Who are the sons of God and the daughters of men

[Truth7t7]

Correct = as long as they remain in their spiritual domain.

Jude 1:5-7
But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jude 1:5-7 proves nothing as you continue to post this as support for your continued claims

Give a complete explanation on the scripture referenced and make a firm claim, tired of watching scripture posted without a explanation and claim, waiting?

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Truth7t7]

This has really nothing to do with the story of the sons of God.
And never said God's words are fantasy.....the fantasy is going on between your ears.

I Agree 100%

 

[David in NJ]

This has really nothing to do with the story of the sons of God.
And never said God's words are fantasy.....the fantasy is going on between your ears.

You are calling God's CLEAR words of Genesis ch6, Job, Luke ch20 , 2 Peter ch2 and Jude as fantasy.

Your blinded by your own unbelief which is quite common today.

 

[David in NJ]

Jude 1:5-7 proves nothing as you continue to post this as support for your continued claims

Give a complete explanation on the scripture referenced and make a firm claim, tired of watching scripture posted without a explanation and claim, waiting?

Jesus Is The Lord

Unbelief of "It is written" will never give you understanding.

 

[Grailhunter]

You are calling God's CLEAR words of Genesis ch6, Job, Luke ch20 , 2 Peter ch2 and Jude as fantasy.

Your blinded by your own unbelief which is quite common today.

I have plenty of belief just do not make a fantasy out of the Word of God.
Again the way you reason things you could come up with anything.
The scriptures you have given do not say that sons of God were angels or that their offspring were giants or that they were bad.
As a whole the sons of God or son of God is a positive term....generally denoting the good and significant figures of the Bible.
This discussion has been going on for centuries....and no one has come up with the answers

 

[Truth7t7]

Unbelief of "It is written" will never give you understanding.

Your opinion without supporting scripture

(The Sons Of God) were mortal human men, that married mortal human women

Angels don't maintain human sperm, nor do they marry taking wives upon earth as the Sons of God did below

Genesis 6:2KJV
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.

Matthew 22:30KJV
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

 

[Truth7t7]

Your blinded by your own unbelief which is quite common today.

More like, Dave blinded by a belief not found in scripture

The late Chuck Missler and Calvary Chapels, the very promoters of this false teaching in the Nephilim

In Love, Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Marty fox]

The account begins with mankind multiplying and giving birth to daughters. Born among mankind were sons and daughters. The question is who were "the sons of God" and "the daughters of men"? According to Gen 4:26 from the lineage of Seth a human son was born, and he was called Enos. It was then that mankind began to call upon the name of the Lord. Is this enough to prove the line that originated from Seth, the son of Adam, who was another son appointed by God instead of Abel whom Cain killed, were human sons of God who procreated and produced offspring with daughters of men from the line of Cain? Or the line that introduced revenge and murder to mankind?

Genesis 4:25-26 (KJV) And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

From this passage we learn that calling upon the name of the Lord did not come from the line of Cain, who had been driven away from the line of Seth to become a vagabond upon the earth. It would be unreasonable to deny those who call upon the name of the LORD are not the sons of God. But who are the daughters of men these sons of God desired and took against the will of God?

Genesis 4:3-5 (KJV) And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

Offerings were obviously made unto the LORD even before mankind began to call upon His name. Both Cain and Abel gave offerings, but only the offering made of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof by Abel were acceptable to the LORD. The offering of the fruit of the ground by Cain wasn't even said to be the firstfruit that was what the LORD desired.

The story goes on to show how in a rage of jealous anger Cain murdered his brother Abel and was subsequently driven out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. Cain's wife conceived and bare Enoch, he built a city and called the city after the name of his son, Enoch. As this line continues, we read of Enoch's son, Lamech who was a murderer and considered the vengeance of God toward Cain would be light compared to his own (see Gen 4:23-24).

The point for this rambling is that a strong case can be made that the daughters of men were women in unbelief, being born in an atmosphere without being in the presence of the LORD, and no desire for calling upon His name. They were daughters of wickedness, and though beautiful to look at forbidden of those who called upon the name of the LORD, the sons of God to marry. In disobedience to God the faithful sons of God married and bare children of wickedness through these daughters of men. The resulting flood that God brought upon the earth was to rid the world of this great wickedness of mankind, not of fallen angels. It is mankind in unbelief, without desiring to call upon the name of the Lord whose hearts are only evil continually, not fallen angels, if there be any such thing.

