The “sons of God” in Gen 6:1-4: Angels or Humans?

[Samie]

4 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Isn't that why we are "adopted" by God?  But once adopted, we are His sons.  (See Romans 9.)

Do you have any clue as to when adoption took place?

4 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Samie,

With all due respect, you know not with whom you are arguing.  I am no stranger to this word "take."  Without even looking it up, I can tell you from memory that it was indeed used when Satan "took" Jesus up to the temple mount.  It was used when a man "took" a wife.  It was used when translated as "receive" in John 14:1-3 where Jesus promises to "take" His children home.  The word "paralambano" in the Greek is neutral, and can be used either negatively or positively.  You, on the other hand, have not studied the Greek in Matthew 24 thoroughly, for if you had, you would have discovered that the word "paralambano" is not the Greek word used where it says the flood "took them all away."  That is actually a different word.

Green,

You are correct that "paralambano" is not used in Matt 24:39.  But please be reminded that I never referred to "paralambano" in my previous post, did I? 

4 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Nevertheless, since you were speaking of multiple instances of "paralambano," let's look at that one a bit deeper.

"Paralambano" is used in contradistinction to "aphiemi," translated as "left" in the Matthew 24 passage.  We are either "taken" or "left."  I want to be "left."  The word "aphiemi" is translated as "forgive" about a third of the time it is used in the New Testament.  The "left" are the forgiven ones.  The "taken" are those taken in by the deceits of the devil.  Therefore, in Matthew 24, the usage of "paralambano" is clearly a negative usage.

I was speaking of multiple instances of "paralambano"?  Where? The verses I quoted  in my previous post, reposted below with their corresponding Greek verses, do not use "paralambano".  Instead, it is the word ai;rw (airo) translated "taken away" in Matt 24:39

KJV Matthew 24:39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

BGT Matthew 24:39 kai. ouvk e;gnwsan e[wj h=lqen o` kataklusmo.j kai. h=ren a[pantaj( ou[twj e;stai Îkai.Ð h` parousi,a tou/ ui`ou/ tou/ avnqrw,pouÅ

Matthew 11:29   Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

^BGT Matthew 11:29 a;rate to.n zugo,n mou evfV u`ma/j kai. ma,qete avpV evmou/( o[ti prau<j eivmi kai. tapeino.j th/| kardi,a|( kai. eu`rh,sete avna,pausin tai/j yucai/j u`mw/n\

Matthew 16:24   Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

^BGT Matthew 16:24 To,te o` VIhsou/j ei=pen toi/j maqhtai/j auvtou/\ ei; tij qe,lei ovpi,sw mou evlqei/n( avparnhsa,sqw e`auto.n kai. avra,tw to.n stauro.n auvtou/ kai. avkolouqei,tw moiÅ

Seems you confused "paralambano" used in Matt 24:40 with "airo" in Matt 24:39.

 

^BGT Matthew 24:40 to,te du,o e;sontai evn tw/| avgrw/|( ei-j paralamba,netai kai. ei-j avfi,etai\

^KJV Matthew 24:40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Why bring up "paralambano" when it is "airo" being discussed?

[phkrause]

On 2/12/2017 at 8:09 AM, Samie said:

I am interested to know your basis in Scriptures. Can you tell me, please?

Samie, in my post I have posted the Tanakh verses and the commentary from the Rabbi of Rabbis on these verses!!

[Samie]

5 minutes ago, phkrause said:

Samie, in my post I have posted the Tanakh verses and the commentary from the Rabbi of Rabbis on these verses!!

So your basis is the commentary of Rabbi Rashi, who to you is the Rabbi of Rabbis. Jesus was also a Rabbi.  Are you saying Rabbi Rashi surpassed our Lord?

[JoeMo]

"When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them,  the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.  Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal^[b]; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”  The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. (Gen. 6:1-4)

A plain reading of scripture almost demands that "sons of God" are created divine beings.  When we try to spiritualize everything that doesn't make sense to our modern Western logical scientific minds, you can contort scripture into anything you want.  the "and also afterward" indicates that these Nephilim were around after the flood.  God commanded the Israelites completely destroy the people groups is Canaan that were "infected" so to speak with the Nephilim "gene".  The failed to do so along the coast (the land of the Philistines and Gath); and they suffered the consequences up until all of the "giants (like Goliath and his brothers) were destroyed in the time of David.  If you want to spiritualize away the natural reading of an historical book just because you think it's weird, be careful.  It's not much of a stretch from denying that a "son of God" can impregnate a human woman to thinking it's ridiculous that God's spirit impregnated a woman named Mary who birthed Jesus; or impregnated an 80 year-old woman (maybe older) who birthed the nation of Israel.

