Who are the sons of God and the daughters of men

[CadyandZoe]

How many times have I addressed this one.

Take your time and address it as many times as will make you happy.

LOL Can spiritual beings have relations with a woman and produce offspring? Well the sons of God did.

That is debatable and so we debate. In the day when boys believe they are girls, I suppose you are free to believe that spirits can mate with women if it makes you happy.

So when people think 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.

I never argued this. So you must enjoy talking to yourself. Go ahead be happy.

So instead of accepting what the scriptures say

Do the scriptures say that a spirit being mated with a woman. No. Not at all.

God the father impregnated her.

So you say. But it isn't part of scripture.

Miriam received the seed of Yahweh.

No scripture to back this up either.

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.

The Greek does not say "begotten."

For a woman to conceive, it is a physical thing, so that is how the scriptures describe it.

It's a physical thing for men also. But for the Creator, who said "let there be light" and there was light, he does not require an existing medium from which to fashion anything. If God needs a baby he simply speaks it into existence.

Nature had nothing at all to do with her pregnancy. God is not a man that he should need to give Mary some seed.

Yeshua is the real Son of Yahweh. Hallelujah! Praise God!

Not biologically.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

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.

If it is history and somebody spoke of it that you know that means there is proof! Well I simply ask you to trust me that this guy fed you misinformation.

Loyalty is one thing, but asking to trust you citing history and having no evidence that history took place is absolute foolishness!

I spent ten minutes on a web search and found nothing even implying unsaved kings were ever referred to as sons of God. Even saved kings for that matter.

So maybe you should take the five minutes you say it takes and support your claim instead of trying all these slick dodges to not have to defend you rposition.

Paul commended the Bereans for verifying- I am just doing the same for you r claims are not found in teh bible or any web site I could find.

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.

You are asking for blind trust. Not even Jesus asks us for blind trust! You are just dodging having to defend your claims like teh devil with "just trust me".

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

Over 1400 years after teh flood, which I said was happening. But would pharoah have been considered godly before teh flood so he could go into teh presence of the Living God? Seeing how he worshipped demons? don't think godds commentray would have called him a son of god.

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 you just posted teh evidence I said that post flood civilizations began to call kings son of the gods! But as we have proven my claim by you rown answer, I await you to prove your claim. Stop dodging teh reality of this. the simple fact of the matter is you have nothing that refers to people pre flood as being called sons of God other than conjecture and opinion, but no history.

 

[Truth7t7]

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.

Fact is, you haven't cast the truth regarding (The Sons Of God) as you suggest

(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]

That is debatable and so we debate. In the day when boys believe they are girls, I suppose you are free to believe that spirits can mate with women if it makes you happy.

It is what the Bible says.....the sons of God took women and impregnated them, that is what the story is about. And of course Yahweh impregnated Miriam.

Do the scriptures say that a spirit being mated with a woman. No. Not at all.

The sons of God were spiritual beings and God is a spiritual being.

The Greek does not say "begotten."

Of course the Greek does not say begotten, begotten is English....we are reading an English Bible.
But those that understand the Greek know that Greek words often have more than one meaning. And then the meaning of those words are dependent on the other words in the sentence and the context.

What is the Greek word for only begotten son?
Monogenēs may be used as an adjective. For example, monogenēs pais means only child, only legitimate child or special child. In this case in context only begotten.

Then the Hebrew for beget, you know all those begets in the Old Testament.
לְהוֹלִיד to become the father of (offspring); procreate: In the Bible, Isaac begat Jacob. to cause; produce as an effect.

In context with the scriptures....

1st John 4:9
In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him.

John 3:18
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

John 1:14
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Galatians 4:4
But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.

Luke 9:35
And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, my Chosen One; listen to him!”

Did I really need to quote these scriptures or are you just giving me homework?

I do not know what you are trying to prove here but I do not think you are trying to prove that Yeshua was not the Son of God.

It's a physical thing for men also. But for the Creator, who said "let there be light" and there was light, he does not require an existing medium from which to fashion anything. If God needs a baby he simply speaks it into existence.

Like I have always said, I do not care what the truth is, I just tell it.
If the scriptures would say that Yahweh spoke Him in existence......that is what I would be saying.