Genesis 6:1-5 (KJV) And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 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. And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Yes amen

 

[CadyandZoe]

Those scriptures i gave you are 100% irrefutably directly connected to understanding who the "sons of God" were/are in Genesis ch6

How are they connected? They don't share a common theme or a common subject matter. The ONLY thing they have in common are three words "sons of God."

So also is Romans 8: 9-11"though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness"
AND
1 Cor ch15 - Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

Our flesh bodies were not Born-Again, only our spirit.

Spirits are not born again. People are born again. Don't fall for the fallacious spirit/flesh dichotomy.

This you said is true: "But this is not the final state of the man in Christ."

Focus on the TRUTH = Luke 20:34-36

Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage.
But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;
nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

There are two problems with your analysis in my view: 1) The New Testament's use of the phrase "sons of" and answering the wrong question.

"Sons of"
In the New Testament, the phrase "sons of" has the figurative meaning: "characteristic of." For instance, Mark records the calling of the Twelve and in that passage we read that Jesus gave nicknames to the sons of Zebedee, "sons of thunder." In other words, James and John were like thunder in some way.

In Luke 20:34-36, Jesus is comparing TWO groups: 1) sons of this age and 2) sons of the resurrection. The sons of this age are those living in this age, with all of the attributes and limitations of this age. The Sons of the resurrection have new and different attributes and have some of the limitations removed.

Jesus isn't saying that the sons of the resurrection are equal to angels. He is saying that the sons of the resurrection they will share at least one situation and one attribute in common with the angels. Situationally, the sons of the resurrection will not marry or be given in marriage, just like the angels. And with regard to having a new attribute; The sons of the resurrection can never die anymore, just like the angels.

Answering the wrong question:
With regard to the nature of humanity, we ask two different fundamental questions, 1) who are we, and 2) what are we. If you are asking me what I am, I will list my attributes such as: sex, age, height, species, etc. If you are asking me who I am, I will list items that situate me in time and history and why I am distinct from other human beings: name, family linage, address, education, CV, occupation, work history and etc.

Now, consider the investigation process as we seek to understand what Genesis 6 means by "the sons of God." What question are we asking? Who are they? or What are they? Deciding which question is relevant is fundamental to our understanding of the passage. Is Moses telling us who these people are or is he telling us what these people are?

Suppose Moses was answer the question, "what are they?"

What:
Sons of God = angelic beings
Daughters of men = human beings.

But suppose Moses was answering the question, "who are they"?

Who:
Sons of God = royalty
Daughters of men = common

Hopefully you can see the distinction and why it matters whether Moses is answering "who" or "what."
Is he concerned with their metaphysical state, i.e. angel vs. human, or is he concerned with their status among humans, i.e. royalty vs. common?

Those who say that the "sons of God" are angelic beings are answering the question, "What are they?" Son = Angel = metaphysical state = a state of being. But what if that is the wrong question to ask?

Focus on the TRUTH = 1 John 3:1-3

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

If you deny or misalign scripture, you will come to your own understanding (PhD) and FAIL to SEE what has been Said.

Again, what question is John addressing? Is John saying that we are now Angelic beings? I don't think he is.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Mary had a Partner = the Holy Spirit

However, the Holy Spirit did not become a man and impregnate Mary.

Luke 1:35 - "And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.'

If she had a partner, she was not a virgin.
The Holy Spirit was NOT her partner. The birth of Jesus is a miracle performed by the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit didn't mate with Mary.

And Again, "son of God" doesn't answer to the question, "what was he?" It answers to the question, "who was he?"

 

[CadyandZoe]

I agree, not only was human corruption found in those who never called upon the name of the LORD, but what was worse corruption and evil was found in those who did call upon the LORD'S name. Though it isn't stated, I believe that God brought forth through natural birth this race of mighty tyrants, giants to lord over the people and bully them because their evil had become so great. Also the flood came against mankind upon the earth. Not against angels. Why destroy human life if the sin originated from so-called fallen angels?

Good question.
In my responses to David, I have established two distinct questions we can ask about any person, angel or human being: 1) who is he, and 2) what is he?

