Who are the sons of God and the daughters of men

[CadyandZoe]

God most definitely referred to angels as sons of God!

Job 1:6
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

Job 2:1
Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord.

Job 38:7
When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

1. Genesis 6:2
   That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
   
   
2. Genesis 6:4
   There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

No reason to call teh angels men in Gen. 6

You are reading "angels" into the text. It isn't there.

 

[Waiting on him]

You are reading "angels" into the text. It isn't there.

I would suggest that the angels of the seven churches of revelation were in fact sons of God.

Christ was in their midst.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I would suggest that the angels of the seven churches of revelation were in fact sons of God.

Christ was in their midst.

In that instance, the "angels" were human beings -- human messengers.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes.

I thought it was fairly well known.

So human kings regularly travelled to heaven then according to you. Moses knew very well the word King and righteous king, why would he use a word to describe these entities that are mentioned only four other times in Job and clearly reference angels. Where is you revidence other than someone saying so and coming up with a very slick reinterpretation of Scripture?

Not it is not fairly well known. Not in any online encyclopedia I could reference. so you got a source or just spit balling?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You are reading "angels" into the text. It isn't there.

And you are reading "noble kings" into the text when it isn't there. And common caste women when it isn't there.

Gen. 6 contrasts the "sons of god" as opposed to the "daughters of mankind" (not just a class of women). This union produced the Nephil, and the Gibbor. How would a union of a mortal man and mortal woman produce such a class of people?

Now you have to theorize that these "noble kings" were sheltered form the common class for several centuries !

Gen 6:1
¶
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
TOOLS

Gen 6:2
That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Daughters were being produced right from Adam and Eve! So now you have to add other suppositions not found in the word of God or history to support your base supposition.

 

[St. Joseph]

Jesus is not the only son of the father. All kings of Israel were sons of the father. Jesus is unique because God has declared Jesus to be his "monogenes" son: his unique, one of a kind son. God never referred to an Angel as "son."

That is blasphemy

 

[Waiting on him]

In that instance, the "angels" were human beings -- human messengers.

I personally believe this to be the case in Job as well.

 

[CadyandZoe]

So human kings regularly travelled to heaven then according to you. Moses knew very well the word King and righteous king, why would he use a word to describe these entities that are mentioned only four other times in Job and clearly reference angels. Where is you revidence other than someone saying so and coming up with a very slick reinterpretation of Scripture?

Not it is not fairly well known. Not in any online encyclopedia I could reference. so you got a source or just spit balling?

I don't understand your questions. How do they related to Genesis 6? Where does it say that people traveled to heaven? Where does it say that the Sons of God met with God in heaven?

In my view, there are two equally valid interpretations of Genesis 6 and angelic beings is not one of them.

Interpretation #1
Connotation: God like character i.e. "In the likeness of God." The line of Seth Genesis 5:3 Adam had a son in his own likeness.
Sons of God = the sons of Seth
Daughters of men = the daughters of Cain.

Both groups are human beings

Interpretation #2
Connotation: A king under God's authority and ostensibly representing his will on earth.
Sons of God = Kings and rulers under divine right.
Daughters of men = the daughters of common man.

Both groups are human beings

God declares that a human man, Solomon, will be his "son." 2Samuel 7:14
He declares that David's dynasty will have no end. Thus, each of the kings of Israel were God's son. Psalm 2:7
David marvels that God would declare a mere man to be his son. Psalm 8.
According to Jesus, Psalm 82 refers to human rulers, whom God refers to as "the gods." John 10:34-36

 

[ewq1938]

I don't understand your questions. How do they related to Genesis 6? Where does it say that people traveled to heaven? Where does it say that the Sons of God met with God in heaven?

In my view, there are two equally valid interpretations of Genesis 6 and angelic beings is not one of them.

Interpretation #1
Connotation: God like character i.e. "In the likeness of God." The line of Seth Genesis 5:3 Adam had a son in his own likeness.
Sons of God = the sons of Seth
Daughters of men = the daughters of Cain.

