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

[Green Cochoa]

18 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

 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.

 

Those "translations" are obviously inaccurate.  They are paraphrases on a par with the Living Bible, and have been doctored to agree with their translators' opinions.  No reliable translation would take such liberties with the text.  In fact, if they were going to be consistent with their translation of the Hebrew word "sons" (H1121, בֵּן), why did they not apply it elsewhere, such as here?

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children (H1121) [divine beings?]; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. (Genesis 3:16, KJV)

Or here?

And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons (H1121) [divine beings?] and daughters: (Genesis 5:4, KJV)

Would you say all males are divine, and females are simply...their temptresses?

This thread has become so tangential to truth that I am about to bow out of the discussion.

[JoeMo]

4 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

This thread has become so tangential to truth that I am about to bow out of the discussion.

This is just a discussion.  IMHO this is not a salvational issue.  You or I will not burn in hell because you or I get this wrong.  I don't mind being wrong (although I don't think I am).  I would prefer to simply say I don't believe as you do.  I can promise you that this is not the only issue that you and I would not agree on.  If we agreed 100% on every single detail of theology, there wouldn't be much to talk about, would there?

[Samie]

3 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

In fact, if they were going to be consistent with their translation of the Hebrew word "sons" (H1121, בֵּן), why did they not apply it elsewhere, such as here?

I agree there is inconsistency in translations of the Hebrew. Same inconsistency that exists in your view: you believe "ben elohim" in Job referred to angels; but the "ben elohim" in Genesis referred to humans.

But Moses was consistent. He used "ben elohim" if he was referring to angels, "ben adam" when referring to humans.  Had he used "ben elohim" to refer to humans in Gen 6, but then used "ben adam" elsewhere to refer to humans, then he was also inconsistent.

[phkrause]

I know this is an old thread, but I ran across a lecture by Pr Doug Batchelor today and thought of this thread! I believe there were a few others, but this will do. In my personal opinion I believe he pretty much covers all the angles??

Did Angels Marry Humans?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hMMZx12KN4

 

[JoeMo]

2 hours ago, phkrause said:

Did Angels Marry Humans?

I watched the video. If I poked all the holes in it that I found, it would take all night to post it here.  As much as I respect DB, it is my opinion that he is totally off base here. I stand with the position I took when this thread was current.  Why do more than 500 ancient cultures all over the planet have stories about the "gods" coming down from the sky and marrying human women; and those women having supernatural off spring.  By the way most of those 500 cultures also talk about a great flood that destroyed them all.

He said angels were spirits; and could not take on flesh and blood.  Then who were the angels that went to Lot's house Lot drug back into his house?  He quoted the scripture that angels don't marry.  He didn't say anything about angels being incapable of having sex.  From his explanation, "sons of God" were descendants of Seth and "daughters of men" were descendants of Cain.  What? Did Seth only have sons and Cain only daughters?  Why would their offspring be giants?  He talked about giants being around in David's day.  Genesis 6 explicitly says there were giants in those days (days of the flood) and afterwards.  He then compares the "sons of God in the Paleo-Hebrew language of the OT to the sons of God in the Greek language.  Two totally different animals.  If he were being intellectually honest, he could have admitted that the sons of God in the NT are ADOPTED sons of God (see Romans 8, Gal.4, and Eph. 1)- not direct creations of God as those in the OT. In summary, he was using scripture to "prove" his position rather than using scripture to "formulate" a position - a deceptive mistake Christians and Jews have been using forever.  We all know it happens here as well.

I could say much, much more about the refusal of people to take scripture - especially in the historical books - literally.  Just because some things sound like science fiction doesn't mean they didn't actually happen.

[JoeMo]

Check out Psalm 82:

"God has taken his place in the divine council;  in the midst of the gods he holds judgment" (Verse 1)

"I said, “You are gods,  sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, like men you shall die,  and fall like any prince.” (Verses 6-7)

Who are these "gods that God is talking about? IMHO they are the fallen angels who rule the nations around Israel - Baal, Dagon, Molech, Astoreth, Zeus, Apollo, and others.  These were created supernatural beings illegally playing the role of God; and are now imprisoned.  They were not mere stone idols.  Why are these fallen angels imprisoned while their alleged leader - satan - still prowls the earth free looking for whom he may devour? IMHO it is because satan sever crossed the line of mating with human women.

All this is only my steadfast opinion; and I am passionate about it.  That being said, it is only my opinion and not a salvational truth.  However, it will be nice to consider this when the 5th trumpet of Revelation is sounded and the abyss is opened.

[JoeMo]

7 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

Lets take a look at this first small phrase in the text, which your rambling mumbo-jumbo failed to do:

I'm not going to let you goad me into another heated debate with you over this by being offended by garbage like this.  I know my view on this subject is unpopular here; nonetheless, it is my view after much study.  You are entitled to your view; and I am entitled to mine.  There are many preachers and grassroots Christians out there who agree with my view - even some SDA's.  It is not a salvational issue.