Those who believe that the Sons of God were angelic beings, believe that Moses is answering the question, "what were they?" Answer, they were angels.

But what if Moses was answering the other question? Who are they? In this instance, not all angels are sons of God just as not all human beings are sons of God. The question, "who am I?" seeks to know how I am distinct from other human beings. In what way am I distinct? Am I a king, a prince, a pauper, or a thief? The "what" of me is distinct from the "who" of me.

 

[Grailhunter]

Over the centuries there has been a lot of interest in the event of the sons of God mating with the daughters of men and the offspring they produced. If you are interested in reviewing some of the theories on this story Wikipedia has some information on this….I say some but not all.

Sons of God - Wikipedia

Again we do not have all the information required to answer all the questions that these verses bring up. The problem is that the story itself is vague, short, and it is a stand alone event.

What we know and what we do not know.

1. We don't know where the giants came from, all we know is that there were more than one race of them and they were there before and after the sons of God mated with the daughters of men. Because the scriptures do not tell us where the giants came from, people want to see that answer in this story.....and it is just not there. Not for the Nephilim or the Anakim, or the Rephaim.

2. We do not know the linage of the daughters of men. Some try to trace it back to Seth but there is no consistent linage in the scriptures.

3. We do not know that the daughters of men were good or bad.

4. We do not know how many couplings there were....3 or 300 hundred.

5. We do not know for sure if God objected to the coupling of the sons of God with the daughters of men. Could it be a bad thing for divine beings to impregnate women? Yahweh impregnated Miriam.

6. The Bible indicates that angels do not marry or reproduce….does this mean that they are incapable of reproducing or that it is forbidden for them to reproduce? It is a sticky point, and one that has been debated over the centuries, but the sons of God that presented themselves before God in the Book of Job are not defined as angels in word or example. They appear to be undefined divine beings. The Old Testament does indicate the existence of other beings besides God and angels…..the Lord of hosts…etc. And since men do not present themselves before God in the Holy Court of God, they are definitely not human.

7. The phrase sons of God or the phrase son of God does not indicate anything negative in the Bible. The phrases denote good and important figures in the scriptures.

8. There is no biblical support that would indicate that the sons of God are associated with the fall of angels.

9. It is clear in the story that the offspring of these couplings produced superior men of some sort.

10. The Bible does not indicate that the offspring of these couplings were giants....mighty men....not mighty giants.

11. Mighty men and of renown….we do not know what they did to deserve this description. There is no lineage for the daughters of men or the descendants of the mighty men. So the sky has been the limit on speculation. Were people like Moses, Yoshua, Yacob, David etc, descendants of the mighty men, there is nothing to prove this.

12. There is no written connection between this event and the flood. The scriptures indicate that Yahweh caused the flood due to the wickedness that abound on earth. Since this event with sons of God is not described as wrong or wicked, there is no reason to assume that it was “the” cause of the flood. The wickedness that Yahweh was referring to was the whole world. But since the flood is mentioned in close proximity, it causes questions among the other questions.

The giant Nephilim like the Anakim, and the Rephaim are associated with groups later in the Old Testament that worshipped Pagan gods. Which brings up some other questions…

1. Did the giants survive the flood? How and why?

2. Is there any reason to assume that the descendants of the sons of God would worship Pagan gods?

3. "and they took wives for themselves," Wives not just sex acts. Is this an indication of morality? A marriage, did they stay with the women? Did they raise their sons?

4. “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” Why did God say this? This again, is something people have have debated for years. We don't know for sure what it meant, but we know what it did not mean. It did not effect the life span of males, they continued to have long life spans. (The Bible does not indicate that females had Long life spans.) So people speculate on this too.

Considering all this, there can be no conclusive determination on this story, all we can say for certain is that there has to be more to the story. Ergo all the efforts to speculate.

Genesis 6:1-8
6 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6. The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 The Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord

 

[CadyandZoe]

Just listen to the bible:

Mat_1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Mat_1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Verse 20 helps the reader understand why it was appropriate for Joseph to wed his fiancé. Now suppose the angel said, "fear not to take Mary as your wife: for that which is conceived in her is of your neighbor next door." Would this make sense? No. Why? Because a man is not obligated to wed an adulterous women, i.e. a woman that has slept with another man.