[JoeMo]

Look at the difference between how God directed Israel to treat it's enemies in general:

"When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. ¹¹ If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. ¹² If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. ¹³ When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. ¹⁴ As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. ¹⁵ This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby." (Deuteronomy 20:10 -15)

On the other hand, look how God instructs them to treat those people groups infected with the Nephilim "gene":

"However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. ¹⁷ Completely destroy^[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. ¹⁸ Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God." (ibid, vs. 16-18)

These same people groups are mentioned as objects of complete destruction several times in the OT.  Joshua carried out the Lord's command everywhere, EXCEPT:

" No Anakites were left in Israelite territory; only in Gaza, Gath and Ashdod did any survive." (Josh 11:22)

Who were Israel's nemesis for several centuries after Joshua? Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod.  Why? because until the time of David, the remnants of the Nephilim (rebellious "wanna be gods" and their followers) resided there until the time of David.

[phkrause]

5 hours ago, JoeMo said:

A plain reading of scripture almost demands that "sons of God" are created divine beings.

Not at all, at least not to me. "sons of God" means the sons of the Godly living on earth, which would be the sons of Seth! And the daughters of man would be the daughters of Cain. Why would evil angels be able to pro-create? When God create man he said "lets make man in our image," which would say to me that when angels were created, they were not created in the image of God and his Son!! So why would we even want to entertain that evil angels could pro-create? Not sure I can understand that thinking!

[Samie]

5 hours ago, phkrause said:

Not at all, at least not to me. "sons of God" means the sons of the Godly living on earth, which would be the sons of Seth!

Not at all, based on how I understand what the Bible says:

NAS Genesis 7:1 Then the LORD said to Noah, "Enter the ark, you and all your household; for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time.

So how can those who intermarried with human women be Godly when God said Noah was the only one righteous?

[phkrause]

9 hours ago, Samie said:

Not at all, based on how I understand what the Bible says:

NAS Genesis 7:1 Then the LORD said to Noah, "Enter the ark, you and all your household; for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time.

So how can those who intermarried with human women be Godly when God said Noah was the only one righteous?

So you believe that angels can pro-create?? Not from what I gather from the Word of God!! Only humans can pro-create, period!!!!! And by the way, by the time Noah came around the world was in pretty bad shape. The inter-marrying of the Sons of God and Daughters of men had been going on for many years. I will go with the evidence that angels can not pro-create!

[Samie]

11 minutes ago, phkrause said:

I will go with the evidence that angels can not pro-create!

Any evidence from the Bible? What verse?

[JoeMo]

15 hours ago, phkrause said:

Not at all, at least not to me. "sons of God" means the sons of the Godly living on earth, which would be the sons of Seth! And the daughters of man would be the daughters of Cain. Why would evil angels be able to pro-create? When God create man he said "lets make man in our image," which would say to me that when angels were created, they were not created in the image of God and his Son!! So why would we even want to entertain that evil angels could pro-create? Not sure I can understand that thinking!

Animals and plants are not made in the image of God, either; yet they pro-create.  Why is it such a leap of faith to think that higher order beings like angels don't have the ability to do so?

[8thdaypriest]

3 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Animals and plants are not made in the image of God, either; yet they pro-create.  Why is it such a leap of faith to think that higher order beings like angels don't have the ability to do so?

Hmmmm.  So little cherubs with wings are baby angels?

[JoeMo]

17 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Hmmmm.  So little cherubs with wings are baby angels?

Only in classical paintings...

[phkrause]

9 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Why is it such a leap of faith to think that higher order beings like angels don't have the ability to do so?

Complete Jewish Bible

Mark 12:23-25:

23 In the Resurrection, whose wife will she be? For all seven had her as wife."

24 Yeshua said to them, "Isn't this the reason that you go astray? because you are ignorant both of the Tanakh and of the power of God?

25 For when people rise from the dead, neither men nor women marry -- they are like angels in heaven.

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

11 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Animals and plants are not made in the image of God, either; yet they pro-create.  Why is it such a leap of faith to think that higher order beings like angels don't have the ability to do so?

Well, the Bible speaks of "he asses" and "she asses" but never once mentions "he angels" nor "she angels."  In light of Jesus' clear reference to angels not marrying, it would be no "leap of faith" to think they can procreate, it would be a "speculative presumption"--a forbidden one, I might add.  Those who exercise "faith" believe Jesus' words--that there is no marrying nor giving in marriage in heaven; and it goes without saying that in God's Home there is no fornication, adultery, nor out-of-wedlock hedonism either.

[Green Cochoa]

On 02/14/2017 at 1:09 AM, JoeMo said:

A plain reading of scripture almost demands that "sons of God" are created divine beings. 

Which scriptures have you been reading?  Have you read these?

