Who are the sons of God and the daughters of men

[rwb]

We are talking about giants that really existed....being real they would leave remains and tracked in history.

The giants were NOT the result of humans procreating with angels. They are the sons of Anak. The Canaanites were descendants of Noah. The Canaanites are identified in Genesis as descendants of Ham, son of Noah.

Numbers 13:33 (KJV) And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

 

[David in NJ]

If she was a virgin, and I believe she was. This means she had no partner. Don't change a miracle into a natural act.

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.'

 

[rwb]

Seth and his prodigy were not 'sons of God'.

I didn't argue they were. I said the sons of God are those who call upon the name of the LORD, which did not happen until the birth of Enos the son of Seth.

 

[rwb]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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?

 

[David in NJ]

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?

The absolute worse that can happen to mankind was shown us from the Beginning/Genesis ch3 which led to Genesis ch6
which leads to the Final Conflict = Revelation ch12

And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth.

Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time.”

"There is nothing new under the sun - what has been will be....."

 

[rwb]

You said: "the sons of God were the faithful line of God"

Faithfulness to God does not produce GIANTS that so polluted the humankind and animals as well, so that God wiped the earth clean of its polluted genetic manipulation.

The term "sons of God" refers to spirit Beings = Angels and those who have been Born-Again by the Spirit of God.

How do you know? Even the human sons of God were drowned by the flood waters that covered the earth. Being those who called upon the name of the LORD, they still took ungodly women as wives, and continually multiplied evil on the earth. That's why the flood waters came. If the sons of God were also guilty of evil, why wouldn't God use tyrants, evil giant men of renown to lord over even them?

You err in your understanding of angels.

 

[rwb]

Throughout Scripture, the term "sons of God" only refers to spirit Beings = angels and the resurrected 'Born-Again' spirit of man.

Peace

You must be reading a translation that I am not familiar with? For I find reference to "sons of God" being those who are of faith throughout my Bibles.

 

[Grailhunter]

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.

I cannot agree with this. I don't even think it was a stretch.
But I will give you this, a fellow named Augustine of Hippo was thinking along these lines. But I disagree with him too.

 

[Grailhunter]

The giants were NOT the result of humans procreating with angels. They are the sons of Anak. The Canaanites were descendants of Noah. The Canaanites are identified in Genesis as descendants of Ham, son of Noah.

Numbers 13:33 (KJV) And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

I guess I disagree with you on this too.
But I did not say that the sons of God were angels.
And I did not say the giants were the product of the sons of God and daughters of men mating.
Anything on this is mostly speculation because there is not enough information and not enough following history.
The Bible says that there were giants in the land.....they were already there before the sons of God mated with the daughters of men
The sons of God were mighty men, men of renown.
Why are they mentioned together? Who is to say that the sons of God didn't take on the giants. Was David one of the men of renown? He took on the giant Goliath.

Anak was probably just another one of the giants and of course his sons would be giants. What is the alternative, there mothers were giants.

 

[rwb]

The absolute worse that can happen to mankind was shown us from the Beginning/Genesis ch3 which led to Genesis ch6
which leads to the Final Conflict = Revelation ch12

And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth.

Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time.”

"There is nothing new under the sun - what has been will be....."

Are you saying that Rev 12 was fulfilled before the flood?

 

[David in NJ]

How do you know? Even the human sons of God were drowned by the flood waters that covered the earth. Being those who called upon the name of the LORD, they still took ungodly women as wives, and continually multiplied evil on the earth. That's why the flood waters came. If the sons of God were also guilty of evil, why wouldn't God use tyrants, evil giant men of renown to lord over even them?

You err in your understanding of angels.

Unfortunately you added your own words upon scripture to reach the outcome you desired.

God says that the "sons of God" were angels - that is what we should believe and not anything that departs from that Truth, which the Holy Spirit has spoken.

Sinful men and sinful women cannot produce 'GIANTS' and never has = sinful mankind reproduces sinful mankind = period.

Evidence of GIANT skeletal remains have been found and documented around the world, some of which reached 20-30 feet in height.

Jude
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.

2 Peter 2:4-6
For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;

 

[Truth7t7]

Seth and his prodigy were not 'sons of God'.

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.

 

[David in NJ]

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.

You have the correct scripture but you are missing the understanding in FULL.

Look again and you will find the TRUTH in the Scriptures in Post #591

Peace and Good Morning

 

[Truth7t7]

You have the correct scripture but you are missing the understanding in FULL.

