If the "Sons of God" in Genesis 6 were angels...

[Saint Steven]

Oh boy, the blasted nephilim again. Are these the 800 foot tall Enochian nephilim or the 9 foot Goliath-looking ones in the actual Bible?

Anyway, nothing (as in not a dadgum thing) that indicates that spiritual beings can "mate" with human women. Until you can demonstrate that they can, the whole "nephilim" thing is blue smoke.

How was Jesus conceived?

 

[Jamdoc]

I personally believe Genesis 6 is speaking of angelic beings.
I do not believe that they were 400 ft Giants, I believe that either is an error in translation or a error in whosoever originally wrote the Book of Genesis if it was Moses or rewrote it, the Babylonians did destroy the Hebrew scrolls, did they not.
For some reason people of today expect for the ancient people who were just learning the craft of writing and the craft of reading to be literally / politically correct and they were not. And try to use it against them in far too many cases. When if one just stops and think it's only been a good hundred years since everybody was required schooling worldwide and in some cases in the world today still there is no such thing as schooling. A study indicated in 1870 one of four or one of five people actually attended School and that was in the so-called civilized world.

You bring up some good points. Could it have started with Eve and the one we call Satan seducing her and her bearing a child for him accepted as Cain by many Christians. After all Satan was wise/ full of wisdom was he not

Most churches teach Angels are spiritual beings and yet they had to have physical form and physical capabilities of reproducing in order to do this and in order to be seen as men. OR they actually did what man today considers as artificial insemination _ spliced their DNA with the DNA of man.

Some churches use to teach that all the Angels were males.
Jesus said we will be as the angels are neither marrying or given into marriage - could we all be males again, if that is so.
No females - no temptations of desire. Plus scripture says there will be no remembrance of none of this.

In the Old Testament the Bible does state that the Angels were curious and in The Book of Enoch it says they were doing experiments with both man and beast and creating monstrosities. So suppose they are too scientist of sorts.

Your words are food for thought.

Well, Genesis 4 is specific that Cain was from Adam, so I don't think Satan was involved in that. That's just fallen men, at least that first generation or two, what Enoch appears to talk about is about a 500 year period of time where the giants basically controlled the world. It parallels a lot of Pagan beliefs in Demigod beings and so on, Enoch tells a similar story but instead of worshiping the Nephilim and fallen angels as gods, Enoch sees them as abominations.

This concept is also consistent in the New Testament, with Paul's evangelism in gentile lands, they are worshiping pagan Gods and Paul says that they are actually worshiping devils, fallen angels. Powers, principalities, rulers of the darkness of this world, and spiritual hosts of wickedness in heavenly places.

It's been assumed for a long time that the Greek and Roman pantheon, the Babylonian pantheon, Norse pantheon, Hindu pantheon, etc are all just made up, imaginary beings, but what the bible teaches is no, they're real beings, they're just not God, they're devils, fallen angels.

The one thing I find odd is.. after the flood how did giants come back, 10 foot tall Goliath and 13 foot tall Og and so on, and how did people go to telling stories of the previous pre-flood civilization (the source of their myths I believe), if only 8 people survived the flood and all of those were faithful.. wouldn't none of them teach about the giants and just let that old world be dead and forgotten? For some reason, when Humanity got restarted, they still told the stories about demigods and pagan gods and so on.

and... we had giants twice as tall as any human in recorded history.

 

[Jamdoc]

How was Jesus conceived?

That is.. quite a refute.

 

[Saint Steven]

Good.
Scripture is True and Good and Right and God-Given.
He Says Himself everything reproduces with its own kind.
Angels never reproduce. Nothing ever indicates they desire to or have any affection for wooman.
Giants happen without angels. No worries there. Never was a worry.
The problem is spurious fairy tales and imaginations of the flesh and from demons.

How was Jesus conceived?

 

[Saint Steven]

That is.. quite a refute.

Great topic, thanks!
I like the way you presented this.
And I have wondered about Jesus' statement about no marriage in heaven when the gods (angels) were able to conceive with earthly women. (because they saw they were beautiful) I love your Barbie and Ken question.

So, where does this leave us? Hard to say for sure. (I'm afraid that CF folks aren't prepared to handle my conclusion - horrors)

 

[Jamdoc]

Great topic, thanks!
I like the way you presented this.
And I have wondered about Jesus' statement about no marriage in heaven when the gods (angels) were able to conceive with earthly women. (because they saw they were beautiful) I love your Barbie and Ken question.

So, where does this leave us? Hard to say for sure. (I'm afraid that CF folks aren't prepared to handle my conclusion - horrors)

It's a particular theological knot that I've been picking at for at least a year, but the threads that come loose lead to the first sin by mankind, and the sins of angels, the days of Noah, days of Lot, second coming, and how are these things reconciled in the end? Sexual sin is a particular focus to avoid in all of scripture as well, and yet there is a good design in it, that apparently God changes His mind about at some point.

 

[Yekcidmij]

If the supernatural view of the first part of Genesis 6 is taken, where it's Angels making human hybrids and not this kinda goofy redundant view that it's just men.. cause if it is just men then it's men reproduced, had daughters and then.. men saw them and took them as wives and reproduced? Wait isn't that how they got the daughters in the first place?

