Nephilim: Giants of the Bible

TruthInLight

Active Member
Sep 28, 2018
56
24
37
Portland
✟33,214.00
Country
United States
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Single
Depends on how one is interpreting the text.

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

-CryptoLutheran

Such thing was a reality. Christianity has been watered down by said "mainstream view".

There's two opposing sides, who disagree, when it comes to the matter. One finds it ridiculous, the other digs deeper on the scriptures and seek more detail.
 
Upvote 0

biblelesson

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2021
1,080
397
66
College Park
✟69,403.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The strongest source the angel view has, IMO, is the uses of bə-nê hā-’ĕ-lō-hîm in Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:7. The angel view holds that bə-nê hā-’ĕ-lō-hîm is only used in Gen 6:2, 4 and in Job (x3). Therefore, according to the angel view, since we know that the three Job verses are angels then Gen 6:2 are also angels.
Your reasoning can’t be factual, and I don’t see where you made clear reference to Adam being called the son of God, Luke 3:38 KJV. Please don’t ignore what Luke 3:38 is telling us. Men born after Adam populating the earth are sons of God.

Another issue is angels cannot marry, and they are spirit, Mark 12:25 KJV, Matthew 22:30 KJV. Spirit begins cannot mate with fleshy human beings. This is a violation of nature. Different species cannot reproduce or breed.
Genesis 6:3 KJV, “And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” God says nothing about angels. He is speaking of flesh.

For anyone interested, here is a great article or commentary that does a good job in explaining Genesis 6:2 KJV.

 
Upvote 0

biblelesson

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2021
1,080
397
66
College Park
✟69,403.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Reflecting on context before Gen 6:2, we see Adam and Eve sinned (Gen 3:6-7), Cain killed (Gen 4:8), Lamech took two wives (Gen 4:19) and killed two men (Gen 4:23), Seth begat Enosh and “people began to call upon the name of the Lord” (Gen 4:26). And in Gen 6:1, man’s defile-began to multiply; and they had “daughters of men” (denoting ungodly daughters).
Daughters of men does not denote ungodly daughters. If that’s the case, then what were the godly daughters called? Daughters of who?
 
Upvote 0

Paleouss

Active Member
Oct 23, 2023
84
23
57
Midwest
✟16,861.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Your reasoning can’t be factual, and I don’t see where you made clear reference to Adam being called the son of God, Luke 3:38 KJV. Please don’t ignore what Luke 3:38 is telling us. Men born after Adam populating the earth are sons of God.
Good morning biblelesson, hope your morning is a blessed one. I'm not sure what you mean by "Your reasoning can't be factual". Are you saying I misrepresented what people that hold the angel view think? You seem to be quoting my opinion of what the strongest angel view verses were. Are you saying my opinion can't be factual?

If I were to guess, it seems you think I am presenting the angel view and not what I am actually doing which is presenting the oposite view. The post you qoute is the fourth of a series in this thread.

Thank you for the Luke 3:38 quote.

Peace to you
 
Upvote 0

Paleouss

Active Member
Oct 23, 2023
84
23
57
Midwest
✟16,861.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Daughters of men does not denote ungodly daughters. If that’s the case, then what were the godly daughters called? Daughters of who?
Hi again biblelesson,

The quote you are referencing is a summery of a previous post. I have provided that post below. So I don't have to write it again. :). This post is then followed up by 4 or 5 other posts. One of which you quoted and asked the above question.
Hello arrepto veritate

As I said previously, I think ground zero is your research, prayer and interpretation of Gen 6:1-4. I recommend an in depth, word-for-word research of the translated Hebrew words in these four verses (Gen 6:1-4).

For example, my first start at this topic began with Gen 6:1. More specifically, around whether Hā-’ā-ḏām should be tranlsted 'men' or 'mankind' and the translated word "began" (hê·ḥêl).

The Hebrew word “hê·ḥêl” in its exact form occurs 19 times in the Bible. The root word is chalal which has a “defile”, “break”, “eat as common things” hint. Of those 19 occurrence of hê·ḥêl in this exact form it appears only 2 other times in Genesis. In Gen 10:8, hê·ḥêl is used within the context of Nimrod (trans: “rebel” or “lord of rebellion”), he is a “rebel” that is “in face” of God (lip̄·nê Gen 10:9); And in Gen 44:12, hê·ḥêl is used within the context of Joseph testing his brothers to see if past defilement is also current defilement of their character.

