Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 2 Peter 2:4 ¶ For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment; |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 2 Peter 2:4 ¶ For if God did not [even] spare angels that sinned, but threw them into hell and sent them to pits of gloom to be kept [there] for judgment; |
Subject: explain Genesis 6:2-4 |
Bible Note: Greetings, First off, my reply wasn't to Doc nor to you, but to the original poster. Secondly, I find the notion that you believe me to be some secular troublemaker disturbing since there is absolutely zero proof of such accusations in anything I have written in my short time here. For that, I would like an apology. Thirdly, I didn't turn to any secular sources at all. I provided an interpretation of the passage based on the grammar, hermeneutics, and simple common sense. As for Mark 12, yes, read the context. The topic is a question of who's wife will she be? Jesus answers that at the time, there will be no marriage, but that it will be for them as it is for the angels now. Meaning, that there will be no marriage. Now, to imply that Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage is not a great stretch of the context, but is plain in the text. My point in using this passage is to discredit the notion that the identity of the Sons of God in Genesis 6 is angels. This is based partly on the fact that the "Sons of God" took wives. As for Hebrews 1, again, the topic is comparing Jesus to Angels, and the rhetorical question is made of which angel did God declare to be his child? The answer, which I stated before, is obvious. None of them. Again, this also applies to discredit the identity of the "Sons of God" in Genesis 6 as being angels because, as Hebrews implies, no angel has been called "a son of God". Now, my use of Romans 8:14 and 1 John 3:1 is to help support my main belief that the identity of the Sons of God in Genesis 6 is the line of Seth, who appeared to have been obedient to God's will, which carries a similar meaning to the usage in Romans and 1 John. A broader definition would "Human believers" As for the explanation of the Trinity, if you had read what I said, it should be clear. The only obscure use of the phrase "Sons of God" is found in Job. I was providing an alternative interpretation of the use of that phrase in Job as a pre-emptive explanation as to one of the more popular support passages that people will use to say that the Sons of God in Genesis 6 are angels. They will often use Job. My theory on the dinosaurs is just a simple explanation on who the nephilim really are. They can't be the offspring of the Sons and Daughters because they were already living when the two groups mated. Therefore, it means something else, as I explained before. Now, I have given my explanation on the passage, and I have provided this added bit of clarity. For the record, I did stick to the topic at hand, which was identifying the Sons of God and the Nephilim in Genesis 6. I pulled from resources found elsewhere in the Bible to support my claims. Never did I cite a resource outside the Bible. If you wish to believe in the myth of angels mating with humans, and creating demigods straight out of the tales of Greek Mythology, go ahead. Personally, I'll believe what I've supported, that this was a time when the godly line of Seth intermarried with the ungodly line of Cain, and it happened when the nephilim still walked the earth. Jalek |