Another possibility is that Gen 6 is talking about some sort of various collection of Ancient Near East fertility cults (Wenham's commentary and Drewermann mention this possibility). In this interpretation, and in Ancient Near Eastern temples, what happened in the temple corresponded to what happened in heaven. The temple was supposed to be a sort of microcosm, reflection, or mirror image of heaven. This is true in ancient Israel as well where the temple itself was constructed as a microcosm of the entire universe. This is true in Gen 1-2 where the description of God's creating the universe interestingly parallels Moses' construction of the tabernacle so that the universe - all creation - in Gen 1-2 is being described as God's tabernacle (if anyone is interest in ref's, I can post). The different parts and objects in the temple parallel various objects in the heavens (Josephus, "Antiquities" iii; Philo, "The Life of Moses" ii.80). The priests in the temple paralleled the "hosts of heaven" (ie, the "sons of God"; see Philo, "Special Laws" i.66).

So in Gen 6, it may (emphasis on "may") be talking about some priests in Ancient Near Eastern temples. It could be that the priests in these temples were engaging in a distorted view of temple and [temple] worship/liturgy. In their duties as priests, they were supposed to represent the heavenly hosts, and heavenly hosts were not to engage in "relations" with human women (so neither were temple priests). These priests violated this ideal by engaging in various fertility cults and rites and by doing so were "reenacting" or commemorating the hosts of heaven (the "sons of God") copulating with human females.

So in a way, it could be talking about the "sons of god" as being angels or divine beings, but doing so in terms of Ancient Near Eastern temple liturgy and specifically describing some sort of temple practices involving fertility cults/rites.

 

[Jamdoc]

Another possibility is that Gen 6 is talking about some sort of various collection of Ancient Near East fertility cults (Wenham's commentary and Drewermann mention this possibility). In this interpretation, and in Ancient Near Eastern temples, what happened in the temple corresponded to what happened in heaven. The temple was supposed to be a sort of microcosm, reflection, or mirror image of heaven. This is true in ancient Israel as well where the temple itself was constructed as a microcosm of the entire universe. This is true in Gen 1-2 where the description of God's creating the universe interestingly parallels Moses' construction of the tabernacle so that the universe - all creation - in Gen 1-2 is being described as God's tabernacle (if anyone is interest in ref's, I can post). The different parts and objects in the temple parallel various objects in the heavens (Josephus, "Antiquities" iii; Philo, "The Life of Moses" ii.80). The priests in the temple paralleled the "hosts of heaven" (ie, the "sons of God"; see Philo, "Special Laws" i.66).

So in Gen 6, it may (emphasis on "may") be talking about some priests in Ancient Near Eastern temples. It could be that the priests in these temples were engaging in a distorted view of temple and [temple] worship/liturgy. In their duties as priests, they were supposed to represent the heavenly hosts, and heavenly hosts were not to engage in "relations" with human women (so neither were temple priests). These priests violated this ideal by engaging in various fertility cults and rites and by doing so were "reenacting" or commemorating the hosts of heaven (the "sons of God") copulating with human females.

So in a way, it could be talking about the "sons of god" as being angels or divine beings, but doing so in terms of Ancient Near Eastern temple liturgy and specifically describing some sort of temple practices involving fertility cults/rites.

Sounds like something a scholar who did not believe the bible and was allegorizing it would write, no offense.

 

[Saint Steven]

Saint Steven said:
How was Jesus conceived?

(staff edit)

Perhaps you weren't following the discussion?

The question was about whether spiritual beings could reproduce with humans.
Mostly in reference to the "gods" that conceived the Nephilim with human women.

 

[Wayne Gabler]

Saint Steven said:
How was Jesus conceived?


Perhaps you weren't following the discussion?

The question was about whether spiritual beings could reproduce with humans.
Mostly in reference to the "gods" that conceived the Nephilim with human women.

Angels have eaten from the tree of knowledge and tree of life in New Jerusalem, that allows them to interact with the material world. Jesus went through the same process. The tree of life in Eze:47 is how the people resurrected to life in Re:20:4 will make that transition.

 

[Saint Steven]

Angels have eaten from the tree of knowledge and tree of life in New Jerusalem, that allows them to interact with the material world. Jesus went through the same process. The tree of life in Eze:47 is how the people resurrected to life in Re:20:4 will make that transition.

How did you arrive at these conclusions? News to me.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Sounds like something a scholar who did not believe the bible and was allegorizing it would write, no offense.

This is pretty poor response, no offense.

 

[Wayne Gabler]

How did you arrive at these conclusions? News to me.

Ge:3:1:
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.
And he said unto the woman,
Yea,
hath God said,
Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

Ge:3:2-5:
And the woman said unto the serpent,
We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden,
God hath said,
Ye shall not eat of it,
neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
And the serpent said unto the woman,
Ye shall not surely die:
For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof,
then your eyes shall be opened,
and ye shall be as gods,
knowing good and evil.

Men in Re:21 become 'sons of God' when they are in New Jerusalem, where the two trees are. Angels know about good and evil, and they have been alive since the beginning of day1 of creation. The trees were not in the Garden until day6 of creation, that means all angels were in New Jerusalem before Ge:1:1 was spoken into existence.

Job:1:6:
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD,
and Satan came also among them.

Re:21:8:
But the fearful,
and unbelieving,
and the abominable,
and murderers,
and whoremongers,
and sorcerers,
and idolaters,
and all liars,
shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone:
which is the second death.

Re:20:6:
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power,
but they shall be priests of God and of Christ,
and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[Jamdoc]

This is pretty poor response, no offense.

well it sounds like your response was "none of this actually happened, it was just describing ancient religious practices and traditions"

 

[Yekcidmij]

well it sounds like your response was "none of this actually happened, it was just describing ancient religious practices and traditions"

Oh, I think Gen 6 is addressing real things that actually happened - I just have a differnt take than you, which doesn't amount to "not-believing-the-bible." It amounts to just disagreeing with you and your take on it. If disagreement in interpretation amounts to "not believing the bible," then I guess I'd have to say it looks like you don't believe the bible since you reject the author's intent.