Fallen Angel's Seed

[Maria Billingsley]

.It says they don't marry. It doesn't say they can't./QUOTE]

I

If we read the scripture more closely, it states we will be "like the angels " who do not marry.
“For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” (Matt. 22:23–30.)

 

[BPPLEE]

If we read the scripture more closely, it states we will be "like the angels " who do not marry.
“For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” (Matt. 22:23–30.)

Still doesn't say they can't. Obviously they are not supposed to and that is the problem in Genesis 6.

 

[Servus]

Still doesn't say they can't. Obviously they are not supposed to and that is the problem in Genesis 6.

Also Jesus specifies the angels that are in heaven. Who knows regarding cast down angels.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Still doesn't say they can't. Obviously they are not supposed to and that is the problem in Genesis 6.

So the angels suddenly became human and can procreate? This is not stated anywhere in scripture. But like I said there are a few interpretations, I am just sharing one of them.

 

[Servus]

So the angels suddenly became human and can procreate? This is not stated anywhere in scripture. But like I said there are a few interpretations, I am just sharing one of them.

I think the way demons are described, it's unlikely fallen angels would have any kind of physical form. How else could they possess and be cast out and transfer from a person into a herd of swine?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

I think the way demons are described, it's unlikely fallen angels would have any kind of physical form. How else could they possess and be cast out and transfer from a person into a herd of swine?

Correct, no physical form. The sons of God were not angels who married women then gave birth to nephilim.

 

[Sorn]

Correct, no physical form. The sons of God were not angels who married women then gave birth to nephilim.

But they could take on physical form, and in this case they took on human form.

 

[Sorn]

So the angels suddenly became human and can procreate? This is not stated anywhere in scripture. But like I said there are a few interpretations, I am just sharing one of them.

Marriage is an economic, emotional, physical union and one designed for procreation (as in having children).
Take out children and economic needs and maybe you don't need 'marriage' but can still have relationships.

 

[BPPLEE]

I think the way demons are described, it's unlikely fallen angels would have any kind of physical form. How else could they possess and be cast out and transfer from a person into a herd of swine?

We really don't know what fallen angels can and cannot do. We're not given much information on it

 

[Servus]

We really don't know what fallen angels can and cannot do. We're not given much information on it

True. Much of this is purely speculation. However, fallen angels and demons seem synonymous, and the Bible seems to make it pretty clear that demons are wandering spirits looking for a physical body to inhabit. Then again, as far as angels go, Jacob physically wrestled with an angel. The again many speculate the angel was actually Jesus.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

But they could take on physical form, and in this case they took on human form.

Demons, aka fallen angels, did not take physical form. Messengers, aka angels, from God came in temporary human form to deliver messages. Blessings.

 

[BPPLEE]

True. Much of this is purely speculation. However, fallen angels and demons seem synonymous, and the Bible seems to make it pretty clear that demons are wandering spirits looking for a physical body to inhabit. Then again, as far as angels go, Jacob physically wrestled with an angel. The again many speculate the angel was actually Jesus.

And some say that demons are actually the spirits of the Nephilim and fallen angels are in another class. Like you say speculation

 

[Sorn]

Demons, aka fallen angels, did not take physical form. Messengers, aka angels, from God came in temporary human form to deliver messages. Blessings.

You don't know that, you are only assuming it.

 

[friend of]

That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Okay so if the sons of God were humans just like the daughters of men, then why is there a distinction here? If the sons of God are human, then why wouldn't this passage read: "the sons of God saw the daughters of God that they were fair..."

I think the distinction is here for a reason, mainly to indicate that it was fallen Angel's, not descendants of humans @Maria Billingsley

 

[Maria Billingsley]

You don't know that, you are only assuming it.

Likewise. We are at a stalemate. I found this commentary helpful.
Thanks for engaging!
Can Demons Materialize in Human or Animal Form?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Okay so if the sons of God were humans just like the daughters of men, then why is there a distinction here? If the sons of God are human, then why wouldn't this passage read: "the sons of God saw the daughters of God that they were fair..."

I think the distinction is here for a reason, mainly to indicate that it was fallen Angel's, not descendants of humans @Maria Billingsley

This may help.
GOD, CHILDREN OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com

 

[apollosdtr]

But the fallen angels don't occupy heaven, they fell to earth. Which is why they are called fallen angels.