I kind of collect the descriptions that people have about this event....humor.....so please let me have your description of how it happened.

 

[Grailhunter]

Fact is, you haven't cast the truth regarding (The Sons Of God) as you suggest

(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.

As I said we disagree.
The sons of God were not mortal men the Bible does not say that.
I did not say that the sons of God were angels.
But still Matthew 22:30 does not say that angels cannot impregnate women....it says that they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Incapable or forbidden....I tend to lean towards incapable....but the Bible does not say that.
Either way enough said we disagree and I am ok with that.

 

[David in NJ]

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."


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

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?


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

PhD is the fastest way to intellectual debacle regarding the Holy Sciptures.

Follow this:

Matthew 18:1-5
Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, 3and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.

1 Corinthians 1:20-31
Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the [j]Greeks foolishness, 24but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. 27But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, 29that no flesh should glory in His presence. 30But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and righteousness and sanctification and redemption— 31that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the Lord.”

Proverbs 30:5-6
Every word of God is pure;
He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.
Do not add to His words,
Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

 

[CadyandZoe]

It is what the Bible says.....the sons of God took women and impregnated them, that is what the story is about.

But no where does it say that the sons of God are angelic beings. You are reading that into it.

And of course Yahweh impregnated Miriam.

He caused her to become pregnant, but he did NOT inseminate her.

The sons of God were spiritual beings and God is a spiritual being.

It depends on what you mean by "spiritual". They were human beings.

Of course the Greek does not say begotten, begotten is English....we are reading an English Bible.

And your English Bible is wrong.

Monogenēs may be used as an adjective. For example, monogenēs pais means only child, only legitimate child or special child. In this case in context only begotten.

I can mean only child, but it can also mean "significant child" as in the case of Abram. Isaac wasn't Abraham's only child but he was "monogenes" because he was unique among his brothers and sisters. He was the child of promise.

In context with the scriptures....

1st John 4:9
In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him.

The translation "only son" is incorrect and misleading. Jesus was not God's only son. All of the kings of Israel were sons to him.

John 3:18
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

Same as above. Not only was Jesus a "son" by virtue of being a son of David, Jesus was the unique, one-of-a-kind son, in that he was THE coming one, the messiah.

John 1:14
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Again, mistranslated. Jesus was not an only son.

I do not know what you are trying to prove here but I do not think you are trying to prove that Yeshua was not the Son of God.

According to the scriptures, Jesus was qualified to be "the son" on the basis that he was a son of David. (Romans 1 for example) But some in this thread mistakenly believe that Jesus was qualified to be "the son" because Jesus and God somehow shared genetic characteristics. Jesus was literally the offspring of God the father. This is literally not true. And patently absurd.

Physically speaking, only the offspring sons of David are qualified under the Davidic Covenant. 2Samuel 7

Like I have always said, I do not care what the truth is, I just tell it.
If the scriptures would say that Yahweh spoke Him in existence......that is what I would be saying.

You aren't telling what the scriptures say. You are telling what the scriptures mean and they don't mean what you think they mean.

I kind of collect the descriptions that people have about this event....humor.....so please let me have your description of how it happened.

I pass.

 

[Grailhunter]

But no where does it say that the sons of God are angelic beings. You are reading that into it.

I am better than that LOL If you were to read post 632 you would see that I said they were not angels or men. They were the type of spiritual beings that would present themselves before God in His Holy Court.

He caused her to become pregnant, but he did NOT inseminate her.

Please describe that event.....I dare you....LOL

It depends on what you mean by "spiritual". They were human beings.

They were defiantly not humans....the scriptures do not say that and men do not present themselves before God in heaven.

And your English Bible is wrong.

LOL You got another joke?

I can mean only child, but it can also mean "significant child" as in the case of Abram. Isaac wasn't Abraham's only child but he was "monogenes" because he was unique among his brothers and sisters. He was the child of promise.

Christ was nothing like Isaac.
And I gave you the supporting scriptures.
Nowhere in the scriptures is Christ described as a significant child. You have to take it in context....

The translation "only son" is incorrect and misleading. Jesus was not God's only son. All of the kings of Israel were sons to him.

