Results 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
|||||
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 | The Disciple | 30782 | ||
Another note to the issue... Brief conclusion: The writer is trying to show us that what was stated in the previous verse is still the topic of the next verse. Namely angels and how like in S/G they went after strange flesh. These angels are different from others we know about because they willingly left their abode(habitation) knowing the consequences of doing so. 2Pet2:4 is crossed to Jude 6. The place of holding is called Tartarus, a place of final punishment. Involves severe limitations of action, symbolized by 'chains'. Almost total lack of understanding, symbolized by the darkness. A special place indeed. Saved for special punishment because of special circumstances? Why were these angels put their? The only scripture that can coincide is found in Jude 6, where, "reserved for judgent" is found again. I can only hope to believe we are both wrong in our endeavors for truth in this issue. The Lord may tell us when we get to Him...we were so cloooooooooose...but yet. How much more can we see if we were to do a verse by word by precept search of this passage? I pray we both can glean that which is lovely from all this. *SHALOM* Discipled |
||||||
3 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Servant7 | 31079 | ||
Greetings in the Lord, Sadly, my brother, you can light a persons foot on fire, and they will refuse to address it. Traditions are often the controling factor, and not the Word of God. Alot of the confusion is created by the notion that Seth's line was Godly and noble. This simply was not the case. Seth's line (aside from Noah), perished in the flood. This whole mess is created by a missed translation of Gen 4:26. "Then men bagan to call upon the name of the Lord", is incorrect. "then men began to profane the name of the Lord", is a more accurate rendering. I attempted to share this in other posts, and was met with sarcasm, and disdain; hardly what I expected from my family in Christ. While there is no one hundred percent guarantee that this is refrenceing angels, it certainly is not speaking of Seth's line. Some other "heavenly Bodies"? Only the Lord knows. This is not salvation issues, but might have great importance in the end days. What Deceptions is Jesus Refrencing in Matt 24:4? Does Matt 24:37 shed some light on this? Let us not forget that the word "nephilim" also means "fallen ones". Check out the root word "Nephal"; "to fall, be cast down, to fall away, desert". What does this mean? Let me know what you think. These Nephilim are obviously not done.(Matt24:37). This is the difference from Noah's time to know? Tell Me what you think brother. In Christ, Servant7 |
||||||
4 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 31100 | ||
Hello, I must disagree with parts of what was stated. As for your insight into Genesis 4:24, I have not come across that before. I'll check into it. As for Seth's line perishing in the flood, this is incorrect. Noah, being a decendant of Seth, carried on the Line. The Line of Seth continued. As for Genesis 6 not referring to the line of Seth, there is stronger support for the line of Seth than there is for the possibility of it being angels. As I have shown throughout this thread, the thought that Angels married humans is not only not supported in Scripture, but goes against the Scripture as well. Then you have the fact that angels are never identified directly as the "sons of God". As for the Niphillim, the text reveals that they existed at the time. Nothing, other than it being a time reference, can be concluded from the text of genesis 6. The only other usage for "niphillim" is in Numbers 13. Due to the great flood separating the historical context of these two passages, it is highly unlikely that the two passages are of talking about the same group of niphillim. At best, the term "niphillim" can be descriptive in nature. As for Matthew 24:37, the point Jesus was trying to make is that his coming will be unexpected, as he explains in the following verses. This isn't connected to the topic at hand. At best, the idea that Angels came to earth, against God's will, mated with humans, and produced superhumans is pure conjecture and is not, nor can be supported in any fashion. The only explaination for this passage is that it is referring to the Line of Seth which will ultimately bring the Christ to us, as is noted in the Geneology in Luke. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
5 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Servant7 | 31112 | ||
Greetings in The Lord, JMan, If you will briefly review my post to Decipled, you will find I stated "aside from Noah". The plurality of the phrase "sons of God" in Gen 6 is what i am refrencing. They all did perish in the flood (again, aside from Noah). Only 8 individuals were found worthy not to perish. And again I say, "Heavenly Bodies" does not refer to a man ever in the word; Therefore, to assume it does now is also cojecture. I wholeheartedly disagree with you on this topic, but my love for you brother, goes without saying. You truly seek to enlighten through the word, by diligent study. That is the heart of a servant. As always a pleasure, In Christ, Servant7 |