I think the world would be a whole lot worse if the dragon and his angels were already living on Earth. And the dragon doesn't fall to earth until the war in Heaven, Revelation 12, the 3rd of 3 woes... which matches Daniel, with Michael standing up right before the great tribulation... the time of Jacob's trouble. The dragon falling to earth may be the falling star bringing with it 1/3 of the stars of the mid-heaven (the archangel's angels), and opening the pit... where the locusts live... which are the armies Ezekiel talks about, that were killed in battle.

 

[apollosdtr]

Genesis 6:5 Now the giants were upon the earth in those days; and after that when the sons of God were wont to go in to the daughters of men, they bore children to them, those were the giants of old, the men of renown.LXX

Giants, before and after the flood. Some say that the sin in the garden of Eden, as taught by the dragon, was intercourse: hence the sudden desire for clothing. How else can one explain the seed of the woman versus the seed of the dragon/enchanter? The woman Eve was the mother of all humans. So, the sons of God would have been the dragon and his angels on Earth.
___________________
Others say that Japheth was the Titan Iapetus... similarity of names?
Titans & Titanesses | Theoi Greek Mythology
After them, came the Giants of Pelasgian Legend.
Giants | Theoi Greek Mythology

The personification of Heaven and Earth... obvious poetic license.
Seas give birth to rivers... also poetic license.
Zeus made sweet love... the evangelization of Crete, etc.

Everything in your post is interesting, except I don't think intercourse was the sin taught by the devil because God told Adam & Eve to multiply before the snake tempted Eve.

True... But those bits of Genesis are like prophecy... not strictly linear.
Genesis 1:28 go multiply. Genesis 2:7 dust of the earth. Genesis 2:16-17 law to Adam. Genesis 2:22 created Eve. Genesis 4:1 Adam knew his wife... after leaving Eden.

Genesis 2:18-20 is very curious to me. Not good that man is alone... bring him the critters and see what he calls them... "but for Adam there was not found a help like to himself"... curious, right? There was none of his same species... does that mean no humaniods, at all?

 

[Sorn]

Likewise. We are at a stalemate. I found this commentary helpful.
Thanks for engaging!
Can Demons Materialize in Human or Animal Form?

So your premise is demons can not materialize. Perhaps. But what what is being argued here is can angels materialize, ie before they fell, and the answer is yes.
So an angel can decide to materialize, marry, have kids etc, but once stopped, then they could perhaps no longer materialize.

 

[Paul4JC]

That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Okay so if the sons of God were humans just like the daughters of men, then why is there a distinction here? If the sons of God are human, then why wouldn't this passage read: "the sons of God saw the daughters of God that they were fair..."

I think the distinction is here for a reason, mainly to indicate that it was fallen Angel's, not descendants of humans @Maria Billingsley

Nowhere does the passage say sons of Seth, or daughters of Cain so to do so is embellishing the text. This is the one of many discrepancies. As the late Rob Skiba used to say, "kissing cousins don't product 9 foot giants." Chuck Missler said, "What? Were the daughters of Seth ugly?" Another danger is to try to imply that the Sethites were some righteous race. "All have sinned," and none but 8 made it onto the ark, though only Noah was blameless in his generation Gen 6:9. Just as absurd it is to suggest the daughters of Seth were ugly, is to suggest the sons of Seth were holy and perfect.

Mischievous Angels or Sethites?: Textual Controversy: – Chuck Missler – Koinonia House

Origin of the Sethite View
It was in the 5th century a.d. that the "angel" interpretation of Genesis 6 was increasingly viewed as an embarrassment when attacked by critics. (Furthermore, the worship of angels had begun within the church. Also, celibacy had also become an institution of the church. The "angel" view of Genesis 6 was feared as impacting these views.)

Celsus and Julian the Apostate used the traditional "angel" belief to attack Christianity. Julius Africanus resorted to the Sethite interpretation as a more comfortable ground. Cyril of Alexandria also repudiated the orthodox "angel" position with the "line of Seth" interpretation. Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages. It is still widely taught today among many churches who find the literal "angel" view a bit disturbing. There are many outstanding Bible teachers who still defend this view. Again, this has nothing to do with the the biblical text.