[JoeMo]

Here's another thought (and that's all it is - just a thought) ...

Assuming that God didn't find it feasible to explain gene splicing/replacement  (aka gene editing) to Moses, is it at least feasible that fallen angels did some gene editing on human women in an attempt to produce a super race?  Humanity is on the verge of (if not already capable of) of gene editing to "improve" man (Google CRISPR).  If we can do it, why couldn't fallen angels do it?

Fallen angels are not "aliens" - they are fallen angels who have rebelled against God, no matter what the "ancient extraterrestrial theorists" say.

[B/W Photodude]

The topic of angels procreating with humans is one I find bizarre. It also has a couple of serious flaws in it that all the twisting and bending can't fix. I suspect that if some has not slept thru biology class, it would not have been an issue!

Angels are spirits. We are "carbon based units." We have dna, angels do not. It simply is not possible for an angel to procreate with a human. It would be easier for a human to procreate with an ape than an angel with a human! At one time, people believed that this actually occurred.

For an angel to be able to procreate with a human, it suggests that angels can between themselves procreate. That also is flawed. The topic of marriage was brought up to Jesus and he suggested we would be as angels in heaven which seemed to indicate that we also would no longer procreate or marry. There will be no babies in the new earth. All children going to heaven should have grown up by the time of the recreation of the earth takes place.

Given that it is thought that the sons of God may be angels, it must be assumed that they are good angels. You would not call demon angels sons of God. If the sons of God were procreating with humans, then they had committed sin as that would at a minimum been fornication! Then they would no longer have been sons of God. You could argue that even if they married and lived with this daughter of men, they had violated the will of God and coveted something that was not theirs.

So, this whole argument is so wrong on so many levels!

So, then we have to actually look at what is a "son of God." Given that it is said that we must let the Bible interpret itself, here are some verses that will shed some light on the Bibles meaning of "sons of God.":

John 1:12 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:

There were very spiritual men in those days. One even was taken because he was so close to God. I would suspect that all in the line from Seth to Noah were "sons of God." Quite possibly very spiritual men became attracted and formed unions with "daughters of men", which I would suggest to be those not following God. Likely, the "sons of God" could not at that time see the results of such a union.

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

Philippians 2:15 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 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 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.

[JoeMo]

On 5/19/2019 at 11:52 PM, The Wanderer said:

Calling Pastor B “dishonest,” just because we don’t like something he says, or because we generally disapprove of his ministry, is to be blunt, very rude and close-minded

That's fair; I didn't mean to sound like I think he's dishonest; just that he doesn't present the scriptural evidence for both sides of the story.  I actually have much respect for DB and his predecessor Joe Crews. 

10 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

The topic of angels procreating with humans is one I find bizarre.

Me too.  But that doesn't mean it's not true.

10 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Given that it is thought that the sons of God may be angels, it must be assumed that they are good angels.

In the OT, the term "son of God" arguably means direct creations of God.  I say "arguably" because the Hebrew phrase "bene ha'elohim" is only used twice in scripture. In looking into this further, I found a study at https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_724.cfm that was quite balanced.  The conclusion of the study was:

"We have looked at the various arguments for the angelic view and the responses given by those who reject it. On the basis of the biblical evidence, one cannot rule out the possibility that the writer of Genesis had in mind angels when he referred to the sons of God. Yet this does not seem to be the obvious view of the passage or even the likely view. It seems we are dealing with the gross sins of humans, not angels, that caused God to send the Flood."

So it appears that at least some experts find the "fallen angel view"  viable while others find the "sons of Seth" view viable. IOW, it is a matter of opinion.

[phkrause]

Well I take Jesus' opinion over all others and he says that the Angels don't procreate!!!!! I think I'll go with my Savior on this!!

[R. G. White]

On 2/4/2017 at 8:31 PM, Gustave said:

The traditional Adventist understanding is that the angels, archangels ( such as Lucifer and Michael who is understood to be pre-incarnate Christ ) & God the Father were and still are "flesh & blood hominids" complete with flesh, bone and "functional" organs. This would suggest that angels ( of any rank up to archangels ) would have bred human females who than produced 'giants' - AKA the Nephilim.

 

I don't know your background, but I grew up in the SDA Church, as a pastor's son. We never had any "understanding" other than that the angels are an order of created being separate from mankind. Our primary spokesperson, Ellen White, explained this Bible passage as the entire world becoming corrupted when the sons of Seth, who should have been faithful to God, chose to marry the godless daughters of Cain.

[phkrause]

2 hours ago, R. G. White said:

I don't know your background, but I grew up in the SDA Church, as a pastor's son. We never had any "understanding" other than that the angels are an order of created being separate from mankind. Our primary spokesperson, Ellen White, explained this Bible passage as the entire world becoming corrupted when the sons of Seth, who should have been faithful to God, chose to marry the godless daughters of Cain.