Of the other 16 uses of hê·ḥêl in the OT, 15 of the 16 are within the context of defilement. In Num 16:46 & 16:47, hê·ḥêl is used within the context of the plague that had begun; In Judges 20:39, within the context of the moral degeneration of Israel and Benjamin “strik[ing] and killing” men of Israel; In 1 Samuel 14:35, where Saul built an altar to the lord but it was defiled by the sin of Jonathan who had eaten honey (forbidden as a burnt offering (Lev 2:11)) after an oath was given; 2 Kings 10:32, hê·ḥêl is used when defilement began with Israel and God “cut off parts of Israel” (NKJ); In 2 Kings 15:37, when in Jotham’s reign God sent “Rezin king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remaliah against Judah” (NKJ) for defilement; In 1 Chr 1:10, hê·ḥêl is again used within the context of Nimrod (trans: “rebel” or “lord of rebellion”); In 2 Chr 29:27, twice in the context of the beginning of the burning of the burnt offering for defilement atonement; In 2 Chr 34:3, in the context of a purge of defilement beginning in Juda; In Eze 20:9, 20:14 & 20:22, the word hê·ḥêl is translated “profaned” (NKJ, ESV, NIV) and is in the context of God not wanting his “name” to be defiled... you get the point.

We see other forms of a Hebrew phrase suggesting a translation of “began” more frequently pointing toward good use or with a verse where there is no sin or defilement. In Gen 4:26, the first use of any Hebrew word translated for “began” in Genesis when the Hebrew word of hū·ḥal is used, as “people began to call on the name of the Lord” (NKJ, NIV, ESV); In Gen 9:20, the Hebrew way·yā·ḥel translated “began” is within the context of Noah working the soil; In Gen 26:13, the Hebrew word phrase way·yiḡ·dal translated “began” is within the context of Isaac being prosperous, the root word being gadal which means to grow up or become great.

So it seems to me, it is very clear from above that the Hebrew hê·ḥêl, commonly translated to only “began”, can intend to carry with it a notion of defilement. So my preferred, more awkward, interpretation of Gen 6:1 would be (reading it in Interlinear order)…

Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, - when - defile/began - men - to multiply - on - the face - of the earth

In other words, it should be, IMO, "men" not "mankind" and the reason for the distinction is that these "men" are possibly being identified as a restrictive group by the Hebrew word hê·ḥêl.

This interpretation impacts Gen 6:2.

May God do a fruitful work through you.
 
Upvote 0

Paleouss

Active Member
Oct 23, 2023
84
23
57
Midwest
✟16,861.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don’t see where you made clear reference to Adam being called the son of God, Luke 3:38 KJV. Please don’t ignore what Luke 3:38 is telling us. Men born after Adam populating the earth are sons of God.
I thought I would comment on your presentation of Luke 3:38 from an angel view perspective. I would like to make clear to you that I hold that the "sons of God" from Gen 6:2 are godly men from Gen 4:26. I am only presenting what I think the angel view holds.

It is my understanding, anyone that holds the angel view please correct me if I am wrong, that the angel view holds that when Adam sinned he lost his sonship (inheritance). That is, Adam was created in the image of God (Gen 1:27, Luke 3:38) and was a son of God but when Adam sinned that image was no longer in the image of God but in the image of Adam (Gen 5:3). Adam lost his sonship through sin. In other words, Adam lost the entrance into the "kingdom" and this access to the "kingdom" was not restored to mankind until Jesus Christ, the second Adam.

With this view, excuse the crudeness of it if I left out details, then any reference to "sons of God" in Gen 6:2,4 cannot be humans because the line of Adam no longer have sonship. Thus, for the angel view, Luke 3:38 does not bring anything to the Gen 6:2,4 debate. (again, according to how I understand the angel view.)


Peace be with you all
 
Upvote 0

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
8,767
3,013
60
Montgomery
✟127,890.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No such thing as Nephilims or spirit-men born from an angel and a human woman.

Giants in the land means men of renown from great kingdoms and great wealth. Adam, a son of God had sons, and they had sons, and so on. These sons were called the sons of God. Daughters were born called daughters of men. So there were sons of God born after Adam who married daughters of men and some of these men became men of renown.

Renown: the condition of being known or talked about by many people; fame.
"authors of great renown"

I know people want their to be half-men and half-angels walking around? But that goes against all laws of nature!
Why would marriage between the two human groups you describe anger God to the point that he wiped out the entire human race except for 8 people?
 
Upvote 0

biblelesson

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2021
1,080
397
66
College Park
✟69,403.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good morning biblelesson, hope your morning is a blessed one. I'm not sure what you mean by "Your reasoning can't be factual". Are you saying I misrepresented what people that hold the angel view think? You seem to be quoting my opinion of what the strongest angel view verses were. Are you saying my opinion can't be factual?

