Nephilim

[godenver1]

so now reading my theology book it comes to my understanding The sons of God were in fact angels. So angels slept with women. This is Elmer Towns view in his book theology for today. He says Gen 6:2 was not the only time sons of God were used to describe angels.

Job 1:6 KJV

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

7 And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

Now the NLT says members of the court, I will deffer to KJV in this case

and again job 38:7

38 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,

2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?

3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?


so it is clear the sons of God were angels that slept with women, that is why they were giant, and why they were heros. and that is why they were so wicked and God wipe them from the earth, they were a new race have angel half man. This explains their strength and size and also wickedness. It also explains why they took any woman they wanted because even a fallen angel was appeared beautiful. and no one could stop them because of their strength.

I have my answer thank you very much.

I wouldn't say this theological issue is exactly 'essential' to Christianity but did you read the reply by ThisBrotherOfHis?

 

[Bluelion]

I wouldn't say this theological issue is exactly 'essential' to Christianity but did you read the reply by ThisBrotherOfHis?

funny he trashes the thread while posting in it, seems to me if it bothered him that much he could simply not post

 

[classicalhero]

To be perfectly honest you really can't be dogmatic on this issue since the information we have about it is rather limited. Many Theological doctorates have been written about this and it is one that will always be disputed on both sides of the argument.

 

[godenver1]

funny he trashes the thread while posting in it, seems to me if it bothered him that much he could simply not post

I don't know who you're referring to, but if it is TBOH, he may have done that but his argument still made sense. Classicalhero is right though, we simply can't be dogmatic on this.

 

[Bluelion]

I don't know who you're referring to, but if it is TBOH, he may have done that but his argument still made sense. Classicalhero is right though, we simply can't be dogmatic on this.

still no one address the point in the book of Job, which is thee oldest book in the Bible, sons of God refer to angels, why does this change to me in Gen? I think it is easy to make the connection that sons of God's were angels. Also the reference daughter of men or humans, if they were men them self why call it daughters of men. I think the connection is easily made.

 

[Yekcidmij]

still no one address the point in the book of Job, which is thee oldest book in the Bible, sons of God refer to angels, why does this change to me in Gen? I think it is easy to make the connection that sons of God's were angels. Also the reference daughter of men or humans, if they were men them self why call it daughters of men. I think the connection is easily made.

"Son(s) of God" doesn't not always equate to divine beings. For example, all of Israel is called God's son. The King is called God's son. In the OT, being God's son seems to be connected with being chosen by God. Though there are cases where "sons of God" is talking about divine beings (Job as you mentioned being one of those).

So just because the phrase appears in Genesis doesn't mean it's automatic either way; the phrase has a range of meanings. We have to examine author, audience, and context to determine what the phrase in this particular text means.

 

[Bluelion]

"Son(s) of God" doesn't not always equate to divine beings. For example, all of Israel is called God's son. The King is called God's son. In the OT, being God's son seems to be connected with being chosen by God. Though there are cases where "sons of God" is talking about divine beings (Job as you mentioned being one of those).

So just because the phrase appears in Genesis doesn't mean it's automatic either way; the phrase has a range of meanings. We have to examine author, audience, and context to determine what the phrase in this particular text means.

However before the Jewish race sons of God always referred to angels.

 

[Yekcidmij]

However before the Jewish race sons of God always referred to angels.

What does this have to do with anything? And how do you know this anyway? There are other references in the ancient world (before Israel came along) where "son of the gods" refers to a human; usually a dynastic ruler of sorts. Egyptian Pharaoh's were considered a son of the gods - in a quite literal way.

 

[Bluelion]

What does this have to do with anything? And how do you know this anyway? There are other references in the ancient world (before Israel came along) where "son of the gods" refers to a human; usually a dynastic ruler of sorts. Egyptian Pharaoh's were considered a son of the gods - in a quite literal way.

Give examples, Pharaoh is certainly not consider sons of God in the Bible and the mention of Egypt in the Bible is after the jewish race.

We are speaking of the Bible not other books.

 

[Yekcidmij]

We are speaking of the Bible not other books.

You were the one that brought up people before the "Jewish race."

 

[Bluelion]

You were the one that brought up people before the "Jewish race."

yes that are in the Bible not other books.

 

[Yekcidmij]

yes that are in the Bible not other books.

So what are your references?

Your previous comment about Job being the earliest book of the bible makes me believe this is your reference.

(1) I don't think Job is the oldest book in the bible and certainly not written before the "Jewish race" was around. I think Job was written after the Exodus and probably some time after Israel was in the land.

(2) Presuming, for the sake of argument, that Job was the oldest reference in the bible to "sons of God," that does not automate that the same is true for Genesis 6. For one, your sample size is too small - one reference is a pretty slim sample size from which to draw any more general conclusions. Two, we must also not forget to consider the immediate context of Genesis as well.

 

[Bluelion]

So what are your references?

Your previous comment about Job being the earliest book of the bible makes me believe this is your reference.

(1) I don't think Job is the oldest book in the bible and certainly not written before the "Jewish race" was around. I think Job was written after the Exodus and probably some time after Israel was in the land.

(2) Presuming, for the sake of argument, that Job was the oldest reference in the bible to "sons of God," that does not automate that the same is true for Genesis 6. For one, your sample size is too small - one reference is a pretty slim sample size from which to draw any more general conclusions. Two, we must also not forget to consider the immediate context of Genesis as well.

oh you don't believe it is the oldest book oh ok I don't care

Seems you are trying to argue and not address my points.

I am majoring In Bible and theology studies, This is the view of my school and my as per education. Its debated yes, but accepted by many, the fact God describes dinosaurs in it puts it well before exodus, and why people tend to except it as the oldest book in the Bible.

