Who are the sons of God and the daughters of men

[David in NJ]

O

Of course I can't produce a son of God it is spiritual. I am not saying that every decedent from Seth was a son of God just that the faithful line came through him

Marty,
Forgive me that i did not say 'Good Morning' - Good Morning

Marty, you have the answers directly from God in His word - the Holy Scriptures.

God never spoke a word on 'the lineage of Seth are the sons of God".

Here is your(our/everyone's) answer directly from the Word = John 1:10-13

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.
He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become sons of God, to those who believe in His name:
who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

 

[Timtofly]

Genesis says the "sons of God/angels" were on earth taking wives and producing offspring that were giants and men with superior aspects that they were "men of renown".

2 Peter and Jude says that this was their sin whereby God locked them in chains in the depths of darkness/hell.

i notice that you make claims but are not able to bring forth scripture that support your claims.

These claims you make are not in Scripture either. Jude does not say Genesis 6 was their sin. I notice you make claims not supported by Scripture.

They are bound in chains of darkness because they are stars. That is what Scripture states.

You are a son of God. You are not an angel. Angels are not humans, nor sons of God. You keep saying they are, but that contradicts all your verses. You quote the Scripture, then say the opposite of what the Scripture does say.

 

[David in NJ]

These claims you make are not in Scripture either. Jude does not say Genesis 6 was their sin. I notice you make claims not supported by Scripture.

They are bound in chains of darkness because they are stars. That is what Scripture states.

You are a son of God. You are not an angel. Angels are not humans, nor sons of God. You keep saying they are, but that contradicts all your verses. You quote the Scripture, then say the opposite of what the Scripture does say.

You are confused as to what scripture declares.

Take your time and keep reading and praying.

 

[Marty fox]

G

Marty,
Forgive me that i did not say 'Good Morning' - Good Morning

Marty, you have the answers directly from God in His word - the Holy Scriptures.

God never spoke a word on 'the lineage of Seth are the sons of God".

Here is your(our/everyone's) answer directly from the Word = John 1:10-13

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.
He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become sons of God, to those who believe in His name:
who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Good morning back to you LOL

Right so the faithful ones are the sons of God

If you read Gensis 5 & 6 you will see that Cains offspring and Seth's offspring are separated and they are separated for a reason.

The only things besides names and dates in Cain's offspring is the great human accomplishments they made and sin.

The only things besides names and dates in Seth's offspring is that they called on the name of the Lord and that some walked with God. Then at the end of Seth's line we see that they started to complain about their living conditions.

 

[rwb]

You just choose not to believe "it is written"

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.
6And 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;
7as 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.

It could have been more easily understood that these "angels" were not spirit beings, but human beings, if the translators had uniformly translated ἄγγελος angelos messenger instead of taking upon themselves to pick and choose when to define messenger (which could be human or spirit) and when to define angels. The student of the Word should have had opportunity to study themselves to learn whether or not 'angelos' in every verse is a human or spirit being, instead of being led to believe they are always angels of God, and some of them fallen. But in the way 'angelos' has been translated in most versions of Scripture leads many to believe that fallen angels of God engaged in sexual relationships with human beings and together created giants. These messengers were called sons of God in the days of Seth, after the birth of his son, Enos, men began to call upon the name of the Lord. (Ge 4:26) These who called upon the name of the Lord, were appointed by God to be the beginning or first to proclaim His name on the earth. But they chose to leave that special dwelling place they had with God, and lusting after beautiful women took of those who had been driven from the face of the Lord (Ge 4:16). These were of the vagabond and fugitives from God upon the earth with no desire to call upon the name of the Lord.

Strong's Greek Dictionary
32. ἄγγελος angelos (ángelos)
Search for G32 in KJVSL; in KJV.

ἄγγελος ángelos, ang'-el-os - from ἀγγέλλω angéllō (probably derived from G71; compare G34) (to bring tidings); a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication, a pastor:—angel, messenger.

