THE ANGELS THAT SINNED

[Red Baker]

I'm not 100% dogmatic on this...but pretty close...demons are the spirits of the giants mentioned in Gen 6 after some of the fallen angels procreated with the daughters of men.

You are 100% wrong! Consider:

Nephilim Heresy – Details​

Did angels have wild sex with women? Birthing a sci-fi mongrel race of superhuman persons? Is this what Genesis 6:1-2 teaches? Or is there another lesson far more important? Paul warned that men would turn from sound doctrine and truth to fables, and this is a great example of it. What nonsense! If you want to know and defend the truth in these perilous times of the last days, here is an opportunity for you to do so.​

Nephilim Heresy – Details​

Who were the Sons of God?​

What Was Their Sin?
What Happened?

Genesis 6​

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
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.
3 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.
4 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.
5 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.

Numbers 13
33 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.

The sons of God in Genesis 6:2,4 were men from the godly families of the righteous descending from Seth to Noah. Their sin was to break their covenant with God and lustfully marry into the wicked families on earth descending from Cain and others. The offspring were famous men in the antediluvian world, and God drowned the earth for this sin and the wickedness of man.

Speculators, rejecting even elementary hermeneutics, assume the sons of God to be angels, which they say came to earth for sexual liaisons with women, resulting in a mongrel super race, which they call the Nephilim. Though God destroyed all living creatures with the Flood in Noah’s day, the consistent speculators find the Nephilim again in Canaan from Numbers 13:33.

Nephilim is a transliterated Hebrew word, occurring in corrupt Bible versions in two places, and subsequently used by some as a name for the mongrel creatures resulting from angels copulating with women according to a false and foolish interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 and Numbers 13:33.

Genesis 6:4 (RV, ASV, RSV, NASV, NIV, NSRV, ESV, WEB, HSCB, GW, NCV, NIRV).
Numbers 13:33 (RV, ASV, RSV, NASV, NIV, NSRV, ESV, WEB, HSCB, GW, NCV, NIRV, BBE, CEB, The Message, Young’s).

The King James Version, God’s inspired and authoritative scriptures in English, which may be trusted and argued at the word level, as it was designed and used, has giants in both places.

Transliteration creates new words with no established meaning in the receiving language, and in this case, having little or confused meaning in the originating language. This unnecessary transliteration created the mysterious term Nephilim, encouraging imaginations to run wild about angels having sex with women resulting in a new race. A certain meaning of Nephilim cannot be determined, but since it does not occur in God’s Bible anyway, it is of no consequence to saints.

The wild idea of angels having sexual intercourse with human women to generate science fiction supermen should be ignored, if it were not for some publishing speculations based on this bizarre interpretation. Having turned their ears away from sound doctrine and truth for fables, carnal Christians with itching ears have found teachers that will scratch their lusts with these farfetched tales of a super race (II Tim 4:3-4). Rather than learn Christ, truth, and godliness, they want to be entertained with ridiculous propositions based on even more ridiculous interpretational methods.

The texts above do not say or imply anything about angels, and the rest of scripture is totally silent about such an incredible heaven-earth, interracial sexual event and its result. It is the logical fallacy of begging the question or circular reasoning to assume that angels are intended by a few uses of “sons of God” for angels in Job 1:6; 2:1; and 38:7. There is no reason to connect these passages beyond the mere sound of their words, which is a presumptive mistake violating even elementary hermeneutics for rightly dividing scripture (Neh 8:8; II Tim 2:15).

Rather than leap into the black abyss of angel-human mongrels running around in dark forests or leading international conspiracies, let sane readers weigh the evidence for a much simpler and Biblical explanation of the text. The scriptures themselves will prove that God in this passage … identified the sin of His adopted children (Seth’s descendants) marrying the reprobate children of the world (Cain’s and others’ descendants), thus bringing the Flood on the whole world, except for the family of Noah, which obtained mercy for his faithful obedience.

