Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30700 | ||
Ok? Look at the context again. Beginning with Verse 1, you have the author talking about men, the Lineage of Cain, multiplying on the earth, and that they had daughters. The Sons of God (the Line of Seth) saw that the Daughters of the Line of Cain were beautiful and married them. Because God didn't like this union, he limited the life span to 120 years. Now, to give a time reference, the niphillim are mentioned as being in existance during this time, when the lines of Cain and Seth fused into one line. The children of this union became Mighty men of old and Men of renown. The Niphillim have nothing to do with being the offspring of this union. Angels have nothing to do with it either. Now for the verses you cited. 2 Peter 2:4 just says that Angels left heaven. Which is already known. According to one of the prophets. Satan rebelled, took a third of the angels with him, and God kicked them out. This passage never says anything about angels taking human form and having sex with humans. Jude 1:6-7 I've been waiting for someone to bring this one up. Again, the context isn't looked at closely. The whole context of Jude is about those who have disobeyed God. Verse 7 points out NOT that angels went after strange flesh, but the point is that the angels who disobeyed are going to made examples of just like Sodom and Gamorrah were made examples of. The phrase referring to indulging in strange flesh and gross immorality is talking about Sodom and Gamorrah, NOT the Angels. The reference was only given to remind the readers why Sodom and Gamorrah were destroyed. All that is pertinant to the Angels who rebelled is that they left heaven, and will be punished and made examples of, which is already known in the prophetic passages. It doesn't say anything about angels having sex with humans. John 8:44 merely presents to us who Satan truly is. Genesis 3:24 This talks about the Cherubim who was sent to protect the tree of Life. According to the context, this could be the only Cherubim ever known. On top of that, CHerubims aren't referenced to until the creation of the Ark of the Covenant and Until Daniel. Job 1:6 Again, Angels are mentioned by name. In fact, if you read verses 1-5 of Job 1, you get a totally different picture. That passage talks about feasts, festivals, and worship gatherings. That seems to support my suggestion that the "Sons of God" in verse 6 are humans engaging in the worship of God. I'm sorry, but when you look at these passages in their proper context, the idea that Angels married human females not only sounds rediculous, but is unscriptural as well. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
2 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Morant61 | 30752 | ||
Greetings Jesusman! Since this thread seems destined to go on forever, I might as well get involved! :-) I don't feel that it is possible, nor necessary, to take a dogmatic position on this issue either way. It simply isn't that important. However, I can't agree that there isn't any possibility of the "Sons of God" referring to angels or that Jude 7 may refer back to Gen. 6:1-4. Here is why: 1) The LXX, in Job 1:6, actually translates the phrase "the sons of God" as "the angels of God". 2) 1 Enoch, which Jude may have been alluding to, clearly interprets Gen. 6:1-4 as referring to sexual relations between humans and angels. Now, my point isn't to prove the case either way, but simply to point out that both of these sources were fairly conteporary with the writing of the New Testament. Thus, they provide some support to the notion that "Sons of Men" means angels and that Gen. 6:1-4 could refer to sexual relations between women and angels. On a technicule note, would the 'toutois' of Jude 7 have to refer back to the "angels" of Jude 6? Thus, equating the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah with the sin of the angels! "Angels" was the only possible antecedent that I could find in Jude 5-7. However, I couldn't find much info in the quick scan I did of my sources and the text. Maybe you have access to something I missed! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30981 | ||
Hello Tim, As for Job, and the LXX using angels, true, it does say that. This was one of the things I was researching this week. However, according to my sources, only the LXX uses "angels". I haven't been able to find another source that uses it. This leads me to think that the true reading was "sons". Next, and for the book of Enoch being used in Jude, yes, and it is directly referenced in Jude 14. However, I wonder why Enoch wasn't placed among the cannon? As for "toutos", It doesn't refer to the angels in verse 6. I spelled it out in my other post I gave to "Discipled". You might want to check it out. Here's the abridged edition. "Toutos" refers to Sodom and Gammorah, not the angels. First, you have a constistant pattern. To mention the angels in verse 6, in verse 7, would break up that pattern. If not, then verse 6 would also refer to the people of egypt from verse 5 in one form or another. As we can see, it doesn't. So, the pattern includes that the example of one verse is separate from the other examples in the context. Then there is a matter of punctuation. There is a greek coma between "sodom and gammorah" and "the cities around them". There is no such punctuation between "sodom" and "Gammorah". This shows that "Sodom and Gammorah" are to be contrasted or compared to "the cities around them". The following verse shows that comparisson. "They (the cities around them), in the same manner as these (Sodom and Gammorah) ...". Jesusman |
||||||
4 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 31006 | ||
On an added note, Sodom and Gamorrah are known all throughout scripture to have been destroyed due to their sexual immorality. The term "sodomite", which is derived from name of the city of Sodom, carries the meaning of someone who acted as the people of Sodom acted, ie: sexually immoral. This is a constant meaning throughout the Bible. It is not disputed. On top of that, there is no direct, undisputed passage that says that angels acted sexually immoral. With that, and what I said in my previous post concerning the Greek language, it follows that the cities around sodom and gamorrah acted like Sodom and Gamorrah. Angels aren't a part of this verse. The only relation between verse 6 and 7 is that they are examples of those who have disobeyed and were punished. Verses 6 and 7 share this with verse 5, and the three ultimately tie into the larger context of the Epistle of Jude. Jesusman |
||||||