I saw you profile it says under occupation aggravating you. You enjoy playing with people do you. Sounds like the opposite of Christ to me

You say your christian yes?

I think we are done here btw I am not aggravated.

 

[Yekcidmij]

oh you don't believe it is the oldest book oh ok I don't care

Seems you are trying to argue and not address my points.

So you weren't trying to use the reference to "sons of God" in Job to correlate the meaning in Genesis 6? So what is your reference then?

I am majoring In Bible and theology studies, This is the view of my school and my as per education.

Should I accept it because your school says so or should I look for good reasons instead?

Its debated yes, but accepted by many, the fact God describes dinosaurs in it puts it well before exodus, and why people tend to except it as the oldest book in the Bible.

I think the references to Uz, the Chaldeas, the Sabeans are helpful in dating it post ~1000 BC and I think the references to Rahab are a reference to Egypt and the Exodus.

I saw you profile it says under occupation aggravating you. You enjoy playing with people do you. Sounds like the opposite of Christ to me

Oh my goodness. I've been a member of these forums since 2002; that was from when I set up my profile. I had forgotten all about it. I've changed it to avoid further confusion.

In any case, are you really going to question my Christianity now? And over the dating of the book of Job and Genesis 6?

You say your christian yes?

So you read one obscure part of my profile (from over a decade ago, btw) but not the others where I indicate that I'm a Christian? Why?

I think we are done here btw I am not aggravated.

I really not trying to aggravate you.

 

[godenver1]

oh you don't believe it is the oldest book oh ok I don't care

Seems you are trying to argue and not address my points.

I am majoring In Bible and theology studies, This is the view of my school and my as per education. Its debated yes, but accepted by many, the fact God describes dinosaurs in it puts it well before exodus, and why people tend to except it as the oldest book in the Bible.

I saw you profile it says under occupation aggravating you. You enjoy playing with people do you. Sounds like the opposite of Christ to me

You say your christian yes?

I think we are done here btw I am not aggravated.

For the sake of friendly theological discussions I will say that I believe Yekcidmij made a good point when he said that one or two verses in Job isn't really enough to make general definitive decisions.

What about this one verse in Romans 8?

Romans 8:14
14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

If I read this, why should I assume that angels had sex with humans and gave birth to giants when I could read that godly people 'went into' fleshly people whilst aggressive people were on the Earth?

 

[Bluelion]

For the sake of friendly theological discussions I will say that I believe Yekcidmij made a good point when he said that one or two verses in Job isn't really enough to make general definitive decisions.

What about this one verse in Romans 8?

Romans 8:14
14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

If I read this, why should I assume that angels had sex with humans and gave birth to giants when I could read that godly people 'went into' fleshly people whilst aggressive people were on the Earth?

The point I was making is before the Jewish race the sons of God referred to angels not men, so it is logical to think in Gen they are referring to angels. The sons of Gods after the jewish race were always referring to Jews, in the New testament it was anyone with The Holy Spirit. As Gods plan came to be sons of God took on new meaning and meant different groups.

 

[Dan61861]

The Bible says Adam was a son of God. I don't think we can go back farther than that.

In Christ
Daniel

 

[Bluelion]

The Bible says Adam was a son of God. I don't think we can go back farther than that.

In Christ
Daniel

Yeah a son, not sons of God

 

[Dan61861]

Can I ask you a few questions, blue?

 

[MWood]

The sons of God who slept with women. I believe they were angels. here is the verses.

NIV Gen 6
6 When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with[a] humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”

4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.


NLT Gen 6

Then the people began to multiply on the earth, and daughters were born to them. 2 The sons of God saw the beautiful women[a] and took any they wanted as their wives. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not put up with humans for such a long time, for they are only mortal flesh. In the future, their normal lifespan will be no more than 120 years.”

4 In those days, and for some time after, giant Nephilites lived on the earth, for whenever the sons of God had intercourse with women, they gave birth to children who became the heroes and famous warriors of ancient times.

5 The Lord observed the extent of human wickedness on the earth, and he saw that everything they thought or imagined was consistently and totally evil. 6 So the Lord was sorry he had ever made them and put them on the earth. It broke his heart. 7 And the Lord said, “I will wipe this human race I have created from the face of the earth. Yes, and I will destroy every living thing—all the people, the large animals, the small animals that scurry along the ground, and even the birds of the sky. I am sorry I ever made them.” 8 But Noah found favor with the Lord.

NKJV Gen 6

6 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.

3 And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive[a] with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.


Now the NIV says human which is not in other translation.

I believe they were angels because first it says daughters of men then separate group Sons of God. Now some say these were men who found favor with the Lord that the righteous slept with unrighteous. But this does not explain why the men became great hero of Great strength, and were wicked. There is a another name give we have not heard nephilim. To me this points to a new race, I believe half angel have men which would explain there great strength, and them being giants. To me that explains a lot about this group nephilim.

What do you believe and why. Biblical evidence would be great, but how you interpret the text is good to.

There is no right answer, I have not made up my mind by I am leaning towards angels.

The punctuation in verse 4 has a lot to do with our understanding of this verse. Let me give it to you from the KJV.
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.

Now the words, children, became, and were, was added to help with the flow of the sentence. If you read the verse without these words the verse takes on a whole different meaning.

These women didn't have children that were giants. The scripture says there were giants in the earth in those days; Then the scripture moves on to the sons of God and daughters of men. When you remove the words in italics the scripture says these men were mighty men of old, men of renown.

But even so, the scripture does not say that the union of the sons of God and the daughters of men produced giants.