The sin was by men of flesh, not by angels, for God in context and in consequence said He would not always strive with fleshly man (Gen 6:3). The sin was taking daughters for marriage – not a sin of giving daughters in marriage. This must be human males taking human females, for the sin was by fleshly men, not angels, and the sin was taking the wives.

The sin was by men of flesh, not by angels, for God’s consequential judgment came on humanity and other breathing creatures in 120 years, when He drowned the human race by Noah’s Flood (Gen 6:3). Nothing happened to any angels 120 years later. Angelic destruction and punishment were thousands of years away, as they confessed to the Lord Christ on earth.

The also in verse 6:3 compares two things that are flesh. Since God is not flesh, He is not compared. Since angels are not flesh (and not mentioned here), they are not compared. Are there comparable fleshly things in context? Sons of God and daughters of men! The sons of God, who chose and took wives from the daughters of men, were also flesh. Though named after God religiously, they still had bodies and lusts of flesh like the daughters of men.

The Flood was provoked by men of the earth, not by angels, for God saw the wickedness of man and the evil imaginations of his heart (Gen 6:5-7). He did not see the wickedness of angels. If the angels were guilty of corrupting humanity, as would be the case if the wicked sexual perpetrators were angels, they would be mentioned. They are not mentioned. If the angels were guilty of this horrible sexual transgression, why did God punish humanity for it?

There is no mention in Genesis 6:1-4 of angels or anywhere else in scripture regarding such an incredible event as angel-human marriages, sexual intercourse, conception, reproduction, mongrel birth, mongrel nursing, etc. The Bible is a closed system of truth, and honest men never argue for an incredible thing like angel-human mongrels when there is not a mote of Biblical evidence for anything even resembling such a wild, Greek mythology fantasy. The burden of proof is upon them, for the doctrine they construct is entirely based on Job alone.

You can finish read this here: https://letgodbetrue.com/sermons/index/year-2012/nephilim/

 

[CrowCross]

You are 100% wrong! Consider:

Nephilim Heresy – Details​

Did angels have wild sex with women? Birthing a sci-fi mongrel race of superhuman persons? Is this what Genesis 6:1-2 teaches? Or is there another lesson far more important? Paul warned that men would turn from sound doctrine and truth to fables, and this is a great example of it. What nonsense! If you want to know and defend the truth in these perilous times of the last days, here is an opportunity for you to do so.​

Yes, I see that you have turned from sound doctrine.

Nephilim Heresy – Details​

Who were the Sons of God?​

What Was Their Sin?
What Happened?

Genesis 6​

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
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.
3 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.
4 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.
5 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.

Numbers 13
33 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.

The sons of God in Genesis 6:2,4 were men from the godly families of the righteous descending from Seth to Noah. Their sin was to break their covenant with God and lustfully marry into the wicked families on earth descending from Cain and others. The offspring were famous men in the antediluvian world, and God drowned the earth for this sin and the wickedness of man.

This is incorrect...As mentioned before in the book of Job the angels are presented as the "sons of God"...yet you deny that.

Speculators, rejecting even elementary hermeneutics, assume the sons of God to be angels, which they say came to earth for sexual liaisons with women, resulting in a mongrel super race, which they call the Nephilim. Though God destroyed all living creatures with the Flood in Noah’s day, the consistent speculators find the Nephilim again in Canaan from Numbers 13:33.

Either the event happened again or one of Naohs sons wives had Nephilim blood.

Nephilim is a transliterated Hebrew word, occurring in corrupt Bible versions in two places, and subsequently used by some as a name for the mongrel creatures resulting from angels copulating with women according to a false and foolish interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 and Numbers 13:33.

Genesis 6:4 (RV, ASV, RSV, NASV, NIV, NSRV, ESV, WEB, HSCB, GW, NCV, NIRV).
Numbers 13:33 (RV, ASV, RSV, NASV, NIV, NSRV, ESV, WEB, HSCB, GW, NCV, NIRV, BBE, CEB, The Message, Young’s).