 

[Timtofly]

Nope

All have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God

"For since death came through a man(Adam), the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
For as in Adam all die" - 1 Cor ch15

the "sons of God" are not dead men walking the earth and marrying the "daughters of men"

They are not descendants of Adam in Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

They are humans created on the 6th Day. You really don't get the all have sinned part, do you?

As by one man Adam sinned entered the world. Adam physically died the instant he disobeyed God. Now all his offspring are in dead corruptible flesh.

Read this verse because with the second birth you are a son of God, but with your first birth, you are a son of Adam.

"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:"

Adam was a son of God in the image of God until he disobeyed God. Now he is a human in sin, and part of that all have sinned group, and passed that death image to Seth. Your physical birth places you in Adam's dead image. Your spiritual birth places you in God's image, but the effect will not happen until you shed this body of sin at physical death. 1 John 3:2

"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."

The book of Ephesians explains this as well.

The sons of God were the other humans created on the 6th day with Adam. Adam's dead physical flesh is past down through his offspring. Not sin, the state of physical death. All are sinners because they all sin. The sons of God did not sin, because they went through the wedding vows. The problem happened when those human females passed on Adam's dead corruptible flesh to their offspring. They all still had to individually sin and disobey God to become as wicked as they did. No verse states that marriage to the daughters of Adam was a sin.

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

Having a wife is not sin. Even more than one wife was not a sin.

"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."

So these children that were born lived long lives, but their imaginations of their hearts became only evil continually. Their offspring and each generation becoming worse. They all were humans. None of them angels. They were humans before Adam sinned. They were still humans after Adam sinned. They were not sinners in Adam's dead image. It was only when some offspring had offspring with Adam's offspring is when those offspring took on Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

Sorry but you are lumping all the sons of God together in one general point. That would be like saying all Christians are child molesters, because a few who call themselves Christians were caught and prosecuted. That is ridiculous. Now you add to that point that angels are child molesters because they can appear as human males. See where you started to go wrong and jump to conclusions?

2 Peter 2 is almost identical to Jude 1. Both are talking about false "Christians" coming in and destroying the sheep and giving all Christians a bad name. Then they are compared to past events like angels leaving their post in the firmament. Not all wolves in sheep clothing are of a sexual nature. Some deny that Jesus is God. I guess that even boils down to sex, but not all doctrine in Scripture deals with sexual sins.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No, angels are not stars, but they are "luminaries" figuratively speaking.

When stars are used symbolically, it refers to angels.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

They never took on male bodies. Only angels God sends appear as human.

Chapter and verse that supports your theory?

God immediately placed them in chains of darkness. They rebelled before Satan tempted Eve in the Garden.

Time to end this. YOu keep rewrtiting scripture! teh angels rebelled with Satan and they were not put in chains. Paul and Peter and John and Jesus all showed they are alive and well and deceiving on earth.

It is the angels who left their first habitation which is Genesis 6.

Believers of goodwill argue back and forth over who the sone of God are. But you have now rewritten Scripture with all your hypotheses to justify you rposition. None of your declarations have any biblical support unless you twist Scripture beying recognition.

Have the last word if you wish, I am done with you on this thread.

 

[CadyandZoe]

It could have been more easily understood that these "angels" were not spirit beings, but human beings, if the translators had uniformly translated ἄγγελος angelos messenger instead of taking upon themselves to pick and choose when to define messenger (which could be human or spirit) and when to define angels. The student of the Word should have had opportunity to study themselves to learn whether or not 'angelos' in every verse is a human or spirit being, instead of being led to believe they are always angels of God, and some of them fallen. But in the way 'angelos' has been translated in most versions of Scripture leads many to believe that fallen angels of God engaged in sexual relationships with human beings and together created giants. These messengers were called sons of God in the days of Seth, after the birth of his son, Enos, men began to call upon the name of the Lord. (Ge 4:26) These who called upon the name of the Lord, were appointed by God to be the beginning or first to proclaim His name on the earth. But they chose to leave that special dwelling place they had with God, and lusting after beautiful women took of those who had been driven from the face of the Lord (Ge 4:16). These were of the vagabond and fugitives from God upon the earth with no desire to call upon the name of the Lord.