The justification for a Joseph / Mary union is the fact that the conception came about as a miracle, a method outside of nature. To suggest that Mary received biological material from a spirit being is not only absurd, but it defeats the argument for why Joseph should be willing to marry his fiancé. This miracle is of the same sort as changing water into wine.

Mankind changes water into wine all the time. It is a slow process of growing grapes in soil and giving the grape plants water to drink. The grapes are harvested, mashed, filtered and fermented. Eventually the vintner has wine. Jesus skipped the entire process, miraculously going from water straight to wine. Likewise, God skipped the natural process of creating a baby such that Mary was found to be pregnant apart from nature.

God did not exchange bodily fluids with Mary.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Because this is a public forum. I do not know you at all. Nor do you know me. If we make claims we should have the info to back it up.

Sure, I agree with that. But historical proof is not something any of us can supply. Surely you know this. We could argue for months on end about the credibility of historians etc. I simply ask you to trust me as a brother. And what am I asking you to do? Pick the historical sources you DO trust and search it out for yourself. As I said, this is such a common way to refer to loyalty that it shouldn't take you more than five minutes to find reliable information.

You could be just flinging bull for all anyone knows.

And how would you know? Right? But this is what trust is all about. If we remain skeptical all the time, we will never learn anything new.

It is always teh best that we can back up claims with facts, otherwise people will tend ot think you are just being dishonest. I went and searched about your "noble kings" and found nothing on the net.

Okay, fair enough

And sorry, if you make a claim, it is your responsibility to back it up with fact.

I get that. It's simply a hazard of this medium. If I were writing a paper, I would give references of course. But convincing you to believe MY references is tricky at best. I believed my historian friend because 1) he is a faithful Christian man, 2) he has shown himself to be trustworthy, 3) he has a degree in history, 4) he served as the president of a college. I have no reason to doubt his bona fides. And I have no explanation for why you couldn't find information regarding references to kings as either gods or sons of a god.

Type this into your Google search, "Was Pharaoh considered Ra?" It might be a good place to start.

In a court case the prosecutor does not defend the defendant. And on a forum we are in the court of public opinion. when people refuse or cannot back their claims, they tend to be disregarded as credible.

Well, I didn't say "believe me because I said so."

Yes many post babel civilizations rendered their kings as gods or sons of gods, but there is 0 that even hints of this pre flood. that is why you are challenged!

You expect me to take your word? :) isn't turn about fair play? :) Right? But as I said, we shouldn't simply react to people. I'm not going to give you a hard time for not defending your claims without proof. I simply consider your information to be an invitation to look into it myself.

Well it is good to see that you finally recognize angels are called sons of God. But once again , outside of these five references you will not find the people of God in the OT called the sons of God. Wife of Jehovah yes, but sons of God-no!

You will not find Angels in the OT called the sons of God either. Where does that leave us?

 

[Marty fox]

Genesis 6:1-8
When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”

4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.


Many people believe that the sons of God were fallen angels who fornicated and had children with female human beings thus making the world so evil that God decided to destroy civilization. Could this really be? Could spiritual being really fornicate with human beings even though Paul taught us that heavenly bodies have a different splendor than human bodies in 1 Corinthians 15? Would God really allow this to happen? I believe not

I believe that the sons of God were the faithful line of God and that the daughters of men were the daughters of the unfaithful line of Cain.

In the previous chapters of Genesis we see that the descendants of Seth were faithful to God while the descendants of Cain were not. All we hear about the descendants of Cain is the great accomplishments they made but Seth's descendants were great men of God. The earth seamed quite peaceful up until this time so what changed?

God constantly warns the faithful to not dwell with the unfaithful throughout the Old Testament and there is a reason for this which is to keep the faithful from being corrupted. We read that the sons of God were only attracted to the daughters of men because they are beautiful not because they loved them so the reason why they fornicated with them was for lust not love.

Over time while dwelling with the unfaithful the faithful conformed to the ways of the unfaithful until the faithful came down to just one man Noah. The ways of the Lord was lost and the offspring of these people lived for themselves not for the Lord as the whole world became filled with wickedness and this was the reason that God decided to destroy almost all of the human race with the great flood.