The King James Version, God’s inspired and authoritative scriptures in English, which may be trusted and argued at the word level, as it was designed and used, has giants in both places.

Transliteration creates new words with no established meaning in the receiving language, and in this case, having little or confused meaning in the originating language. This unnecessary transliteration created the mysterious term Nephilim, encouraging imaginations to run wild about angels having sex with women resulting in a new race. A certain meaning of Nephilim cannot be determined, but since it does not occur in God’s Bible anyway, it is of no consequence to saints.

The wild idea of angels having sexual intercourse with human women to generate science fiction supermen should be ignored, if it were not for some publishing speculations based on this bizarre interpretation. Having turned their ears away from sound doctrine and truth for fables, carnal Christians with itching ears have found teachers that will scratch their lusts with these farfetched tales of a super race (II Tim 4:3-4). Rather than learn Christ, truth, and godliness, they want to be entertained with ridiculous propositions based on even more ridiculous interpretational methods.

The texts above do not say or imply anything about angels, and the rest of scripture is totally silent about such an incredible heaven-earth, interracial sexual event and its result. It is the logical fallacy of begging the question or circular reasoning to assume that angels are intended by a few uses of “sons of God” for angels in Job 1:6; 2:1; and 38:7. There is no reason to connect these passages beyond the mere sound of their words, which is a presumptive mistake violating even elementary hermeneutics for rightly dividing scripture (Neh 8:8; II Tim 2:15).

Rather than leap into the black abyss of angel-human mongrels running around in dark forests or leading international conspiracies, let sane readers weigh the evidence for a much simpler and Biblical explanation of the text. The scriptures themselves will prove that God in this passage … identified the sin of His adopted children (Seth’s descendants) marrying the reprobate children of the world (Cain’s and others’ descendants), thus bringing the Flood on the whole world, except for the family of Noah, which obtained mercy for his faithful obedience.

The sin was by men of flesh, not by angels, for God in context and in consequence said He would not always strive with fleshly man (Gen 6:3). The sin was taking daughters for marriage – not a sin of giving daughters in marriage. This must be human males taking human females, for the sin was by fleshly men, not angels, and the sin was taking the wives.

The sin was by men of flesh, not by angels, for God’s consequential judgment came on humanity and other breathing creatures in 120 years, when He drowned the human race by Noah’s Flood (Gen 6:3). Nothing happened to any angels 120 years later. Angelic destruction and punishment were thousands of years away, as they confessed to the Lord Christ on earth.

The bible says they were thrown into prison.

The also in verse 6:3 compares two things that are flesh. Since God is not flesh, He is not compared. Since angels are not flesh (and not mentioned here), they are not compared. Are there comparable fleshly things in context? Sons of God and daughters of men! The sons of God, who chose and took wives from the daughters of men, were also flesh. Though named after God religiously, they still had bodies and lusts of flesh like the daughters of men.

The Flood was provoked by men of the earth, not by angels, for God saw the wickedness of man and the evil imaginations of his heart (Gen 6:5-7). He did not see the wickedness of angels. If the angels were guilty of corrupting humanity, as would be the case if the wicked sexual perpetrators were angels, they would be mentioned. They are not mentioned. If the angels were guilty of this horrible sexual transgression, why did God punish humanity for it?

There is no mention in Genesis 6:1-4 of angels or anywhere else in scripture regarding such an incredible event as angel-human marriages, sexual intercourse, conception, reproduction, mongrel birth, mongrel nursing, etc. The Bible is a closed system of truth, and honest men never argue for an incredible thing like angel-human mongrels when there is not a mote of Biblical evidence for anything even resembling such a wild, Greek mythology fantasy. The burden of proof is upon them, for the doctrine they construct is entirely based on Job alone.