Both groups are human beings

Interpretation #2
Connotation: A king under God's authority and ostensibly representing his will on earth.
Sons of God = Kings and rulers under divine right.
Daughters of men = the daughters of common man.

Both groups are human beings

Seth isn't God, so his children are not sons of God. Two humans do not produce a child who becomes a giant. Giants were real and are not the product of two humans.

Sons of Seth did NOT come with satan to God in heaven in the book of Job.

Sons of God in the OT are always angelic beings, the same who left their first estate and sinned and are cast into chains reserved for judgment. Yes, those same angels.

 

[CadyandZoe]

And you are reading "noble kings" into the text when it isn't there. And common caste women when it isn't there.

Yes, we both bring a preunderstanding to the text. In my previous post, I indicate the source of my preunderstanding. But I also base my interpretation on historical context. I can't quote historical records for you. Sorry about that. I learned about the historical use of the phrase "sons of God" from a PHD in history.

Gen. 6 contrasts the "sons of god" as opposed to the "daughters of mankind" (not just a class of women). This union produced the Nephil, and the Gibbor. How would a union of a mortal man and mortal woman produce such a class of people?

I don't see any evidence that the offspring became the Nephilim. All Moses says is that they existed during those days.

The more significant question, from my perspective, is why God was upset at mankind.

Genesis 6:12 And God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for humanity had corrupted its way upon the earth.

Surely genetic corruption wasn't the issue was it? No.

Genesis 6:6 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of mankind was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually.

God is talking about moral corruption, which is the result of the evil intent of the heart of mankind.

If an angelic being were to take a human woman to be his wife, this would NOT represent the evil intent of humanity. It would represent the evil intent of angel-kind. It would not represent the corruption of human kind; it would represent the corruption of angel-kind.

Now you have to theorize that these "noble kings" were sheltered form the common class for several centuries

Gen 6:1
¶
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
TOOLS

Gen 6:2
That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Daughters were being produced right from Adam and Eve! So now you have to add other suppositions not found in the word of God or history to support your base supposition.

Not supposition; deduction.
Who were the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men? Men, and not only men but MIGHTY men. These were men of renown. And why "renown?" These were leaders and royalty and people of high standing, who performed great deeds.

 

[CadyandZoe]

That is blasphemy

2Samuel 7:14

 

[CadyandZoe]

Seth isn't God, so his children are not sons of God.

God does not sire sons biologically. The phrase "son of God" doesn't refer to a male offspring of God. It refers to the man's high status before other men. God doesn't literally give birth to a son. Rather, he symbolically gives birth to a son by proclamation, "I will be a father to him and he shall be a son to me." 2Samuel 7:14

Two humans do not produce a child who becomes a giant. Giants were real and are not the product of two humans.

The offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men were not giants. According to Moses, the Nephilim were already on the earth in those days.

Sons of Seth did NOT come with satan to God in heaven in the book of Job.

God did not meet with Satan in heaven.

Sons of God in the OT are always angelic beings, the same who left their first estate and sinned and are cast into chains reserved for judgment. Yes, those same angels.

I see no evidence that the sons of God were angelic beings. The Bible never says they were. I see evidence that the sons of God are human.

Referring to human beings Jesus says.

Matthew 5:9
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.

In the following passage, Jesus describes those who attain the resurrection of the dead. First he tells us what they will be "like" and then he tells us what they "are."

Luke 20:36
for they cannot even die anymore, for they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

1. they are like angels, but
2. they are sons of God.

Here we see the mind of the Lord, he does not agree that an angel is a son of God; in his view, an angel is distinct from a son of God. Those who attain the resurrection will be "like" an angel but they will "be" sons of God.

They are like angels in that they can't die anymore. But they are sons of God, "being sons of the resurrection."

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Interpretation #1
Connotation: God like character i.e. "In the likeness of God." The line of Seth Genesis 5:3 Adam had a son in his own likeness.
Sons of God = the sons of Seth
Daughters of men = the daughters of Cain.

Both groups are human beings

Interpretation #2
Connotation: A king under God's authority and ostensibly representing his will on earth.
Sons of God = Kings and rulers under divine right.
Daughters of men = the daughters of common man.