Strong's Greek Dictionary
32. ἄγγελος angelos (ángelos)
Search for G32 in KJVSL; in KJV.

ἄγγελος ángelos, ang'-el-os - from ἀγγέλλω angéllō (probably derived from G71; compare G34) (to bring tidings); a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication, a pastor:—angel, messenger.

The "angels" in 1Corinthians 11 are hats, for instance.

 

[Timtofly]

Did I say Joel? Oh my. My mistake. I meant to say "Jude." (Senior moment. :) )
Jude says the angels left their habitation.

An observation: (if I may)
The opening chapter of Genesis reveals a logical process. First God creates domains, then he populates the domains with creatures. For instance, he creates oceans and then he populates that domain; then he creates the dry land, and he populates that domain with creatures. The sky is filled with birds and the heavens are filled with stars and etc. Presumably, the angels have their own domain.

Some creatures can survive in more than one domain. The domain of a bird is the sky, but a bird also lives in the trees and sometimes on the ground. The domain of man is on the dry ground, but some men can dive for pearls, holding the breath for an extended period.

When Gabriel spoke with Mary, the mother of Jesus, presumably Gabriel briefly left his domain to visit Mary in her domain, perhaps returning to the domain of angelic beings once he was finished.

The book of Revelation indicates that Satan swept a third of the Stars from heaven. Presumably, this speaks metaphorically about an angelic rebellion when a third of the angels rebelled against God, leaving their usual habitation for some other location.

Just thinking out loud here. Have a great weekend.

Ok, thanks.

I don't think the disagreement is that the angels left their post in the firmament, and all that was placed in the firmament were the stars. The sun is still considered a star. Interesting verse:

"And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;"

Seems to indicate that even the sun is the job of an angel.

The firmament is the domain of the stars and the stars take on human form when sent by God. Those angels never were sent by God, so that cannot apply to them. They were immediately chained in darkness in the pit, which was prepared just for them and Satan.

If people take Revelation 12:3 as symbolic, then they did not come to earth, as that was symbolism of a dragon.

"And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born."

Neither did the stars rebel at the birth of Christ. All this verse literally states is that a third of the stars rebelled. One may compare that number with this verse:

"And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea."

In the midst of a symbolic phrase John states that a third of the angels rebelled. Then later in a literal thought John gives the amount as a figurative number.

We can see that both groups of individuals were deceieved and followed Satan. We also can see that one group was placed in chains of darkness without any time in between their being deceived and getting anywhere, and the other was consumed by fire before anything happened.

 

[David in NJ]

G

Good morning back to you LOL

Right so the faithful ones are the sons of God

If you read Gensis 5 & 6 you will see that Cains offspring and Seth's offspring are separated and they are separated for a reason.

The only things besides names and dates in Cain's offspring is the great human accomplishments they made and sin.

The only things besides names and dates in Seth's offspring is that they called on the name of the Lord and that some walked with God. Then at the end of Seth's line we see that they started to complain about their living conditions.

Again, there is no scripture that states "the faithful ones are the sons of God".

The words of God on the subject - Gen ch6 , Job ch1 ch2, ch38 , John ch1 , Luke ch20 , 2 Peter ch2 , Jude , 1 John 3:1-3 , Revelation

There is no reason to drift away from these scriptures that specifically inform us of the "sons of God"

 

[Timtofly]

But we understand that nightingales are not divine beings. And neither are stars. Right? or No?

The stars are in the firmament. That is all God put in the firmament. They are called stars. Only when sent to earth are they messengers. Instead of appearing as stars in their natural form, they appear as humans.

I accept they have physical form. Flaming fire would be the same as a "ball of gas". They are called stars in Scripture both literally and figuratively, because even humans have been symbolically described as stars as in Revelation 12 and Israel. There are literal lights in the firmament.

 

[CadyandZoe]

The stars are in the firmament. That is all God put in the firmament. They are called stars. Only when sent to earth are they messengers. Instead of appearing as stars in their natural form, they appear as humans.