You can finish read this here: https://letgodbetrue.com/sermons/index/year-2012/nephilim/

 

[CrowCross]

So God created angels with creative attributes?
They can create bodies at will?
Bull.

I've already shown you where angels can take on human form...physical human form...and your reply is "bull"?????

 

[3 Resurrections]

The sin was by men of flesh, not by angels, for God in context and in consequence said He would not always strive with fleshly man (Gen 6:3). The sin was taking daughters for marriage – not a sin of giving daughters in marriage. This must be human males taking human females, for the sin was by fleshly men, not angels, and the sin was taking the wives.

Red, you need to pay really careful attention to Genesis 6:3. God said, immediately after the verse about the sons of God marrying the daughters of men, "And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he ALSO is flesh..." This flesh of mankind's species is a different type of flesh than that of the sons of God. The two types of flesh are being mentioned by God in this one verse.

Paul also compared these different types of flesh in 1 Corinthians 15:39-40. "All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another."

The celestial angels have one type of flesh bodies which was not intended to reproduce after its own kind. But some of the angels rebelled against this restriction for their species, and married womenkind in order to propagate a hybrid species for themselves, and corrupt the human gene pool.

The sin of the celestial angels in Jude 1:6-7 when they "left their first estate" was the very same kind of sin Sodom and the surrounding cities were guilty of: namely, "in like manner giving themselves over to fornication, and going after OTHER flesh" than their own type of terrestrial flesh. This is why the men of Sodom were so eager to "know" the angels which were in Lot's home: they recognized that kind of celestial-fleshed creatures because they had been fornicating with that "OTHER flesh" type of species before then.

If this "sons of God" marrying the "daughters of men" was only ungodly human women marrying the righteous human males, there is no biological reason why this has ever resulted in giants being born to such unions.

 

[CrowCross]

Who are the sons of God? That question has been asked in this thread.

 

[Wordsmith]

Scripture is reasonable.

Sure, talking donkeys, money in fishes mouth, sun going backwards totally within our human reasoning.

 

[Wordsmith]

The sons of God in Genesis 6:2,4 were men from the godly families of the righteous descending from Seth to Noah. Their sin was to break their covenant with God and lustfully marry into the wicked families on earth descending from Cain and others. The offspring were famous men in the antediluvian world, and God drowned the earth for this sin and the wickedness of man.

I read your post (twice) lets start with the above statement which you offered no scripture to support.

1. You have no support from the OT to say any reference in the to to "sons of God" are human men. There is evidence to the contrary in Job, Genesis and Psalms. Show us how you got there from scripture.

2. Show us how righteous men descended from Seth married women from the line of Cain to produce "mighty men which were of old, men of renown." When unbelievers marry believers they just produce babies just like every other marriage.

4 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.

Verse 4 clearly says there were giants in the earth WHEN the sons of God came unto the daughters of men.

Your sons of Seth theory has zero evidence and is 100% speculation!

 

[Wordsmith]

Though God destroyed all living creatures with the Flood in Noah’s day, the consistent speculators find the Nephilim again in Canaan from Numbers 13:33.

Yes there were giants again!

Genesis 6:4 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.

 

[jeremiah1five]

I've already shown you where angels can take on human form...physical human form...and your reply is "bull"?????

And I replied that they were good angels on a mission from God and was necessary for God to create bodies or something similar.
And they were hungry so they ate.
It would have been disrespectful to refuse their host.

 

[Wordsmith]

The wild idea of angels having sexual intercourse with human women to generate science fiction supermen should be ignored, if it were not for some publishing speculations based on this bizarre interpretation. Having turned their ears away from sound doctrine and truth for fables, carnal Christians with itching ears have found teachers that will scratch their lusts with these farfetched tales of a super race (II Tim 4:3-4). Rather than learn Christ, truth, and godliness, they want to be entertained with ridiculous propositions based on even more ridiculous interpretational methods.

Before you get too carried away with the above statement show us the "Interpretational methods" you use to come up withe sons of Seth THEORY.