Both groups are human beings

and both of these are interpretations. Interpreting is different from reading and accepting.

I don't understand your questions. How do they related to Genesis 6? Where does it say that people traveled to heaven? Where does it say that the Sons of God met with God in heaven?

God dwells in heaven! Since sin came no man can behold God and live. Even Moses, whom I assume you would call one of these "noble kings" could not look upon god!

As for Satan being in heaven?

6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

7 And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

If you do not know that this means teh encounter was not on earth, then we must end this as you cannot fathom basic grammatic understanding.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I don't see any evidence that the offspring became the Nephilim. All Moses says is that they existed during those days.

The more significant question, from my perspective, is why God was upset at mankind.

Genesis 6:12 And God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for humanity had corrupted its way upon the earth.

Surely genetic corruption wasn't the issue was it? No.

Genesis 6:6 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of mankind was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually.

God is talking about moral corruption, which is the result of the evil intent of the heart of mankind.

Yes moral corruption was the cause of destroying mankind.

But simple primary grammar tells you the Nephilim and Gibborim and men of renown are the offspring of the relationships.

 

[ewq1938]

God does not sire sons biologically.

Yes he does, one son was his only begotten.

The offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men were not giants. According to Moses, the Nephilim were already on the earth in those days.

Because of the union between angels and humans.

God did not meet with Satan in heaven.

Yes he did.

Referring to human beings Jesus says.

We are talking about Hebrew from the OT not Greek from the NT.

 

[Truth7t7]

Jesus is not the only son of the father. All kings of Israel were sons of the father. Jesus is unique because God has declared Jesus to be his "monogenes" son: his unique, one of a kind son. God never referred to an Angel as "son."

Jesus Christ is God Almighty, the creator of all things, the Alpha-Omega

 

[Truth7t7]

That is blasphemy

I Agree 100%

 

[St. Joseph]

God does not sire sons biologically. The phrase "son of God" doesn't refer to a male offspring of God. It refers to the man's high status before other men. God doesn't literally give birth to a son. Rather, he symbolically gives birth to a son by proclamation, "I will be a father to him and he shall be a son to me." 2Samuel 7:14


The offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men were not giants. According to Moses, the Nephilim were already on the earth in those days.

God did not meet with Satan in heaven.

I see no evidence that the sons of God were angelic beings. The Bible never says they were. I see evidence that the sons of God are human.

Referring to human beings Jesus says.

Matthew 5:9
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.

In the following passage, Jesus describes those who attain the resurrection of the dead. First he tells us what they will be "like" and then he tells us what they "are."

Luke 20:36
for they cannot even die anymore, for they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

1. they are like angels, but
2. they are sons of God.

Here we see the mind of the Lord, he does not agree that an angel is a son of God; in his view, an angel is distinct from a son of God. Those who attain the resurrection will be "like" an angel but they will "be" sons of God.

They are like angels in that they can't die anymore. But they are sons of God, "being sons of the resurrection."

I never get into a discussion over satan.
It dont matter how he was formed,created,or generated. Whether was in heaven,still in heaven. I trust in Christ. So... .....satan can go to hell.

 

[CadyandZoe]

and both of these are interpretations. Interpreting is different from reading and accepting.

"Interpreting", as I use the term, is reading with care.

God dwells in heaven! Since sin came no man can behold God and live. Even Moses, whom I assume you would call one of these "noble kings" could not look upon god!

When God wants to meet with people, he comes as "the angle of the Lord."

As for Satan being in heaven?

6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

7 And the Lord said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

If you do not know that this means teh encounter was not on earth, then we must end this as you cannot fathom basic grammatic understanding.

It isn't a grammar issue. Whether Satan were on earth or in heaven as he spoke, his meaning would not change. He isn't saying, "I was down on earth and now I am up here in heaven." All he said was that he was roaming the earth.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Yes moral corruption was the cause of destroying mankind.

But simple primary grammar tells you the Nephilim and Gibborim and men of renown are the offspring of the relationships.

No, it doesn't. Moses places the Nephilim on the earth prior to the sons of God taking wives.