Exactly!!!!!

[Gustave]

7 hours ago, R. G. White said:

I don't know your background, but I grew up in the SDA Church, as a pastor's son. We never had any "understanding" other than that the angels are an order of created being separate from mankind. Our primary spokesperson, Ellen White, explained this Bible passage as the entire world becoming corrupted when the sons of Seth, who should have been faithful to God, chose to marry the godless daughters of Cain.

Are you ( and phkraus ) suggesting that the Seventh-day Adventist Pioneers & Ellen White didn't teach that God, Michael & Lucifer the archangels had bodies of flesh with every organ part and "member" of a perfect human man? 

[R. G. White]

59 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Are you ( and phkraus ) suggesting that the Seventh-day Adventist Pioneers & Ellen White didn't teach that God, Michael & Lucifer the archangels had bodies of flesh with every organ part and "member" of a perfect human man? 

Yes, I am. We do generally understand that God and His angels have a physical existence of some kind, but there's a whole lot we have never pretended to know concerning how that works, or how their physical reality compares and contrasts with our own. Paul teaches in I Corinthians 15 that even we human beings are destined to scrap our present bodies of dust in favour of something called a "spiritual" or "heavenly" body. I certainly don't see any way of understanding what exactly that might mean (except for what little we know about Jesus' body after the resurrection), let alone the physical attributes of angels or even of God!

[stinsonmarri]

 

 

1

On 1/28/2017 at 3:34 PM, phkrause said:

Two classes of men, with strong hand and strong will, are here described. “The giants,” the well-known men of great stature, physical force, and violent will, who were enabled by these qualities to claim and secure the supremacy over their fellow-men.

All the antediluvian were tall and great statute human beings had just been created and the Tree of Life had longevity substance, giant means intellect as stated!

 

On 1/28/2017 at 6:42 AM, Samie said:

The issue is in the use of the term "sons of God" as used in the Old Testament.

Only two OT books use the term: Genesis & Job, by the same author, Moses. My opinion is, Moses used the same term with the same reference in mind.  My best guess is based on the words of God Himself when He told Job the "sons of God" shouted for joy when God laid the foundation of the earth.  Hence, the "sons of God" referred to by God Himself existed before Adam was created.  If Moses' use of the phrase "the sons of God" in Job could not possibly refer to humans, I find it hard to believe that Moses had humans in mind when he used the same phrase in Gen 6.

I have no issue in your use of the phrase in the New Testament.

Then you haven't read this:

For unto which of the angels said HE at any time, Thou art MY SON, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a FATHER, and he shall be to me a Son? And of the angels, HE Saith, Who maketh HIS angels' spirits, and HIS ministers a flame of fire. Heb 1:5, 7 

The Bible in Hebrew also tells you that other beings were created by YAHSHUA and these were also the sons that came to worship THE FATHER in Heaven. We need to realize that the Adams also travel as well to Heaven before they sin. They didn't sin overnight we act as if they did! Before probation time was placed on this earth, we do not know how long they lived in the Garden before they sin! We are still limiting YAHWEH and HIS CREATIVE POWERS! Also, in the NT the Greek word Ge does not stand for the earth. It stands for terrain that has soil or any World! Satan and his angels sin and were kicked out before this earth was made! Do you hear of any other evil angel names mention? They are kicked out somewhere on a place that needs no oxygen (firmament) but must have land mass and soil! They are in prison called the bottomless pit. Only some are allowed to come here to earth for each individual that is born when this person dies they return to prison. The proof is in Luke 8:28-33. The word deep in Greek is the bottomless pit! Satan will finally be taken and restricted for a thousand years in the bottomless pit-prison and also his kingdom! 

Heaven is a place and it too is a land mass! All the created sons (actually the Hebrew word is children. It is sad that men seem to always leave women out of the equation which is error also!) of ELOAH comes before HIM THE FATHER and worships on HIS on Appointed Set Times! I pray that we stop limiting THE POWERS of THE ALMIGHTY ONES we are no match!

Blessings!

[JoeMo]

"At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven." (Matt.22:30)

"When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. (Mark 12:25)

Notice the "angels in heaven" part.  The angels (sons of God) who married and had children with human women  were no longer in heaven.  They had left their own habitation (Jude 1:6); so evidently, since they were no longer in heaven, they took it upon themselves (they "chose") to rebel; against God and intermingle with humans; much to the detriment of both species.  The hybrid species of giants in Genesis 6 were the consequence; and they had to be destroyed before they destroyed humanity.  Hence, the flood.

Genesis says "These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God." (Gen. 6:9)  Could this mean that Noah was still a purebred human (i.e., no Nephillim/giant genes in him)?