Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6? | Gen 6:2 | OldPilgrim | 189224 | ||
Hello Rick. Thank you for your post, which I find most informative. It is possible that with your Jewish background, and scholarship, you might be able to help me. I have been told that the word "Nephilim", at (Gen 6:4 The Nephilim were 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.) Is translated in the Septuagint with the Greek word "Titans", and that In Greek mythology the Titans were a family of giants, the children of Uranus and Gaia, who sought to rule the heavens but were overthrown and supplanted by the family of Zeus. Is one able I wonder to conclude from this that when the translators of about 300 BC, were looking for a suitable Greek word to represent Nephilim, they chose Titans, as this was the one word which gave some idea of what they the translators understood the word Nephilim to mean, that is to say, a life form resulting "when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men," I look forward to reading your comments. OldPilgrim. |
||||||
2 | Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6? | Gen 6:2 | InGodITrust | 189226 | ||
Greetings OldPilgrim, You got me "flat-footed." My knowledge and studies are confined to New Testament doctrine. I am very weak in the Old Testament. Found out about my Jewish heritage only 5 months ago. I am anything but a scholar, but thank you for the thought!! Also, it is my understanding that the Jewish authorities did not translate the Septuagint into Greek until sometime around 500-600 bc. As far as a suitable Greek word one can only speculate. Right or wrong, whenever I am trying to draw a conclusion to controversial Scriptural issues, I try to look back through history to what those of reputation interpreted it to be. That, in light of what modern scholars of good reputation have found discovered in their studies. With all the technology we have today it behoves us to compare that with history. Usually, if a present day Bible teacher or scholar does not have "most all of his ducks in a row," I don't consider them necessarily reliable. A big mistake Bible students make is that they don't compare "the source." Just because so and so said it, does not make it worthy of consideration. We live in a day and age where "every Tom, Dick, and Harry," have their own opinion. Usually to the great detriment of Scriptural accuracy. Unfortunately, here on the Forum, that is too ofton the case. My opinion or yours or anyone else's is not worth much if we do not balance everything out and consider, most of all, the source in which we conclude our opinion. Wow, I did not mean to get on my high horse, guess I did so as I just came in from church! Sorry I could not be of help in your sincere quest to find an answer. Frankly when it concerns this subject, there may not be one. You have a really good point though, one should very seriously consider Jewish sources, no matter if Messianic or not, when it concerns Old Testament interpretation. Much blessings to you my friend, InGodITrust |
||||||