 

Quote

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: (John 1:12)

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

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; (Philippians 2:15)

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 3:1)

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. (1 John 3:2)

 

[Samie]

3 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Well, the Bible speaks of "he asses" and "she asses" but never once mentions "he angels" nor "she angels."  In light of Jesus' clear reference to angels not marrying, it would be no "leap of faith" to think they can procreate, it would be a "speculative presumption"--a forbidden one, I might add.  Those who exercise "faith" believe Jesus' words--that there is no marrying nor giving in marriage in heaven; and it goes without saying that in God's Home there is no fornication, adultery, nor out-of-wedlock hedonism either.

Did you notice that, Green?  In heaven.  There is no marriage in heaven.  There is on earth.  Any Scripture for no marriage on earth?

[Samie]

3 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Which scriptures have you been reading?  Have you read these?

JoeMo was clearly referring to the OT, not the NT.  You have nothing from the OT?  The issue is in the use of the phrase "ben elohim" in the OT.

[Green Cochoa]

10 minutes ago, Samie said:

Did you notice that, Green?  In heaven.  There is no marriage in heaven.  There is on earth.  Any Scripture for no marriage on earth?

Samie, where do those angels live? in heaven perchance?  Is there need for a scripture to say there is no marriage on earth?  The scriptures are plain that when WE are in heaven, we will be like THEM.  Where do they live now and where will they live then?  Evidently, they do not marry now, for Christ told us that we will be like them then--without marriage. 

Do you accept that there will be no marriage in heaven?

[Green Cochoa]

12 minutes ago, Samie said:

JoeMo was clearly referring to the OT, not the NT.  You have nothing from the OT?  The issue is in the use of the phrase "ben elohim" in the OT.

The Bible is all in agreement with itself, Samie.  Let us not look for contradictions here.  Nevertheless, Genesis 6 speaks of the righteous among Adam's descendants as "the sons of God" as well, albeit you have not understood this yet.

[Samie]

2 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

The Bible is all in agreement with itself, Samie.  Let us not look for contradictions here.  Nevertheless, Genesis 6 speaks of the righteous among Adam's descendants as "the sons of God" as well, albeit you have not understood this yet.

Not me who did not understand. It's you who confused "airo" with "paralambano", remember? 

And the issue is clearly the use of "ben elohim" in the OT.  Do you understand there is no "ben elohim" in the Greek NT?

[Samie]

2 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Samie, where do those angels live? in heaven perchance?  Is there need for a scripture to say there is no marriage on earth?  The scriptures are plain that when WE are in heaven, we will be like THEM.  Where do they live now and where will they live then?  Evidently, they do not marry now, for Christ told us that we will be like them then--without marriage. 

Do you accept that there will be no marriage in heaven?

You don't seem to understand the issue of this thread, do you?  Take a glance at the title; perhaps that will give you a hint.

[Samie]

2 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Do you accept that there will be no marriage in heaven?

You missed this post. Explains why you asked.

[JoeMo]

12 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Which scriptures have you been reading?  Have you read these?

 Yes I have read those.  Have you read these?

The divine beings saw how beautiful these human women were, so they married the ones they chose. (Gen 6:2 CEB)

More and more people were born, until finally they spread all over the earth. Some of their daughters were so beautiful that supernatural beings came down and married the ones they wanted. (Gen. 6:2 CEV)

When the ·sons of God [^Cmay refer to godly men among Seth’s descendants (ch. 5), or noble men, or angels] saw that ·these girls [^Lthe daughters of men/human beings; ^Ceither evil women among Cain’s descendants (4:17–24), poor women, or simply mortal women] were beautiful, they married any of them they chose [^Cthough their identity is unclear, their marriage clearly violated a boundary]. (Gen. 6:2 EXB)

some of the heavenly beings saw that these young women were beautiful, so they took the ones they liked. (Gen. 6:2 GNT)

some divine beings noticed how attractive human women were, so they took wives for themselves from a selection that pleased them. (Gen 6:2 ISV)

Now a population explosion took place upon the earth. It was at this time that beings from the spirit world looked upon the beautiful earth women and took any they desired to be their wives. (Gen. 6:2 TLB)

Seems like several Bible translators have the same opinion I have.  I looked up some of the verses you quoted in the versions above; and none of them refer to the "sons of God" as divine beings.

 

[JoeMo]

12 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Those who exercise "faith" believe Jesus' words--that there is no marrying nor giving in marriage in heaven; and it goes without saying that in God's Home there is no fornication, adultery, nor out-of-wedlock hedonism either.

I agree completely.  That is why the "sons of God" that committed these sins were kicked out of heaven to be held in sheol until the end; and then destroyed.

[JoeMo]

13 hours ago, phkrause said:

For when people rise from the dead, neither men nor women marry -- they are like angels in heaven.

Just because they don't marry doesn't mean that they are incapable of having sex.  Why would anyone (human or spirit) need to have sex?  Outside of the physical enjoyment within the bounds of marriage (which doesn't exist in heaven), there is no need to replace ourselves; we are immortal.