All Christians are sons and daughters of Christ but not like Yeshua....I do not want to waist my time.....Am I talking to a Jehovah's Witness or something like it?

 

[David in NJ]

I am better than that LOL If you were to read post 632 you would see that I said they were not angels or men. They were the type of spiritual beings that would present themselves before God in His Holy Court.


Please describe that event.....I dare you....LOL


They were defiantly not humans....the scriptures do not say that and men do not present themselves before God in heaven.

LOL You got another joke?

Christ was nothing like Isaac.
And I gave you the supporting scriptures.
Nowhere in the scriptures is Christ described as a significant child. You have to take it in context....


All Christians are sons and daughters of Christ but not like Yeshua....I do not want to waist my time.....Am I talking to a Jehovah's Witness or something like it?

Most likely a JW

 

[Marty fox]

(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.

Also the verse below confirms it.

Genesis 6:7
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.”

No mention of angles in the above verse.

 

[CadyandZoe]

They were defiantly not humans....the scriptures do not say that and men do not present themselves before God in heaven.

Did Paul go to heaven?

Christ was nothing like Isaac.

In the same way that Isaac was Abraham's monogenes, Christ was God's monogenes.

Nowhere in the scriptures is Christ described as a significant child. You have to take it in context....

Well, we could multiply examples of where it is said that Jesus was a significant child, but that isn't the point.

Are you unaware of the Davidic Covenant? The covenant where God promises a descendant of David to reign on the throne over the people of God? God promised David that his house would continue forever. And he promised David that whenever a son of David would rule on his throne, "I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me." David wrote Psalm 2 to be read at the coronation of the king of Israel. Every son of David that ruled on the throne was a "son" of God.

Now, among all the sons of David, of whom he says, "I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me" Jesus is the unique, one of a kind, descendent of David who will not only rule over Israel, he will rule over all the earth.

Speaking first of Solomon and then of every other king who ruled on David's throne he says through the prophet Nathan

2Samuel 7:13-17

He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me; when he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men, but My lovingkindness shall not depart from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever.”’” In accordance with all these words and all this vision, so Nathan spoke to David.​

As I said, the promise includes each and every son of David that ruled on David's throne; "I will be a father to him and he shall be a son to me."

Jesus is a son of David, who will rule on the throne of David, when God brings about his kingdom on earth. And Jesus has been given ALL authority and he will rule the earth forever. This makes Jesus a "monogenes" among all the other sons of David, who were also sons to God. In this context, "monogenes" doesn't mean "only born" (a mistake by scholars that remained uncorrected for years) it means "one-of-a-kind." Among all the sons of David who ever ruled on David's throne, of whom the Father called "son", only one literally fulfills the Davidic Covenant. That unique, one-of-a-kind son is Jesus Christ.

Translating "monogenes" as "only begotten" was a very big mistake and has caused much confusion among believers. To paraphrase a passage from the NET Bible, Paul uses the Greek term "monogenes" in reference to Issac Heb 11:17, who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14; 1:18; 3:16, and 3:18).

And no, I am not a JW.

 

[Grailhunter]

Did Paul go to heaven?

Do you think Paul presented himself before God? Or was he taken there?

Look I pray for the souls of Jehovah's witnesses or whatever you are.... but I do not have a whole lot to say to you other than what I would say to anyone that belonged to the Branch Davidian, or the Jim Jones group or the Moonies, or the Hare Krishnas.....RUN! Get away from this group, all that awaits you is a curse! If you are programmed so deeply and cannot do it on your own, get professional help.

 

[rwb]

The sons of God were not mortal men the Bible does not say that.
I did not say that the sons of God were angels.

I'm not sure what you might believe the sons of God to be since neither human nor angel?

I believe these human beings were not spiritual beings but born with both a physical body of flesh & blood and a spirit that gives the body life, and together body & spirit became living souls. They would have learned early on to worship and give sacrifices and to call upon the name of the LORD. As we read both Cain and Abel gave offerings to the LORD. But it appears that one of these born to be sons of God instead chose to go the way of serving self-first. Offering to the LORD from Cain that which was not the best of the produce, the firstfruit of the harvest, as did Abel when he offered unto the LORD the best, or as we read Abel "brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof". Did the sons of God, born to know and obey God become like their brother Cain? Is this what caused them to look with lust upon the daughters of men in unbelief and wickedness? Choosing to serve self above serving the LORD? Was this why the world became so corrupted through sin that only one man and his family was found worthy of life and saved from the flood? And through them God would begin again?