God protected the line of the faithful and continued to do so throughout the bible. I believe that this kind of serves as warning to the church and will be the same reason that God will destroy the human race in the future by fire as the church is slowly conforming to the ways of the world.

This study I believe is also the answer as to when and why will God end the world.

There is a lot of end times in Genesis chapters 4-6.

 

[Grailhunter]

Verse 20 helps the reader understand why it was appropriate for Joseph to wed his fiancé. Now suppose the angel said, "fear not to take Mary as your wife: for that which is conceived in her is of your neighbor next door." Would this make sense? No. Why? Because a man is not obligated to wed an adulterous women, i.e. a woman that has slept with another man.

The justification for a Joseph / Mary union is the fact that the conception came about as a miracle, a method outside of nature. To suggest that Mary received biological material from a spirit being is not only absurd, but it defeats the argument for why Joseph should be willing to marry his fiancé. This miracle is of the same sort as changing water into wine.

Mankind changes water into wine all the time. It is a slow process of growing grapes in soil and giving the grape plants water to drink. The grapes are harvested, mashed, filtered and fermented. Eventually the vintner has wine. Jesus skipped the entire process, miraculously going from water straight to wine. Likewise, God skipped the natural process of creating a baby such that Mary was found to be pregnant apart from nature.

God did not exchange bodily fluids with Mary.

How many times have I addressed this one. LOL Can spiritual beings have relations with a woman and produce offspring? Well the sons of God did. Part of the problem is the attitude that Christianity developed toward sex and women after the biblical era. The Early Church Fathers, most of the well known Christian leaders taught that sex and women were filth and some taught that sex in marriage was a sin. They pretty much taught that sex and women were dirty, nasty, and sinful and in league with the devil. Ergo the witch hunts and the Catholic Church's belief that to be "truly right with God" and a religious leader you had to be celibate. For most of its history the Early Church Fathers and then the Catholic Church were not keen on marriage. As seen in the doctrine that sin is contagious through sex....the doctrine of Original Sin were babies are born with sin...infected because their mother and father had sex. Horse manure!

So when people consider of the story of God impregnating Miriam....it has to be something other than sex because God would never do something as dirty, nasty, and sinful and connected to devil. So instead of accepting what the scriptures say, they are going to come up with some wild alternatives that is not described in the scriptures...and I do mean wild because I have heard a lot of them....like....

For those that believe in the preexisting Christ....He shrunk Himself or became seed and miraculously manifested His seed-self into Miriam and fertilized her egg and she was impregnated. Of course the storyline does not have Christ doing anything, God the Father impregnated her.

That He became a baby and beamed Himself into Miriam's womb. Forgoing the possibly that He was God's Son.

Of for those that believe that the Trinity is one person.....God so love the world that He begot Himself and Miriam carried all of them inside her womb and Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were crucified, Christ was talking to Himself on the cross and they resurrected together.

And then for the Catholics, Miriam was a virgin after she conceived and after she gave birth to Christ. Because they do not want to believe that Christ would touch anything as dirty and nasty as female genitalia. The term virgin Mary does not appear in the Bible.

And then people have to do a juggling act in their minds, that what happened was not by the seed of God, but then they want to believe that Christ is the real Son of God.

I have heard it said that God was incapable of manifesting as a man.....they put no limit on God Almighty for anything else....but for this one thing He does not have the power to do.

The fact is, other than it involving God the Father, the scriptures do not describe some miraculous thing that happened, it is pretty much within the normal process of things. Yeshua is the real Son of Yahweh. Miriam received the seed of Yahweh. The scriptures say that, God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,....now the scriptures make it clear what the word begot means, it does not mean some magical manifestation. As does the rest of the of the words in the description of the event mean. For a woman to conceive, it is a physical thing, so that is how the scriptures describe it. Miriam had found favor with God....God over shadowed her....and she conceived and carried His child in her womb, just like any other baby and she delivered a child. The "church" was even opposed to the idea or paintings of Christ suckling Miriam's breasts. That is how weirdo they are about this. Cause ya know breasts are dirty and sinful!

Was there anything different about Yahweh and Miriam coming together and conceiving a child....we do not know. But the physical things that have to happen to conceive a child is told in the storyline. Yeshua is the real Son of Yahweh. Hallelujah! Praise God!