 

[Wordsmith]

And they were hungry so they ate.
It would have been disrespectful to refuse their host.

Let's be consistent. You again are using human reasoning to get out of the corner you have back yourself into. Do spirit beings get hungry? Do they digest food and all that goes with that process? You argue against fleshly bodies of any type then allow fleshy attributes. At least try to appear consistent.

 

[jeremiah1five]

I read your post (twice) lets start with the above statement which you offered no scripture to support.

1. You have no support from the OT to say any reference in the to to "sons of God" are human men. There is evidence to the contrary in Job, Genesis and Psalms. Show us how you got there from scripture.

Of course, he did. God judged MEN not hybrids and destroyed MEN in the flood.

7 And the LORD said, I will destroy MAN whom I have created from the face of the earth; both MAN, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Gen. 6:7.

There you go. The Word of God Himself.

2. Show us how righteous men descended from Seth married women from the line of Cain to produce "mighty men which were of old, men of renown." When unbelievers marry believers they just produce babies just like every other marriage.

And that's what happen. Human babies.

4 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.

Verse 4 clearly says there were giants in the earth WHEN the sons of God came unto the daughters of men.

Your sons of Seth theory has zero evidence and is 100% speculation!

Red Baker has it right.
It's a shame you won't think this through but instead will hold to fantasy.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Red, you need to pay really careful attention to Genesis 6:3. God said, immediately after the verse about the sons of God marrying the daughters of men, "And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he ALSO is flesh..." This flesh of mankind's species is a different type of flesh than that of the sons of God. The two types of flesh are being mentioned by God in this one verse.

I'm sure Red Baker will come to refute your failed exegesis and use of flawed hermeneutics to understand Genesis 6.
You are adding to the Bible when you interpret "he is also flesh" to mean something other than man whom God is soon to destroy. You add to the Bible and you're not honest with Scripture.

Paul also compared these different types of flesh in 1 Corinthians 15:39-40. "All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another."

Ah, yes. Different species of flesh. One of MAN, ONE of beasts, ONE of birds, but no mention of hybrids. No mention of demon children. Hmmm, I wonder why. I know. Because there are NONE.
I prefer to accept the words of the Holy Spirit when He says ONE flesh of men/man.

The celestial angels have one type of flesh bodies which was not intended to reproduce after its own kind. But some of the angels rebelled against this restriction for their species, and married womenkind in order to propagate a hybrid species for themselves, and corrupt the human gene pool.

Have you read the link Red Baker provided? It's the most exhaustive commentary I've read ever.
It is an excellent REASONable exegesis on this subject. You would do well to consider it.
But you won't.

The sin of the celestial angels in Jude 1:6-7 when they "left their first estate" was the very same kind of sin Sodom and the surrounding cities were guilty of: namely, "in like manner giving themselves over to fornication, and going after OTHER flesh" than their own type of terrestrial flesh. This is why the men of Sodom were so eager to "know" the angels which were in Lot's home: they recognized that kind of celestial-fleshed creatures because they had been fornicating with that "OTHER flesh" type of species before then.

The original substance of the angels were spirit. They were given male bodies. These reprobates of Sodom wanted to have sex with these God-sent angels. They didn't know they were actually angels sent by God for their destruction.

If this "sons of God" marrying the "daughters of men" was only ungodly human women marrying the righteous human males, there is no biological reason why this has ever resulted in giants being born to such unions.

Strong's defines the word "giants" as "nephal" or nephalim," and the word merely means "tyrants" and "bullies."
And that's exactly what ANYONE will become if not restrained by law - human or God's law - they become the worst of humankind that we have to build prisons and execute them for the sake of the rest of society.
Let me guess...you're a liberal democrat and are against capital punishment.
Maybe even radical liberal democrat.
Maybe just radical.