If I were to guess, it seems you think I am presenting the angel view and not what I am actually doing which is presenting the oposite view. The post you qoute is the fourth of a series in this thread.

Thank you for the Luke 3:38 quote.

Peace to you
If I responded to something that wasn’t your view then I was mistaken. I misunderstood your post!
 
Upvote 0

biblelesson

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2021
1,080
397
66
College Park
✟69,403.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why would marriage between the two human groups you describe anger God to the point that he wiped out the entire human race except for 8 people?
Because of the wickedness, Genesis 6:5 KJV,
“And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paleouss
Upvote 0

biblelesson

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2021
1,080
397
66
College Park
✟69,403.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I thought I would comment on your presentation of Luke 3:38 from an angel view perspective. I would like to make clear to you that I hold that the "sons of God" from Gen 6:2 are godly men from Gen 4:26. I am only presenting what I think the angel view holds.

It is my understanding, anyone that holds the angel view please correct me if I am wrong, that the angel view holds that when Adam sinned he lost his sonship (inheritance). That is, Adam was created in the image of God (Gen 1:27, Luke 3:38) and was a son of God but when Adam sinned that image was no longer in the image of God but in the image of Adam (Gen 5:3). Adam lost his sonship through sin. In other words, Adam lost the entrance into the "kingdom" and this access to the "kingdom" was not restored to mankind until Jesus Christ, the second Adam.

With this view, excuse the crudeness of it if I left out details, then any reference to "sons of God" in Gen 6:2,4 cannot be humans because the line of Adam no longer have sonship. Thus, for the angel view, Luke 3:38 does not bring anything to the Gen 6:2,4 debate. (again, according to how I understand the angel view.)


Peace be with you all
Don’t get me wrong, but if this is not your view, then I have no reason to respond. It feels like I would be responding to a fantom person!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paleouss

Active Member
Oct 23, 2023
84
23
57
Midwest
✟16,861.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Don’t get me wrong, but if this not your view, then I have no reason to respond. It feels like I would be responding to a fantom person!
I like to understand both sides, completely (when possible). God's truth is the treasure I seek. Countering me when I present a side I do not agree with can be valuable to others. If not me as well. Firms up one's own position. If you think something I presented that is the angel view is not valid, then I invite you to explain why. But just know, in this case, you won't be convincing me of your position (I already hold it, or something close to it) you will just be educating.


Peace to you
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bones49
Upvote 0

Paleouss

Active Member
Oct 23, 2023
84
23
57
Midwest
✟16,861.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why would marriage between the two human groups you describe anger God to the point that he wiped out the entire human race except for 8 people?
Hi BPPLEE. I agree with biblelesson. No matter if you hold an angel view or a human view of "sons of God" in Gen 6:1-4. They answer to the question, why? Is found in Gen 6:5.
 
Upvote 0

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
8,767
3,013
60
Montgomery
✟127,890.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi BPPLEE. I agree with biblelesson. No matter if you hold an angel view or a human view of "sons of God" in Gen 6:1-4. They answer to the question, why? Is found in Gen 6:5.
That didn’t change after the flood so was it all for nothing?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

I Am Hugh

Service Android
Sep 27, 2023
68
27
Pangaea Proxima
Visit site
✟11,281.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Celibate
The Bible is Truth.
The myths are fables the Bible warns sternly against.

The account is from the Bible, I don't understand why it's so difficult. Angels took on human form, like they do throughout the Bible. Only these angels, did bad by having offspring with women. Why is that difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BPPLEE
Upvote 0

returntosender

EL ROI
Supporter
May 30, 2020
9,029
4,209
casa grande
✟322,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
But Gen 6:1-4 speak of the Nephilim and the the sons of God taking daughters of man as wives. So how is this myths and fables?
I agree,. Did they go on to have generations,big so what or who are they?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

returntosender

EL ROI
Supporter
May 30, 2020
9,029
4,209
casa grande
✟322,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Your reasoning can’t be factual, and I don’t see where you made clear reference to Adam being called the son of God, Luke 3:38 KJV. Please don’t ignore what Luke 3:38 is telling us. Men born after Adam populating the earth are sons of God.

Another issue is angels cannot marry, and they are spirit, Mark 12:25 KJV, Matthew 22:30 KJV. Spirit begins cannot mate with fleshy human beings. This is a violation of nature. Different species cannot reproduce or breed.
Genesis 6:3 KJV, “And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” God says nothing about angels. He is speaking of flesh.

For anyone interested, here is a great article or commentary that does a good job in explaining Genesis 6:2 KJV.

Hugh is a robot?
 
Upvote 0