The SONS of God came in to the daughters of man

[tonychanyt]

Genesis 6:

1 When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive.

Were these sons of God angels?

And they took as their wives any they chose. 3Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

Some powerful angels might have the ability to manifest themselves as men functionally.

NKJV, 2 Cor 11:

13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

Hebrews 13:

2 Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

 

[BobRyan]

Genesis 6:


Were these sons of God angels?

No.

Rom 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Some powerful angels might have the ability to manifest themselves as men functionally.

NKJV, 2 Cor 11:


Hebrews 13:

Matt 22 says angels do not form family arrangements within their own species let alone across other species.

4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

So the Nephilim (large humans) where on the Earth BEFORE the mixed marriages between God's people and Cain's people, and also AFTER that mixed marriage age of man pre-flood.

So that means Noah was also himself "large human" so no wonder we find Nephilim on the Earth AFTER the flood -- Noah was Nephilim.

KJV –
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his nam
Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God.
Luke 20:36 nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
Romans 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.
Galatians 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.


Giants in the Bible

Goliath - was a legendary Philistine warrior
a Gittite. Killed by David. 1Chr 20:5 :"Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite", therefore Goliath was a son of "the giant in Gath". 2Sam 21:22 refers to 4 sons born to the giant in Gath, which were slain by David and his 4 servants thus makes (5) sons

A descendant of Rapha in a lineage of giants, he is most famous for his battle with David,

Rapha: Originally the name of one of the Philistines who was of the body "Rephaites" stood in the text. The plural of this word, or at least a plural of this stem, is REPHAIM (which see). (2) Raphah (the King James Version "Rapha"), a descendant of Saul ( 1 Chronicles 8:37 ). See REPHAIAH

The word Rephaim means "terrible ones" and they are described in the Bible as "giants" and "mighty men." The Rephaim (or Rephaites) appear first in a battle with king Chedorlaomer (Genesis 14:5). Chedorlaomer and his allies defeated the Rephaim, along with the Zuzim and Emim peoples. The Rephaim were similar to the Anakim (Deuteronomy 2:20–21). The Rephaim are mentioned again in Exodus when the Israelites were trying to enter the Promised Land.



Deut 2:10,11
Both the Anakim and the Emim are giants and are both regarded as Raphaim.
Numbers 13:33 We also saw the Nephilim there (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we were like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.” NASB

Number 13:33 - and there we saw the Nephilim, sons of Anak, of the Nephilim; and we are in our own eyes as grasshoppers; and so we were in their eyes.' YLT

ALL other translations use ‘Giants” as the translation for Nephilim in Numbers 13

 

[Mark Quayle]

Genesis 6:


Were these sons of God angels?


Some powerful angels might have the ability to manifest themselves as men functionally.

NKJV, 2 Cor 11:


Hebrews 13:

Would angels, who are not human, be able to produce sperm complete with DNA etc?

Is the Matthew 22:30 reference to "being as the angels are" implicative of their lack of sexuality?

 

[d taylor]

-
​

Yes

 

[Postvieww]

Matt 22 says angels do not form family arrangements within their own species let alone across other species.

No actually it says angels of God in HEAVEN do not marry. I do not believe this thread in anyway refers to angels in HEAVEN. Why add to and make assumptions about that scripture?

 

[Postvieww]

No.

Rom 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Matt 22 says angels do not form family arrangements within their own species let alone across other species.

4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

So the Nephilim (large humans) where on the Earth BEFORE the mixed marriages between God's people and Cain's people, and also AFTER that mixed marriage age of man pre-flood.

So that means Noah was also himself "large human" so no wonder we find Nephilim on the Earth AFTER the flood -- Noah was Nephilim.

Nothing in scripture says Noah was nephilim! The Sethite theory has no basis in scripture. It is a simple an attempt to explain Genesis 6 without acknowledging the obvious.

 

[Postvieww]

Rom 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

The context of these NT scriptures have absolutely nothing to do with the context of "sons of God" in the Old Testament!

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

Matt 22 says angels do not form family arrangements within their own species let alone across other species.

Matt 22 -
23 The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 24 saying: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother. 26 Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh. 27 Last of all the woman died also. 28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.

They ask about HUMANS - saying that in the resurrection of humans - whose wife will she be? (As if to stump the doctrine of the resurrection). Jesus says that those resurrected "neither marry nor are given in marriage BUT ARE LIKE the ANGELS". He is not saying that they ARE Angels or WILL be ANGELS - He is saying that they share the attribute of not marrying , not even BEING married to someone of their own species - JUST LIKE THE ANGELS..