Remember that Scripture tells us it takes only a small bit of leaven to leaven the whole lump. I believe this is what happened in the beginning when man was created with complete autonomy, but freely chose to heed the voice of the serpent, and to serve self above God. For they took of the tree which was pleasant to the eye and able to make them to be as God, knowing both good and evil. Their progeny too it would appear, chose to serve themselves and rejected their LORD and Creator. So, the sons of God saw the daughters of men in unbelief, serving self rather than serving the LORD, and took them to be their wives and the whole became corrupted through sin, and all of them would die if left to continue in this willfully sinful state. But God....Who is rich in mercy and love gave mankind a new beginning by wiping out the whole race of humans and starting anew with a righteous man named Noah, who though righteous unto God was not perfect. But through his seeds the perfect sinless Seed (Christ) would be born.

 

[Grailhunter]

I'm not sure what you might believe the sons of God to be since neither human nor angel?

I believe these human beings were not spiritual beings but born with both a physical body of flesh & blood and a spirit that gives the body life, and together body & spirit became living souls. They would have learned early on to worship and give sacrifices and to call upon the name of the LORD. As we read both Cain and Abel gave offerings to the LORD. But it appears that one of these born to be sons of God instead chose to go the way of serving self-first. Offering to the LORD from Cain that which was not the best of the produce, the firstfruit of the harvest, as did Abel when he offered unto the LORD the best, or as we read Abel "brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof". Did the sons of God, born to know and obey God become like their brother Cain? Is this what caused them to look with lust upon the daughters of men in unbelief and wickedness? Choosing to serve self above serving the LORD? Was this why the world became so corrupted through sin that only one man and his family was found worthy of life and saved from the flood? And through them God would begin again?

Remember that Scripture tells us it takes only a small bit of leaven to leaven the whole lump. I believe this is what happened in the beginning when man was created with complete autonomy, but freely chose to heed the voice of the serpent, and to serve self above God. For they took of the tree which was pleasant to the eye and able to make them to be as God, knowing both good and evil. Their progeny too it would appear, chose to serve themselves and rejected their LORD and Creator. So, the sons of God saw the daughters of men in unbelief, serving self rather than serving the LORD, and took them to be their wives and the whole became corrupted through sin, and all of them would die if left to continue in this willfully sinful state. But God....Who is rich in mercy and love gave mankind a new beginning by wiping out the whole race of humans and starting anew with a righteous man named Noah, who though righteous unto God was not perfect. But through his seeds the perfect sinless Seed (Christ) would be born.

It is simply not what the scriptures say.
Some of these theories are discussed in that Wikipedia article, but none of them pan out.
Men do not go to heaven and present themselves before God.
I have already explained all this in post 632.
The phrase sons of God is never used for bad people or bad spiritual beings. Throughout the Bible the phrase the sons of God are used for the faithful and significant figures.....sons of God or son of God.
The scriptures refer to them as Sons of God....Not man and not angels....from there we can only speculate...and they have.
People have been speculating on this for centuries....you nor I are not going to bring anything new to the table.

 

[David in NJ]

Did Paul go to heaven?

In the same way that Isaac was Abraham's monogenes, Christ was God's monogenes.

Well, we could multiply examples of where it is said that Jesus was a significant child, but that isn't the point.

Are you unaware of the Davidic Covenant? The covenant where God promises a descendant of David to reign on the throne over the people of God? God promised David that his house would continue forever. And he promised David that whenever a son of David would rule on his throne, "I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me." David wrote Psalm 2 to be read at the coronation of the king of Israel. Every son of David that ruled on the throne was a "son" of God.

Now, among all the sons of David, of whom he says, "I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me" Jesus is the unique, one of a kind, descendent of David who will not only rule over Israel, he will rule over all the earth.