I accept they have physical form. Flaming fire would be the same as a "ball of gas". They are called stars in Scripture both literally and figuratively, because even humans have been symbolically described as stars as in Revelation 12 and Israel. There are literal lights in the firmament.

You think the firmament is the domain of the stars? hmm. I always understood that the firmament is the sky. The waters above are the clouds and the waters below are the ocean. No?

 

[rwb]

Again, there is no scripture that states "the faithful ones are the sons of God".

The words of God on the subject - Gen ch6 , Job ch1 ch2, ch38 , John ch1 , Luke ch20 , 2 Peter ch2 , Jude , 1 John 3:1-3 , Revelation

There is no reason to drift away from these scriptures that specifically inform us of the "sons of God"

Who else would the sons of God be, since the only others mentioned are daughters of men? Does it not stand to reason that the sons of God would have been those who began to call upon the name of the Lord in the days of Seth, when a son, called Enos was born to him?

 

[David in NJ]

Who else would the sons of God be, since the only others mentioned are daughters of men? Does it not stand to reason that the sons of God would have been those who began to call upon the name of the Lord in the days of Seth, when a son, called Enos was born to him?

It sounds reasonable to our natural minds but that is not what Scripture defines for us.

There is not a single scripture that denotes the lineage of Seth as the "sons of God".

This specific phrase only pertains to spiritual beings that came into existence as directly from God.

Adam was a "son of God" because he directly came/created from God.

Everyone after Adam are sons of men - Luke ch3, again, provides the evidence/Truth

Jesus Himself was about thirty years old when He began His ministry.
He was regarded as the son of Joseph,
the son of Heli,
the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi,
the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum,
the son of Esli, the son of Naggai,
the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,
the son of Josech, the son of Joda,
the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel,
the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri,
the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,
the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim,
the son of Matthat, the son of Levi,
the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,
the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha,
the son of Nathan, the son of David,
the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,
the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon,
the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Arni,
the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah,
the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg,
the son of Eber, the son of Shelah,
the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,
the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,
the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared,
the son of Mahalalel, the son of Cainan,
the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam,
the son of God.

After Adam sinned, no more "son(s) of God" because "that which is flesh is flesh and that which is spirit is spirit"

Human flesh can NEVER bring forth a "son of God" = John 1:10-13


1 Cor 15:20-23
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him.

 

[Timtofly]

Chapter and verse that supports your theory?

Time to end this. YOu keep rewrtiting scripture! teh angels rebelled with Satan and they were not put in chains. Paul and Peter and John and Jesus all showed they are alive and well and deceiving on earth.

It is the angels who left their first habitation which is Genesis 6.

Believers of goodwill argue back and forth over who the sone of God are. But you have now rewritten Scripture with all your hypotheses to justify you rposition. None of your declarations have any biblical support unless you twist Scripture beying recognition.

Have the last word if you wish, I am done with you on this thread.

Why are stars coming to earth as messengers a theory? Have you read the proclamation of the birth of Jesus and John the Baptist? Have you read Revelation?

No verses claim the angels who rebelled come to earth prior to the 5th Trumpet.

 

[rwb]

It sounds reasonable to our natural minds but that is not what Scripture defines for us.

There is not a single scripture that denotes the lineage of Seth as the "sons of God".

This specific phrase only pertains to spiritual beings that came into existence as directly from God.

Adam was a "son of God" because he directly came/created from God.

Everyone after Adam are sons of men - Luke ch3, again, provides the evidence/Truth

You misunderstood the point I am making. It was my intention to show that since there were born at that time men who called upon the name of the Lord, why would we not define these men of faith sons of God? I'm not saying that only men from the line of Seth were sons of God. I just believe those who called upon the name of God IMO are the most likely candidates for being called the sons of God. After Seth was born, Adam had other sons and daughters. Since only Cain was driven from the face of God to be a fugitive and vagabond upon the earth, there is no reason to believe that only the lineage of Seth were sons of God. We only know that man began to call upon the name of the Lord when Seth begat Enos, but there is no indication that other sons and daughters of Adam were not also sons of God, who called upon the name of the Lord.