It would take a huge amount of eisegesis-insert to inject into this text - "yeah but angels can always choose to "create themselves to have the function of mating with each other or with other species". That would be a wild departure from what is actually in the text.

No actually it says angels of God in HEAVEN do not marry.

IT does not say "choose not to". It says that it is not something they do - sort of like saying that birds don't work in drug stores nor do they make computers.

I do not believe this thread in anyway refers to angels in HEAVEN.

IT refers to Angels --

That gets us to what Christ said regard what "angels do".

Matt 22 does not say "they do not CHOOSE To marry in the resurrection, just as Angels do not CHOOSE to marry"

IT takes a lot of bending to work it around to that sort of thing.

 

[BobRyan]

Rom 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Nothing in scripture says Noah was nephilim!

Until you notice that Noah and his family are the only ones that cross over from pre-flood to post-flood Earth and that the scriptures say there Nephilim on the earth after the flood - same as before. The only way that can happen biologically is for Noah to be Nephilim just was all humanity even BEFORE the mixed marriages according to Gen 6.

The Sethite theory has no basis in scripture.

Sure it does. Scripture calls the sons of God - those that are followers of God. Did you miss Rom 8, John 1 etc??

Rom 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Genesis 5 shows us the lineage for Noah and his ancestors. Saints like Seth, Methuselah and Enoch. It also shows us the wicked in Cain's line of descent.

It is a simple an attempt to explain Genesis 6 .

No doubt to explain where we note the details "in the text"

 

[Postvieww]

Matt 22 -
23 The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 24 saying: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother. 26 Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh. 27 Last of all the woman died also. 28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.

They ask about HUMANS - saying that in the resurrection of humans - whose wife will she be? (As if to stump the doctrine of the resurrection). Jesus says that those resurrected "neither marry nor are given in marriage BUT ARE LIKE the ANGELS". He is not saying that they ARE Angels or WILL be ANGELS - He is saying that they share the attribute of not marrying , not even BEING married to someone of their own species - JUST LIKE THE ANGELS..

It would take a huge amount of eisegesis-insert to inject into this text - "yeah but angels can always choose to "create themselves to have the function of mating with each other or with other species". That would be a wild departure from what is actually in the text.



IT does not say "choose not to". It says that it is not something they do - sort of like saying that birds don't work in drug stores nor do they make computers.


IT refers to Angels --

That gets us to what Christ said regard what "angels do".

Matt 22 does not say "they do not CHOOSE To marry in the resurrection, just as Angels do not CHOOSE to marry"

IT takes a lot of bending to work it around to that sort of thing.

It appears you confuse God ordained marriage with an unnatural unholy sexual union. Also the fact that fallen angels have no regard for God ordained marriage.

 

[Postvieww]

Until you notice that Noah and his family are the only ones that cross over from pre-flood to post-flood Earth and that the scriptures say there Nephilim on the earth after the flood - same as before. The only way that can happen biologically is for Noah to be Nephilim just was all humanity even BEFORE the mixed marriages according to Gen 6.

Sure it does. Scripture calls the sons of God - those that are followers of God. Did you miss Rom 8, John 1 etc??

Rom 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Genesis 5 shows us the lineage for Noah and his ancestors. Saints like Seth, Methuselah and Enoch. It also shows us the wicked in Cain's line of descent.



No doubt to explain where we note the details "in the text"

I did not miss anything about the sons of God in the NT. Did you miss the fact that OT references to sons of God is not born again believers? It is poor exegesis to confuse the two.

 

[BobRyan]

I did not miss anything about the sons of God in the NT. Did you miss the fact that OT references to sons of God is not born again believers?

not true.

Jer 31:31-34 - the New Covenant.

1 Peter 1:10 Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, 11 searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

Moses and Elijah stand with Christ IN immortal glory in Matt 17 - BEFORE the cross even happens.

Gal 3:8 "the GOSPEL was preached to Abraham"

Heb 11 -- ALL the giants of faith - are OT saints.

 

[Postvieww]

not true.

Jer 31:31-34 - the New Covenant.

1 Peter 1:10 Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, 11 searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

Moses and Elijah stand with Christ IN immortal glory in Matt 17 - BEFORE the cross even happens.

Gal 3:8 "the GOSPEL was preached to Abraham"

Heb 11 -- ALL the giants of faith - are OT saints.