Speaking first of Solomon and then of every other king who ruled on David's throne he says through the prophet Nathan

2Samuel 7:13-17

He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me; when he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men, but My lovingkindness shall not depart from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever.”’” In accordance with all these words and all this vision, so Nathan spoke to David.​

As I said, the promise includes each and every son of David that ruled on David's throne; "I will be a father to him and he shall be a son to me."

Jesus is a son of David, who will rule on the throne of David, when God brings about his kingdom on earth. And Jesus has been given ALL authority and he will rule the earth forever. This makes Jesus a "monogenes" among all the other sons of David, who were also sons to God. In this context, "monogenes" doesn't mean "only born" (a mistake by scholars that remained uncorrected for years) it means "one-of-a-kind." Among all the sons of David who ever ruled on David's throne, of whom the Father called "son", only one literally fulfills the Davidic Covenant. That unique, one-of-a-kind son is Jesus Christ.

Translating "monogenes" as "only begotten" was a very big mistake and has caused much confusion among believers. To paraphrase a passage from the NET Bible, Paul uses the Greek term "monogenes" in reference to Issac Heb 11:17, who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14; 1:18; 3:16, and 3:18).

And no, I am not a JW.

2Samuel 7:13-17

He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me; when he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men, but My lovingkindness shall not depart from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever.”’” In accordance with all these words and all this vision, so Nathan spoke to David.

YOU SAID = "As I said, the promise includes each and every son of David that ruled on David's throne; "I will be a father to him and he shall be a son to me."

Well, it is quite easily recognized thru reading the Bible that this prophecy was for David during his time but the fulfillment of this spoke of Christ.

PhD's are banned from Truth = Truth comes from a PERSON who is GOD

 

[rwb]

It is simply not what the scriptures say.
Some of these theories are discussed in that Wikipedia article, but none of them pan out.
Men do not go to heaven and present themselves before God.
I have already explained all this in post 632.
The phrase sons of God is never used for bad people or bad spiritual beings. Throughout the Bible the phrase the sons of God are used for the faithful and significant figures.....sons of God or son of God.
The scriptures refer to them as Sons of God....Not man and not angels....from there we can only speculate...and they have.
People have been speculating on this for centuries....you nor I are not going to bring anything new to the table.

I agree, believers do not go to heaven to present themselves before God. This is a physical response of those who have spiritual understanding. I also agree that the phrase "sons of God" is always referring to those who are of faith, but even the faithful are sometimes charged with sinning. The following is a snippet from a study on Sons of God The Nephilims: and the Sons of God
Perhaps you too will find it helpful as did I.

"some people have legitimately been confused by the language "they came to present [yatsab] (meaning, to 'station' or position) themselves before the Lord." Some think that this must mean that they went into heaven. That is not the case. We have to keep in mind the times that we are reading about. These were the early years of the world. The language of "presenting themselves before God", is common in Biblical History, and doesn't denote literally appearing in Heaven. It is simply common language denoting coming to a place designated for the presence of God to inquire of Him. Today, we'd go to a church and pray. That would be our coming to inquire of God. In those days, they would have their own designated Holy place, and often God would speak to them directly. We see this clearly for example in Deuteronomy:

Deuteronomy 31:14-15

• "...call Joshua, and Present Yourselves in the tabernacle of the congregation, that I may give him a charge. And Moses and Joshua went, and Presented themselves in the tabernacle of the congregation.
• and the Lord appeared in the tabernacle in a pillar of a cloud:...."

God told Moses to present [yatsab] (same word) himself and Joshua before Him in the tabernacle, and "God" appeared there and spoke to them. Please note, they did not appear in Heaven. Comparing scripture with scripture we see this language of presenting oneself before the Lord doesn't denote an appearance in the third heaven. Here they presented themselves before God, but it was in the physical tabernacle on earth. It's the exact same thing as the sons of God presenting themselves. In these early days, God spoke to His servants the Prophets in a special way. And often times that meant an appearance or His presence in a special way. But don't take my word for it, please just compare scripture with scripture.

1st Samuel 10:19

• ..Now therefore Present Yourselves before the Lord by your tribes, and by your thousands."

