sons of God is never referred to as believers until the New Testament. Granted, even in the NT, John 1:12 references believers as been given power to be sons of God (i.e., angels - in the resurrection).
#3. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. (Genesis 3:15). Satan has a seed and it will be at enmity (hostile) between the woman’s seed. Funny how it does not say the seed of man but the seed of the woman. The seed of the woman will be at hostility with the seed of Satan as a result of the Nephilim. Satan’s plan was to try and corrupt humanity so as to prevent the Messiah from coming.
#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 to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. (Genesis 6:4). Giants in the earth after the flood would not really be all that unique of a statement if they simply were solely of Noah’s family. It would simply mention how the giants came out of a particular individual from on the Ark. But there is no genealogy mentioned here. This suggests that these giants are not normal humans.
#5. “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;” (2 Peter 2:4-5). This talks about the angels that sinned during the time of Noah and the flood. As a result, they would eventually face chains of darkness for becoming human and mating with the daughters of men. Fallen angels are still amongst us today. So this is talking about a specific group of angels that sinned as a result of unnatural sex (Which aligns with what happened at Sodom and Gomorrah in the fact that there was another kind of unnatural sex that took place there).
#6. “And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.” (Jude 1:6). This verse would be an enigma or mystery unless one believes the Bible’s teaching on the Nephilim. This again is followed up by mentioning the mention of Sodom. Jude 1:7 says, “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh,“. This again harkens back to a similar thing that the angels did (i.e., unnatural sex involving strange flesh).
#7. Israelites were told by God to wipe out (kill) Giants. Og, king of Bashan was a giant. “For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man.” (Deuteronomy 3:11). Yet, God had the Israelites take him down (Deuteronomy 3:1-3). This was no doubt to protect the line of the Messiah.
#8. Israelites were like grasshoppers in the sight of the giants in Canaan. So they were unnaturally huge and this suggests they were not entirely human (although the sons of God were human enough to mate with the daughters of men).
#9. Six fingers on the hands and toes of giants (Suggesting a hybrid corruption) 1 Samuel 21:20 says, “And there was yet a battle in Gath, where was a man of great stature, that had on every hand six fingers, and on every foot six toes, four and twenty in number; and he also was born to the giant.”
#10. Goliath was a famous giant and fought David, and was killed. No giants are said to ever be good in the Bible, but they were oddly wiped out or killed. This suggests that they are unnatural hybrids, who are against God’s natural order.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Adam and Eve were not created in God’s image. Adam was. You are reading the scripture without considering why “created he him” is identified before “created he them.” What’s the significance of identifying him before them?

How do you explain that the text states "...him; male and female" before "them".
Now go back one verse.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

The Hebrew verb "let (them) have" is plural. Not singular.

On top of this; what do you do with Galatians 3:28?

You are choosing to ignore what Scripture says. Why is it you want to believe that women are not created in God's image? That sounds pretty misogynistic to me.

You are forgetting that God put the man who he had created in his image to sleep and took his rib to make woman. She came out of man. How is this hard to understand, that she could not have been made in the image of God and the Bible does not say this. The Bible says “in the image of God created he him”, but then says “male and female created he them” because woman was taken from man that was in the image of God already. Woman is not made in man’s image, she is part of man’s image that is God’s image. It’s like creating something out of something that already exist.

But if the something already created is created in God's image than why would you assume the something created out of the first entity would not also be created in God's image? How's your wife feel about "not being created in God's image"? That ideology has been used in history to justify oppressing women.

There is nothing that says Jesus’s body was a clone of Mary’s body, nor does the Bible say the Holy Spirit reconstructed the genetics to create a male human body by altering the chromosomes.

How do you know; when you didn't look at the Greek? Mary says to the angel. "How is this possible when I've known no man?" Gabriel explains to her. At the end of Luke 1:35 he says "... the holy thing that shall be born of you" The root of that word born is also translated "kind", "kindred", "offspring", "nation", "stock", "born" and "diversity". I.E. "the holy thing that comes forth from your stock. What "stock" does Mary have other than her DNA?

You have to hear what the scripture tells us about Jesus. He came in the likeness of sinful flesh, Roman’s 8:3 KJV. Although you can argue Jesus was a clone of Mary, that’s not true. We may not know how this was accomplished by the Holy Spirit, but Mary’s egg was actually fertilized by a seed, that is, God’s seed to start the life process.

Nothing in Luke says anything about God's "seed" fertilizing Mary. Galatians 3:16 states that the seed of God is Christ. John 12:24 Jesus describes himself as the kernel of wheat (the seed) that has to go into the ground. That it may bear fruit.

I do think Jesus could not marry being God and man.

Why not?

 

[Job 33:6]

Satan used to be an unfallen angel. Sons of God were angels who were about to fall in Genesis 6.

That's what I was covering.

Ok, well the rebellion of the sons of God says nothing with relation to the rebellion of Satan. The Bible doesn't suggest that these are the same events, though I would agree that Satan and the sons of God are all elohim.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

People say the Nephilims are the giants whose fathers are angle that married women during those days.

This issue has always caused me to wonder how can an angle who is spirit, marry a woman who is flesh and have a baby.

I ask this question especially because Jesus explained in Luke 20:34-36 that those resurrected from the dead neither marry, nor are giving in marriage; that they are equal to the the angles and cannot die anymore.

So Jesus is saying the angels cannot marry nor be givin in marriage, and that they are spirit because they cannot die. So how can a spirit posses a fleshly male seed to produce a baby? Well according to Jesus that can’t happen.