Genesis 5:4 (KJV) And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:

I believe it was these human sons of God that began to grow upon the face of the earth. Then through rebellion against God, these sons of God lusted for the daughters of unbelief. They dishonored and disobeyed God when they took these unfaithful women to be their wives. And this ungodly union turned the hearts of these sons of God away from Him, until 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." It grieved God that He had created man, so God sent a flood to destroy man from the earth and then He began again with righteous Noah.

 

[David in NJ]

You misunderstood the point I am making. It was my intention to show that since there were born at that time men who called upon the name of the Lord, why would we not define these men of faith sons of God? I'm not saying that only men from the line of Seth were sons of God. I just believe those who were the sons of God IMO are the most likely candidates for being called the sons of God. After Seth was born, Adam had other sons and daughters. Since only Cain was driven from the face of God to be a fugitive and vagabond upon the earth, there is no reason to believe that only the lineage of Seth were sons of God. We only know that man began to call upon the name of the Lord when Seth begat Enos, but there is no indication that other sons and daughters of Adam were not also sons of God, who called upon the name of the Lord.

Genesis 5:4 (KJV) And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:

I believe it was these human sons of God that began to grow upon the face of the earth. Then through rebellion against God, these sons of God lusted for the daughters of unbelief. They dishonored and disobeyed God when they took these unfaithful women to be their wives. And this ungodly union turned the hearts of these sons of God away from Him, until 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." It grieved God that He had created man, so God sent a flood to destroy man from the earth and then He began again with righteous Noah.

Because God called no human a "son of God" except Adam.

Only when "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" do we see God bringing forth "sons of God".

He was in the world, and though the world was made through Him, the world did not recognize Him.
He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name,
He gave the right to become sons of God— children born not of blood, nor of the desire or will of man, but born of God.
John 1:10-13

After Adam sinned, no more "son(s) of God" because "that which is flesh is flesh"

Human flesh can NEVER bring forth a "son of God" = John 1:10-13

1 Cor 15:20-23
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him

 

[rwb]

Because God called no human a "son of God" except Adam.

Only when "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" do we see God bringing forth "sons of God".

He was in the world, and though the world was made through Him, the world did not recognize Him.
He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. But to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name,
He gave the right to become sons of God— children born not of blood, nor of the desire or will of man, but born of God.
John 1:10-13

After Adam sinned, no more "son(s) of God" because "that which is flesh is flesh"

Human flesh can NEVER bring forth a "son of God" = John 1:10-13

1 Cor 15:20-23
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him

The same Spirit was with the sons of God before Pentecost as after. Human flesh indeed cannot bring forth sons of God, because the Spirit gives life and the flesh profits nothing. By the power of the Spirit with them Old Covenant men of faith are sons of the living God, just as we who have His Spirit in us today are. If God says, "Ye who are not my people" are sons of the living God, why would He not call the faithful, sons from the beginning?

John 14:17 (KJV) Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Hosea 1:10 (KJV) Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Exodus 4:22 (KJV) And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

Job 1:6 (KJV) 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 (KJV) 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.

It was human sons of God presenting themselves before the Lord, just as we read in 1 Samuel.

1 Samuel 10:19 (KJV) And ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us. Now therefore present yourselves before the LORD by your tribes, and by your thousands.

Romans 8:14 (KJV) For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Galatians 4:6 (KJV) And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

Philippians 2:15 (KJV) That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

1 John 3:1 (KJV) 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.

1 John 3:2 (KJV) 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.

 

[Timtofly]

You think the firmament is the domain of the stars? hmm. I always understood that the firmament is the sky. The waters above are the clouds and the waters below are the ocean. No?

"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so."

"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.... The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;"

I suppose some just think this is just figurative language about rain. But what about the fountains of the deep, what do they symbolize?

IMO there was water under the land. Then you have the Seas. Then the firmament/heaven and then water above the firmament. Yes, according to Scripture there was water above the stars in the firmament.

Heaven and Paradise are closer than most people think.