Look again and you will find the TRUTH in the Scriptures in Post #591

Peace and Good Morning

I Disagree "The Sons Of God" in Genesis chapter 6 were mortal human men, that married mortal human women, it's that simple

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

 

[rwb]

Unfortunately you added your own words upon scripture to reach the outcome you desired.

God says that the "sons of God" were angels - that is what we should believe and not anything that departs from that Truth, which the Holy Spirit has spoken.

Sinful men and sinful women cannot produce 'GIANTS' and never has = sinful mankind reproduces sinful mankind = period.

Evidence of GIANT skeletal remains have been found and documented around the world, some of which reached 20-30 feet in height.

Jude
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.

2 Peter 2:4-6
For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;

I don't find where God calls angels "sons of God"? Many believe Job writing "sons of God" implies angels, but it is just that, implication without biblical support. Don't forget that 'angel' is interpreted "a human messenger of God or Satan" or "an invisible spirit". The only time we read of angels in direct association with Satan is in Rev 12 where Satan and his 'angels' (messengers) fought against Michael and his 'angels' (messengers). Context determines when angel should be interpreted a human messenger or a spirit messenger.

Both Jude and 2Pe 2 speak of God's human messengers who led to the corruption of the whole earth and caused the flood to be brought upon the whole earth. God did not spare these human messengers who had called upon His name. But is reserving them for judgment that shall come on Judgment Day.

 

[ewq1938]

If she was a virgin, and I believe she was. This means she had no partner. Don't change a miracle into a natural act.

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.

 

[David in NJ]

I don't find where God calls angels "sons of God"? Many believe Job writing "sons of God" implies angels, but it is just that, implication without biblical support. Don't forget that 'angel' is interpreted "a human messenger of God or Satan" or "an invisible spirit". The only time we read of angels in direct association with Satan is in Rev 12 where Satan and his 'angels' (messengers) fought against Michael and his 'angels' (messengers). Context determines when angel should be interpreted a human messenger or a spirit messenger.

Both Jude and 2Pe 2 speak of God's human messengers who led to the corruption of the whole earth and caused the flood to be brought upon the whole earth. God did not spare these human messengers who had called upon His name. But is reserving them for judgment that shall come on Judgment Day.

Jude and 2 Peter 2 speak of literal angels

You must add to God's words here to change literal angels to humans = which you have successfully done!

 

[rwb]

Jude and 2 Peter 2 speak of literal angels

You must add to God's words here to change literal angels to humans = which you have successfully done!

That's your opinion, but that doesn't make it fact. If you take the time to look up how the Hebrew word 'angelos' is defined here is what you find. As can be seen angel can be either a spirit being, or a human being, such as John-the-Baptist.

Matthew 11:10 (KJV) For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger (Greek word 'angelos') before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

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.

 

[David in NJ]

That's your opinion, but that doesn't make it fact. If you take the time to look up how the Hebrew word 'angelos' is defined here is what you find. As can be seen angel can be either a spirit being, or a human being, such as John-the-Baptist.

Matthew 11:10 (KJV) For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger (Greek word 'angelos') before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

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.

You have it backwards.

Genesis, Job, Jude, 2 Peter, are literal Truth about literal angels.

You are adding your opinion upon what God has spoken - this is willful on your part.

 

[Grailhunter]

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

I am speculating here with a little bit of humor, so do not take me too seriously.
Angels do not have human sperm and do not marry.....true statement.
But like I have said, there is not enough information here to come to a definitive conclusion.
The Bible does not say that the sons of God were angels so why come to that conclusion?
We would not be having this conversation if the sons of God were defined.
But God and angels are not the only spiritual beings in heaven.
The offspring of the sons of God were mighty men of renown. Not giants, the Bible says
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.

Why is the Bible discussing these mighty men and one of the races of Giants.....and I am saying one of the races of giants. Why is that? We do not know.

Now for the humor part...
For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
I was at Bible camp and sitting around a campfire and talking to a Baptist preacher about heaven...what do we know about it?
I asked, do you think there will be a banquet and good food?
He says, I do not think so, I do not think you will need to eat or have a mouth to eat with.
I asked, do you think there will be romance?
He say, No I think we will be like angel and will not court or marry or even be attracted to female souls.
So I said, No sex?
He said, Of course not, nothing that dirty and sinful.
So I asked, Do you think that heaven will be beautiful?
He said, I do not think you will have eyes to see it if it was.
Well there are trumpets, what about music?
He replied, I don't think you have ears to hear it.

So I nodded my head and thought for a moment and asked him....What do you think hell will be like? LOL