Present (same Hebrew word) themselves before the Lord, and they'd inquire of God. Did that mean the tribes of Israel went into Heaven to present themselves before the Lord? Certainly not, but this is the language God uses to describe the official, recognized gathering together to inquire of God.

Literally, Job 1:6 says "..and there doth come Satan in their midst." So the sons of God came to present themselves before God, and Satan came in the midst of them. It's no real mystery--not at all unlike the 12 Disciples with Christ in Jerusalem, and Satan indwelling Judas in the midst of them. There we have an example of Judas having a Devil, which means Satan coming in the midst of the sons of God.

 

[David in NJ]

Calling God's words fantasy is unbelief = SIN that comes from religion offered to men who drink of it's waters.

For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them deep into hell, placing them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment; if He did not spare the ancient world when He brought the flood on its ungodly people, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, among the eight; if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction,b reducing them to ashes as an example of what is coming on the ungodly;

Although you are fully aware of this, I want to remind you that after Jesus had delivered His people out of the land of Egypt, He destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not stay within their own domain but abandoned their proper dwelling—these He has kept in eternal chains under darkness, bound for judgment on that great day. In like manner, = Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, who indulged in sexual immorality and pursued strange flesh, are on display as an example of those who sustain the punishment of eternal fire.

Believe the Truth and you will Know the TRUTH

There is only One Way = for all of us

 

[rwb]

Considering the context of this passage Peter is warning of humans, who are among those professing to be of faith in Christ. He calls them false prophets, and false teachers, teaching damnable heresies, even denying the Lord. He warns they bring upon themselves destruction, and will lead many away from truth to believe their lies. Peter writes that their judgment was a long time coming but their damnation is assured. Peter uses the example of the days of Noah when God brought the flood waters upon all flesh, preserving only Noah and his family. Just as God had spared only one righteous man, and He reserves unto judgment every human being, so too these early 'messengers', (angels) called sons of God, are being reserved for judgment of fire, casting them down into 'tartaroo' or the lowest parts of hell/hades, the deepest abyss of the grave where they are kept bound in darkness for the Judgment Day.

2 Peter 2:1-5 (KJV) But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

The same admonition and warning coming from Jude, exhorting the faithful saints to earnestly contend (fight) for the true faith they had received. Because certain (ungodly) men had crept in among them, who were from old ordained to condemnation. In the same way that God had not spared many from the chosen nation, Israel, who after being saved from bondage in Egypt He destroyed because they did not believe. Jude compares the destruction of these Old Covenant unbelieving Jews with the 'messengers' (angels) who had not kept their first estate and left their habitation. That is they had not continued in faith and rejected having been first chosen, and departed from God, proving themselves to be in unbelief. These ungodly men are reserved in bondage of darkness unto the judgment of the Great Day! In the same way the unbelieving in Sodom and Gomorrah, turning away from God and committing fornication, going after strange (different, those in unbelief) flesh. The unfaithful in Sodom and Gomorrah have already been physically consumed by fire of God, but they too, like these sons of God are being reserved for the vengeance of eternal fire at the judgment day.

Jude 3-7 (KJV) Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Both of these examples and admonitions to remain faithful to God are written to humans professing to be of faith in Christ, warning them that if they turn away from God, following their own self-will they show themselves to be in unbelief, and though judgment appears to be slow in coming, it will none the less come for whosoever professes to be of God but turns from Him in unbelief.

 

[Grailhunter]

The following is a snippet from a study on Sons of God The Nephilims: and the Sons of God
Perhaps you too will find it helpful as did I.

You article is the same type of stuff that always been talked about for centuries.
There is just an intense desire to know more about this story than what the Bible offers.
Yes all Christians are sons and daughters of God....but when we take wives it is not front page news and our offspring are just normal kids.
I have heard some interesting interpretations on this....only interesting.
I do not know what to tell you, you are doing a lot of work to equate things that do not pertain.
Yes, they went to the tabernacle in the Old Testament and we go to Church and sometime miraculous things happen....But none of this is like what was going on in Job....that was in heaven.

 

[Grailhunter]

Calling God's words fantasy is unbelief = SIN that comes from religion offered to men who drink of it's waters.

God's Word is definitely not fantasy.
But some people develop some fanciful interpretations about God's Word.