Because there is a flesh and blood creation and there is a spiritual creation - angels, you can’t mix the two. Only a man made of flesh can have relations with a woman made of flesh.

So to understand what Genesis is saying we have to look at God’s creation of man and where the woman fit in.

God created man, not woman. Woman was made from a man that God had already created; from the rib of Adam - Adam was God’s creation, not Eve.

Genesis 6:1 says,….when men (God’s creation) began to multiply…and daughters were born unto them, 2 The sons of God saw the daughter of men…and took them wives…

The sons of God in Genesis 6:1-2 is God’s creation - man

The daughters of men are those women born who are patterned after Eve in creation.

The women could not be called the sons of God. They could only be called the daughters of men because as I pointed out earlier women were not created, they were made from an already existing creation - man. And it is man who holds the title sons of God. Women holds the title, daughters of men.

And although 2 Corinthians 6:18 says,
“And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty,” man’s position is still considered over the woman in title. This is why in 1 Corinthians 11:3 the man is the head of the woman, but Christ is the head of man.

Jude 1:6 KJV
”And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.”

The Berean Literal Bible says,

”And the angels not having kept their own domain, but having abandoned the own dwelling, He keeps in eternal chains under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day;” (Jude 1:6) (BLB).

We see a punishment for what they did here by leaving their own domain (Note: These could have been good angels who rebelled after the fall of man to be with human females. So they left Heaven as a result of this sin. The other possibility of the angels leaving their own domain could be referring to the pre-existing fallen angels moving beyond the spirit realm by mating with human females and creating demon / human offspring.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The idea of the Nephilim is not a pretty one. Folks do not tend to believe in fire breathing dragons, either.
Yet, the Bible talks about one in the book of Job. If it is too freaky, don’t believe it, right?

 

[biblelesson]

How do you explain that the text states "...him; male and female" before "them".
Now go back one verse.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

The Hebrew verb "let (them) have" is plural. Not singular.

On top of this; what do you do with Galatians 3:28?

You are choosing to ignore what Scripture says. Why is it you want to believe that women are not created in God's image? That sounds pretty misogynistic to me.

I don’t know why you are using Galatians 3:28 KJV which is talking about salvation for all in Christ Jesus. What Paul is doing is letting the Gentiles know the law is no more where Israel is only chosen by God, but now in Christ all are chosen, and it doesn’t matter if they are male, female, bind or free, Jew or Gree, etc., because in Christ all are one. This scripture is saying believers are one in Christ,
Ephesians 4:4-6 KJV,
4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all

But if the something already created is created in God's image than why would you assume the something created out of the first entity would not also be created in God's image? How's your wife feel about "not being created in God's image"? That ideology has been used in history to justify oppressing women.

I’m a female, and I don’t think your understanding what I’m saying, or we are saying the same thing.

So of course if man is made out of God’s image, women would be of the same image. But that’s not what I’m saying.

I’m saying it was man that God created, and from man woman. The attributes of man became the attributes of woman.

However this is what I’m say, without man, woman could not have been created. Woman did not have the original attributes, but man did, and from man she was created. Because of this, woman’s creation is based off of man’s creation. Woman was not created in the image of God. Man was created in the image of God. A woman’s attributes are based on what God had already given man.

Again this is why In a marriage Jesus is the head of man, and man is the head of woman - this is based on the order man was created being that it was the man that was created in the image of God, whereas woman was made from man.

This is also why women are to wear a head covering during worship, and men don’t have to. Women are to have power over their head because of the angels, but men don’t have to have power over their heads because they are made in God’s image whereas women are made of man, 1 Corinthians 11:8-10 KJV.

How do you know; when you didn't look at the Greek? Mary says to the angel. "How is this possible when I've known no man?" Gabriel explains to her. At the end of Luke 1:35 he says "... the holy thing that shall be born of you" The root of that word born is also translated "kind", "kindred", "offspring", "nation", "stock", "born" and "diversity". I.E. "the holy thing that comes forth from your stock. What "stock" does Mary have other than her DNA?

People are using the Greek language to translate the Bible when it has already been translated. I think this is absolutely wrong. If we are not Greek, don’t speak Greek, can’t write Greek, why are we using Greek to aid in our understanding of the Bible. Apostle Paul warns you about this.

Now the angel said that holy thing that shall be born of you, you have said based on the Greek language the angle meant stalk instead of born. And you have determined Mary’s stalk , that is her DNA was converted and cloned some sort of way. However, a baby takes the DNA of both parents. In this instance, God’s Holy seed (and we don know God’s DNA), and Mary’s egg which was fertilized causing her to conceive like all other women who conceive. There was no cloning involved.

With the billions of babies born in this world, do we say to a woman that child that will be born of you, or do we say that baby of your stalk. That doesn’t make since. The angle was talking about Jesus being born of Mary, in the same way all babies are born of a woman.

Nothing in Luke says anything about God's "seed" fertilizing Mary. Galatians 3:16 states that the seed of God is Christ. John 12:24 Jesus describes himself as the kernel of wheat (the seed) that has to go into the ground. That it may bear fruit.

The seed of God is Christ is true because Christ is God’s Son.

You are the seed of your father. I am the seed of my fathers.

However we cannot say a woman child is her seed because the seed belongs to males.

Christ is the firstborn of his brethren, so guess what, Christian’s are the seed of God because they have the Holy Spirit making them the children of God. This is the new birth Christ accomplished for us at his death and resurrection.