||||||
6 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 31122 | ||
Hello, I did view you post correctly. The context of Genesis 6:1-4 takes place prior, if not around the same time as Noah. Besides, there was a long time between Noah getting the command to build the ark and the time that the flood came. That also needs to be taken into concideration as well. As for "heavenly bodies", the passage doesn't say that. It says "sons of God". The question is "Who are the 'sons of God'?" As I have continuously pointed out during this thread, the sons of God are first the Lineage of Seth, and, in a larger sense, the messianic line. Feel free to disagree with me. However, the point still remains, upon careful research, angels cannot be the Sons of God in Genesis 6. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
7 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Servant7 | 31221 | ||
Heavenly Bodies would be the literal translation of "Bene Ha Elohim". Study a little deeper and you will find the time line from Gen 6:2 to the flood was 120 years. Study a little more and tell me how long you believe a generation was pre-flood. As we look into Gen 6, we will naturally see that Noah was probably alive throughout this time. Read the last verse of Gen 5.The word covers Noahs geneology in verse 10 of Gen 6. The only purpose Gen5:32 could possibly serve is to set a time frame for Gen 6. Let us not forget that the translators added chapters and verses for readability. The original Hebrew did not. Take out the word Chapter(6) out of your Bible, read chapter 5 and 6 through, and you will recieve a feel for how it is written, and it's context. I've truly come to enjoy your responses brother; I look forward to your next post. In Christ, Servant7 |
||||||
8 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 31365 | ||
Hello, No, "sons of God" would be a literal translation. "Heavenly Bodies" is a matter of interpretation. This also goes into the area of syntax and textual critisicm, of which I admit for not being entirely familiar with in the Hebrew. While I am familiar with Hebrew grammer, the areas of Hebrew Syntax and Hebrew Textual Critisicm are areas where I need to do more research. I have heard the argument that "heavenly bodies" would be acceptable in Genesis 6, but this is primarily based upon similar usage in Job 1 and 2, which I shown to be questionable in certain ways. Besides all of this, the foundational question remains unanswerable: where does it clearly say in the Bible that Angels are identified as the Sons of God? On top of that, all of the verses provided thus far to support that angels had relations with humans has been given an entirely different interpretation, one that seems to fit closer with the context. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
9 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Love Fountain | 31367 | ||
Dear Jesusman, Gen 6:1-2 The sons of God (bene 'Elohim)... daughters of men. Wickedness was increasing on every hand. Cain's descendants became exceedingly godless and pagan. A powerful race of giants, called "Nephilim," came into prominence. The verb (napal), "to fall," has been considered the source of the noun, and so these gigantic creatures have been thought of as "fallen ones." The reference to the (bene 'Elohim) has occasioned marked differences of opinion among scholars. ('Elohim) is plural in form. It is usually translated "God." But it can be translated "gods," as, for instance, when it refers to the gods of the heathen neighbors of Israel. It can, also, denote the heavenly circle of beings in close fellowship with Jehovah, residents of heaven, assigned specific duties as God's assistants (see Job 1:6). In some cases in Scripture "sons of God" may be identified with "angels" or "messengers." Jesus is the Son of God in a unique sense. Believers are called "sons of God" because of their relationship to him. In the OT, however, "sons of God" are a special class of beings that make up the heavenly court. The reference to the marriages of (bene 'Elohim) to the daughters of men has been dealt with in many ways. To translate it literally would make the passage say that members of the heavenly company selected choice women from the earth and set up marriage relationships with them, literally and actually. This can be the only interpretation of Job 1:6. There, the (bene 'Elohim) were plainly the members of God's heavenly court. S. R. Driver maintains that this is the only legitimate and correct sense that can be accepted. (from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1962 by Moody Press) Bless you, Love Fountain |
||||||
10 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 31373 | ||
Before I reply to this quotation, again, perhaps you should read my reply below. Jesusman |
||||||