Genesis 6:1-5 who are the sons of God and daughters of man that is talked about?

[GeneZ]

Genesis 6:1-6

Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters
were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful;
and they took for themselves women of all whom they chose.

And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his
days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” There were giants 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.

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent
of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. "
​

If the Sons of God were angels?

Why? ..Why were they able to procreate?

......................

 

[EarlyActs]

Genesis 6:1-6

Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters
were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful;
and they took for themselves women of all whom they chose.

And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his
days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” There were giants 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.

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent
of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. "
​

If the Sons of God were angels?

Why? ..Why were they able to procreate?

......................

Jude and 2 Pet 2 say they left their place in the heavens and they got curious about "genetic engineering" through breeding and insemination. It is bizarre but it makes sense of some very odd facts about giantism, "aliens", longevity.

 

[civic]

Angels cannot and do not procreate so that eliminates them

 

[EarlyActs]

Angels cannot and do not procreate so that eliminates them

But these had left their place. In Gen 18, 19, they eat, they are seen as potential sexual partners. So it all depends on what form they are in, and a form is implied by the Gen 6 picture that they could. The earliest reference to these before this in actual chronology is that they were present when the world was created.

 

[civic]

But these had left their place. In Gen 18, 19, they eat, they are seen as potential sexual partners. So it all depends on what form they are in, and a form is implied by the Gen 6 picture that they could. The earliest reference to these before this in actual chronology is that they were present when the world was created.

It’s not provable and highly debatable and scripture does not specify and leaves allot to our imagination and speculation. It’s not something I would personally form any doctrine over and divide over imho. It makes for an interesting topic of discussion.

 

[civic]

You may want to listen to Peter Gentry on that.

Do you have a link . I was really into it back in the 80’s. I believed at that time they had sexual relations but no longer. I’m not dogmatic though .

 

[EarlyActs]

The proof of the Gen 18 manifestation would be that the homosexuals came knocking on the door for them.

The references in Jude and 2 Pet 2 are also sexual. They left their place, and they sought sexual activity, is what it is saying. Jude 7: indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire[ai] in a way similar to[aj] these angels,[ak]

 

[GeneZ]

Angels cannot and do not procreate so that eliminates them

Careful.. Jesus only mentions his angels as not being given in marriage. Not all the angels.

Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures ​

nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in ​

marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. " Matthew 22:29:30​

Paul was able to procreate.
But, God gave Paul the grace power for celibacy.

Jeremiah was able to procreate... But had to painfully accept celibacy for his healing.


God gave only his own angels the power for celibacy!

On the other hand?

The fallen angels do not get grace from God.
They have no peaceful control over their cravings and lusts.

Its got to be understood. For God put it in the Bible to be understood.

grace and peace ...................

 

[GeneZ]

.................... After all the dust settles....................

The question I have not yet seen asked.

Why were those rebellious angels capable to procreate in the first place?

 

[EarlyActs]

.................... After all the dust settles....................

The question I have not yet seen asked.

Why were those rebellious angels capable to procreate in the first place?

Well, "in the first place" would mean after their departure to Satan's ways. Satan seeks to ruin all of creation's structures. Notice the decree of God that the creatures reproduce after their kind. Well, if your are Satan, the first thing you want to do is genetic engineering and create strange flesh.

Btw, in the most tangential notice about angels and women, notice that Paul wants women's heads covered by either long hair or a veil 'because of the angels.' Indicating some kind of ongoing problem about this.

 

[GeneZ]

Weren't they (those brought forth) all killed in the flood?

Only the mutant offspring in half human bodies were killed in the flood.
But, not the rebellious angels who sired them.

Those angels were assigned by God to go to a prison by God!

For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting 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 protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others." ​

​

2 Peter 2:4-5​

The mutant men needed to be killed in the flood. Because, if allowed to remain alive?
Their mutant genes would have destroyed the chance of the Messiah being born of Adam's offspring.
A body provided by means of the promised ovum of a human woman! Genesis 3:15

...............

 

[civic]

He doesn't conclude what most people assume. He makes one heck of a case though:

He does make a good case.

 

[EarlyActs]

Well, yes, I agree about the fallen ones which is why I specified those brought forth. But, a good reminder for everyone.

Gentry did well on a passage that has has difficult antecedents like Dan 9's last.

But the commentary by Jude 7 should clear up a lot.

 

[ReverendRV]

Genesis 6:1-6

Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters
were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful;
and they took for themselves women of all whom they chose.

And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his
days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” There were giants 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.

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent
of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. "
​

If the Sons of God were angels?

Why? ..Why were they able to procreate?

......................

The sons of God were Men of Renown...

 

[EarlyActs]

The sons of God were Men of Renown...

There are more antecedents that could be referred to.

 

[ReverendRV]

There are more antecedents that could be referred to.

Since Hebrews 1 implies No Angel is called a Son of God, it's a moot argument...

 

[ReverendRV]

That's not true, you're misapplying the text since it is literally saying none of the angels were (called) THE Son of God. IOW, Jesus wasn't an angel. So it is saying none are THE Son of God, not that none are A son of God.

All references of Son(s) of God in the OT Scriptures refer to angelic beings.

You're making a category error.

I disagree it's a Category error...

 

[ReverendRV]

The justification for the Category is, "So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs." Then we are told just how Jesus BECAME superior; "For to which of the Angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father”? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”?

The explanation of his superiority to the Angels, is that today you have BECOME my Son. Which Angel has ever become God's Son? The implication is no Angel has ever BECOME a Son of God. We are sons of God according to Adoption. Angels aren't adopted, thus they can't BECOME a Son of God; and they aren't Essentially a Son of God...

We love the Verses when it comes to disputing Jehovah's Witnesses, but not when it comes to disputing Angels procreating the Nephilim...

 

[civic]

The justification for the Category is, "So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs." Then we are told just how Jesus BECAME superior; "For to which of the Angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father”? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”?

The explanation of his superiority to the Angels, is that today you have BECOME my Son. Which Angel has ever become God's Son? The implication is no Angel has ever BECOME a Son of God...

We love the Verses when it comes to disputing Jehovah's Witnesses, but not when it comes to disputing Angels procreating the Nephilim...

We can see here in this thread depending upon ones premise we can draw opposite conclusions. And these are theology boards.

just sayin.

 

[ReverendRV]

We can see here in this thread depending upon ones premise we can draw opposite conclusions. And these are theology boards.

just sayin.

The Rule is that Administrators and Moderators aren't supposed to Argue in Public...

We're just talking