 

[Red Baker]

To:

3 Resurrections and CrowCross;​

I'll come back tomorrow and address both of your posts and questions~3 Resurrections knows I will, CrowCross will learn that I will. That's how we all learn whether or not we are holding to the truths of God, and I'm sure we all desire to do so, at least I can speak for 3 Resurrections a good man and one who loves God, and has proved it over the past 37 years that I have known him. A very gracious individual.

We only live a few miles from each other but, he is hiding from me~

 

[jeremiah1five]

Who are the sons of God? That question has been asked in this thread.

And the most reasonable answer are they are human males in covenant with God.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Sure, talking donkeys, money in fishes mouth, sun going backwards totally within our human reasoning.

Only to believers in relationship with God for you see those things happened to believers in covenant with God.
And our proper response is to PRAISE GOD.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Let's be consistent. You again are using human reasoning to get out of the corner you have back yourself into. Do spirit beings get hungry? Do they digest food and all that goes with that process? You argue against fleshly bodies of any type then allow fleshy attributes. At least try to appear consistent.

All of a sudden, they don't have bodies?
They have no bodies to eat but have bodies for sex?
Whatever tickles your ears.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Ah, yes. Different species of flesh. One of MAN, ONE of beasts, ONE of birds, but no mention of hybrids. No mention of demon children. Hmmm, I wonder why. I know. Because there are NONE.
I prefer to accept the words of the Holy Spirit when He says ONE flesh of men/man.

As of the time Paul was writing, there were no more hybrid angelic/human creatures in existence anymore, and hadn't been since David and his mighty men slew the remnant of them that were left in his days. So naturally, Paul would not have mentioned any then-present existence of such hybrid creatures in the first century, since they had been destroyed earlier.

This still leaves Paul's mention in 1 Cor. 15:40 of "terrestrial bodies" (which are humankind) in contrast to "celestial bodies" (which are the species of created angelic flesh).

In the days of Noah, Genesis 6:12 pronounced that "God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for ALL flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth. This included the flesh of the fallen angels who had married human wives, as well as the flesh of humankind. Both "terrestrial bodied" creatures and "celestial bodied" creatures had corrupted their way upon the earth, and all had to be destroyed, save for Noah and his family.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Let me guess...you're a liberal democrat and are against capital punishment.
Maybe even radical liberal democrat.
Maybe just radical.

LOL, I'm sorry, but that tickled me. I do have "Conservative" listed under my avatar for a reason. I've told RB before that I grew up from infancy on the tip of the prong of the buckle of the Bible belt - on the same street as Oliver B Green's "Gospel Hour" ministry here in Greenville SC. Conservatism grows on the bushes around here - at least, it was the prevailing mindset until the recent growth spurt has skewed the numbers.

 

[jeremiah1five]

As of the time Paul was writing, there were no more hybrid angelic/human creatures in existence anymore, and hadn't been since David and his mighty men slew the remnant of them that were left in his days. So naturally, Paul would not have mentioned any then-present existence of such hybrid creatures in the first century, since they had been destroyed earlier.

So, you're taking the English word "giants" in the KJV as big people when the word is defined as "tyrants" and "bullies" by James Strong?
Then you want to associate "giants" with anakim and then say these were the remnants of the unreasonable human-angel spawn from Genesis 6 and that Goliath the one David slew was a human-angels offspring leftover?
Total fantasy.

This still leaves Paul's mention in 1 Cor. 15:40 of "terrestrial bodies" (which are humankind) in contrast to "celestial bodies" (which are the species of created angelic flesh).

Spirit beings cannot mate with material beings.

In the days of Noah, Genesis 6:12 pronounced that "God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for ALL flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth. This included the flesh of the fallen angels who had married human wives, as well as the flesh of humankind. Both "terrestrial bodied" creatures and "celestial bodied" creatures had corrupted their way upon the earth, and all had to be destroyed, save for Noah and his family.

No, YOU want it to refer to that kind of flesh, but God makes no distinction as you do which means you're adding to the Bible and not honest with Scripture.