The Truth can be shocking after you have been feed lies all your life.

I call my ministry the Johnny Appleseed of truth. Very much opposed to false beliefs and teachings because they skew the meaning of the scriptures. False beliefs breed false beliefs.

 

[Truth7t7]

Over the centuries there has been a lot of interest in the event of the sons of God mating with the daughters of men and the offspring they produced. If you are interested in reviewing some of the theories on this story Wikipedia has some information on this….I say some but not all.

Sons of God - Wikipedia

Again we do not have all the information required to answer all the questions that these verses bring up. The problem is that the story itself is vague and it is a stand alone event.

What we know and what we do not know.

1. We don't know where the giants came from, all we know is that there were more than one race of them and they were there before and after the sons of God mated with the daughters of men. Because the scriptures do not tell us where the giants came from, people want to see that answer in this story.....and it is just not there. Not for the Nephilim or the Anakim, or the Rephaim.

2. We do not know the linage of the daughters of men. Some try to trace it back to Seth but there is no consistent linage in the scriptures.

3. We do not know that the daughters of men were good or bad.

4. We do not know how many couplings there were....3 or 300 hundred.

5. We do not know for sure if God objected to the coupling of the sons of God with the daughters of men. Could it be a bad thing for divine beings to impregnate women? Yahweh impregnated Miriam.

6. The Bible indicates that angels do not marry or reproduce….does this mean that they are incapable of reproducing or that it is forbidden for them to reproduce? It is a sticky point, and one that has been debated over the centuries, but the sons of God that presented themselves before God in the Book of Job are not defined as angels in word or example. They appear to be undefined divine beings. The Old Testament does indicate the existence of other beings besides God and angels…..the Lord of hosts…etc. And since men do not present themselves before God in the Holy Court of God, they are definitely not human.

7. The phrase sons of God or the phrase son of God does not indicate anything negative in the Bible. The phrases denote good and important figures in the scriptures.

8. There is no biblical support that would indicate that the sons of God are associated with the fall of angels.

9. It is clear in the story that the offspring of these couplings produced superior men of some sort.

10. The Bible does not indicate that the offspring of these couplings were giants....mighty men....not mighty giants.

11. Mighty men and of renown….we do not know what they did to deserve this description. There is no lineage for the daughters of men or the descendants of the mighty men. So the sky has been the limit on speculation. Were people like Moses, Yoshua, Yacob, David etc, descendants of the mighty men, there is nothing to prove this.

12. There is no written connection between this event and the flood. The scriptures indicate that Yahweh caused the flood due to the wickedness that abound on earth. Since this event with sons of God is not described as wrong or wicked, there is no reason to assume that it was “the” cause of the flood. The wickedness that Yahweh was referring to was the whole world. But since the flood is mentioned in close proximity, it causes questions among the other questions.

The giant Nephilim like the Anakim, and the Rephaim are associated with groups later in the Old Testament that worshipped Pagan gods. Which brings up some other questions…

1. Did the giants survive the flood? How and why?

2. Is there any reason to assume that the descendants of the sons of God would worship Pagan gods?

3. "and they took wives for themselves," Wives not just sex acts. Is this an indication of morality? A marriage, did they stay with the women? Did they raise their sons?

For all these reasons there can be no conclusive determination on this story, all we can say for certain is that there has to be more to the story. Ergo all the efforts to speculate.

Genesis 6:1-8
6 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6. The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 The Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord

(The Sons Of God) were mortal human men, that married mortal human women

Angels don't maintain human sperm, nor do they marry taking wives upon earth as the Sons of God did below

Genesis 6:2KJV
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.

Matthew 22:30KJV
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

 

[Grailhunter]

(The Sons Of God) were mortal human men, that married mortal human women

Angels don't maintain human sperm, nor do they marry taking wives upon earth as the Sons of God did below

Genesis 6:2KJV
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.

Matthew 22:30KJV
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Post 632

 

[Truth7t7]

Post 632

Post 637

 

[Grailhunter]

Post 637

So we disagree....not a surprise. This is why there is no stress in my ministry. I do not care what the truth is and I do not care if people do not believe the truth....My ministry is like Christ described, casting seeds.....after I cast the truth, it is up to you and God.