Context my friend, context matters. There are NO OT uses of the phrase sons of God that relate to human believers! You have inserted your NT definition where it does not apply. No matter how hard you try to force this issue it will not work. The scriptures simply do not back your assertion. You are not the first to use this desperate attempt to get around the Genesis 6 text. I challenge you to look up every use of “sons of God” in the OT and show me just one that refers clearly to OT humans. There were no born again believers in the OT , yes there were saints of God but the phrase in question was NEVER used to describe them. That is exclusively a NT description. Jeremiah prophesied of the new covenant to come. No one here is questioning that there were giants of faith in the OT scriptures but that does not prove your point. They were not called “sons of God”.

 

[Postvieww]

Genesis 6:1-4 and Jude 6&7 what do these passages mean? Why should we care? Here is a thread I started a few years ago on this topic. Many issues on this subject were addressed in this thread.

 

[Postvieww]

So the Nephilim (large humans) where on the Earth BEFORE the mixed marriages between God's people and Cain's people, and also AFTER that mixed marriage age of man pre-flood.

I will be looking for your scriptural evidence that "the sons of God' were "God's people" and the daughters of men were "Cain's people".

How can the Marriage between a Godly man and an ungodly woman produce anything other than a baby with freewill to choose God or not?

Genesis 6:12 says all flesh had been corrupted Noah and his offspring being the only exception. There was no Godly line of Seth then to intermingle with ungodly women. God destroyed all flesh except Noah and his family. Why would God destroy a Godly line of Seth.

If they were truly Godly men why would the choose known ungodly women?

This Sethite theory is only a theory designed to explain away the truth wording of Genesis 6.

There is no Biblical evidence to support this false doctrine, if you have it I am listening!

 

[Postvieww]

Sethite Theory refuted!

 

[Qubit]

Were these sons of God angels?

No, they were *fallen* Angels. Big difference. They left their first estate...

Jude 1:6
"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."

Some powerful angels might have the ability to manifest themselves as men functionally.

If by 'manifest' you mean something similar to how Jesus manifested in the womb of Mary, then I would agree.

What the Sons of God did to conceive and incarnate themselves was a type of Kenosis.

 

[Qubit]

So that means Noah was also himself "large human" so no wonder we find Nephilim on the Earth AFTER the flood -- Noah was Nephilim.

Is this a common Seventh Day Adventist teaching?

How do you explain the giant grapes? The Nephilim were just really hungry, so God made giant food for them?

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

Rom 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.
John 1: 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

I will be looking for your scriptural evidence that "the sons of God' were "God's people"

Start by reading the scripture in regard to "the sons of God"

How can the Marriage between a Godly man and an ungodly woman produce anything other than a baby with freewill to choose God or not?

It produces a baby with a sinful nature regardless of whether the both parents are believers or only one parent is.

The difference is the "be ye not unequally yoked" principle in scripture where "you are the light of the world" Matt 4:14-16, and "you are the salt of the Earth - if the salt loses its savor - how then can IT be salted?" Matt 5:13-16

As was seen in the life of Solomon - corruption of the faith resulted from the marriage of believers with unbelievers.

Genesis 6:12 says all flesh had been corrupted

Indeed - mankind had corrupted their ways BUT God said to Noah "YOU are the one that I have found righteous on the Earth" Genesis 6.

Not "You have corrupt flesh".

And God says of the wicked humans "Their THOUGHTS are evil continually" Gen 6 not "their flesh is corrupt DNA continually"

There was no Godly line of Seth

On the contrary - it is listed in Gen 5 and it includes (but is not limited to)

Seth... Enoch, Methuseleh, Lamech, Noah

By contrast - Cain's line shows only rebellion.

God destroyed all flesh except Noah and his family. Why would God destroy a Godly line of Seth.

Because they did not choose to get in the boat with Noah. By the time of the flood their faith too had become corrupt.

If they were truly Godly men why would the choose known ungodly women?

false.

That is like saying "IF God created Adam and Eve sinless then they never would have fallen".

that idea does not survive very long in the book of Genesis.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:
So that means Noah was also himself "large human" so no wonder we find Nephilim on the Earth AFTER the flood -- Noah was Nephilim.

Is this a common Seventh Day Adventist teaching?

How do you explain the giant grapes? The Nephilim were just really hungry, so God made giant food for them?

You need to accept the obvious - first instead of trying to "just say no" to all the obvious answers.

God created mankind and the world - sinless, perfect etc. The entire conditions for life were optimum.

Tornadoes did not spring up the moment Adam ate the fruit.

Perfect conditions for life existed both inside and outside the garden. Since God made the WORLD perfect not just a garden.

What they did not have - was access to the Tree of Life after the fall. Humans no longer had that access.

So while nature began to decay it was very slowly - it is not until long after the flood that you find the first account of someone sick or feeble.

Not sure why this is supposed to be "confusing"