Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Genesis 6:2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Genesis 6:2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful and desirable; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose and desired. |
Subject: angelic beings pro-create or not? |
Bible Note: Makarios Since I can't seem to reason with you read this 6:2 the sons of God saw the daughters of men. The sons of God, identified elsewhere almost exclusively as angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7), saw and took wives of the human race. This produced an unnatural union which violated the God-ordained order of human marriage and procreation (Gen. 2:24). Some have argued that the sons of God were the sons of Seth who cohabited with the daughters of Cain; others suggest they were perhaps human kings wanting to build harems. But the passage puts strong emphasis on the angelic vs. human contrast. The NT places this account in sequence with other Genesis events and identifies it as involving fallen angels who indwelt men (see notes on 2 Pet. 2:4,5; Jude 6). Matthew 22:30 does not necessarily negate the possibility that angels are capable of procreation, but just that they do not marry. To procreate physically, they had to possess human, male bodies. MacArthur, J. J. (1997, c1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed.) (Ge 6:2-3). Nashville: Word Pub. Also I know you have a Jewish friend ask him. I know that in many Jewish teachings that this is considered a reference to angels. The Jewish book Enoch speaks of this in more detail and even names the angels involved. I completely understand the Book of Enoch is not scriptural and I'm not implying that it is even correct. What I demonstrating is this issue is so uncertain that it has been the subject of discussion for many thousands of years. Many men that have devoted their lives to the study of scripture have not been able to resolve this issue and for you to say you have the answer is going out on a limb. Perhaps it would better serve you if you argued this point with MacArthur as I'm apparently unable to show you where your saying things that scripture simply doesn't say. As I have said everything I know about this subject and unless you have something else to offer I see no point in continuing this. However If you have new material or if I come across something let us consider that. EdB |