[Brother Tim]

bumped to top - topic resurfaces

[Brother Tim]

Giants existed before the union of "sons of God" and "daughters of men". The verse cannot be more simple. "and also after that"

[CKG]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Giants existed before the union of "sons of God" and "daughters of men". The verse cannot be more simple. "and also after that"

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. (Genesis 6:4)

[greenbear]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Giants existed before the union of "sons of God" and "daughters of men". The verse cannot be more simple. "and also after that"

It's not that simple, BT. I have read it three different ways.

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.

1)The way you just read it (and there is no evidence anywhere else in scripture that would support your reading, and the structure of the sentence doesn't support your reading, either)

2) the common reading that it means also after those days (described in Gen 1-2) there were giants after that. As for this second more common reading, we don't need this verse to tell us that the nephilim continued after this because other scriptures relating to the Jews driving out the inhabitants of the promised land make it clear enough. And I think you are right that this verse isn't saying what is usually attributed to it.

3)a third (and I think correct) reading is that in the sentence segment "and also after that" the word "that" refers back to the preceding part of the sentence as well as to the next section directly after the comma "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them". The word "after" refers to "the same became the mighty men of old, men of renown".

What is 'that" referring to? It's referring to the account of the sons of God coming in to the daughters of men, and they bare children to them.

What is the "after that" referring to? It's referring to these "same" who became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

[CKG]

No big deal, but I think this thread belongs under Bible studies and not doctrine.

[Brother Tim]

I agree that "Studies" is a better spot, but this is an old thread resurrected. Perhaps Brandon can transfer it, if needed. There is a doctrinal aspect to it, because if one believes that angels have the power to propagate, and teaches so, that is doctrine, unbiblical though it is, IMO.

Friends, I do have a lengthy study thread going about GIANTS, Sons of God (angels) and Daughters of Men By Bob Deffinbaugh, Th.M. (yes I think they did breed) and the antediluvian creatures called the NEPHILIM (which means fallen ones), tons of information, you can check that out at the link below, and don't miss the last page posts 51 and 53, regarding the interlocking, precision cut stone structures of Puma Punku in Bolivia:
http://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=896

[greenbear]

If we're going to study this topic, I wish we could avoid the one sentence arguments.
If simple pronouncements about the topics obvious "unbiblical" standing is all that's necessary then why don't you explain why scholars and serious bible students have hotly debated this issue from time immemorial. Early Bible scholars and historians tended to hold the view that the sons of God in Gen 6 were fallen angels. Josephus believed the sons of God in gen 6 were fallen angels and also wrote about the bones of the giants, which he believed were the offspring of angels and human women, still shown in his day.

For starters,
Jesus did not say angels cannot procreate. He said the angels OF GOD IN HEAVEN do not procreate. He doesn't even say the heavenly angels can't procreate but that they do not procreate.

Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

The angels of God in Heaven is one of 3 subsets of angels.

The second subset are the fallen angels that are not imprisoned.

The third subset are the fallen angels that are reserved in chains because they kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation. Note the comparison of the angels transgression in 1:6 to Sodom and Gomorrha's transgression in 1:7, in like manner giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh.

Jude
1:6 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.

1:7 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.

1 Peter
3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

Interesting reference to Noah's day. Christ preached unto the spirits in prison who were disobedient in the days of Noah! Hmmm.

2 Peter
2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; 2:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: 2:8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds; 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:

This only scratches the surface. I'm going to spend time going over all the material that Bros. Parrish compiled. There has been a lot of written about this subject. I'd like to come to a better understanding. I believe that some people can't or won't face this issue head on because it touches upon human procreation and it's too disturbing for them to contemplate.

[kevinvw]

Okay, first of all, the whole thing about the angels being sexless is flat out wrong. They are all males. Every angel is a man, and the book of Revelation points that the clearest.

Rev 21:17 And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.

If there are no angels that are women, they obviously aren't going to be marrying each other since marriage is sexual and is clearly spoken of as being between man and woman. We all become sons of God, not sons and daughters. The verses in Job and wherever else in the Old Testament say sons not daughters.

I don't believe that we have to get out sin nature from our father. I think that it comes from having Adamic flesh.

Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Jesus was tempted like we are yet without sin. If He didn't have old Adam in Him like we do then this verse seems awfully vain. In fact, how was he even tempted to sin if He didn't even have it in Him?

I agree with sister Greenbear, that Jude and Peter are giving reference to the sons of God that came and fornicated with human women. I also agree with whoever said that the after that is not saying that there were giants before and then after, but is saying that after the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, those men became mighty men.

Gen 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.

Look at the sentence structure.

...and also after that,...

After what?

....when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bare them children to them,...

What about them?

...the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

The semicolon is used to separate two independent clauses which carry their own subject, but are closely related. The after that is not referring to the subject of the previous sentence but of what follows after it. At least that's what I think he was trying to say. It's 4 in the morning and I'm passed due for sleep.

[greenbear]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

bumped to top - topic resurfaces

Is it OK to copy my posts re: sons of God vis a vis nephilim that I put under the flying Scroll thread? I wonder if brother Brandon could copy appropriate posts to son's of God thread? But these issues all overlap. Maybe we need a new thread. Maybe something like "Fallen Angels/demons/aliens/ufo phenomenon/strong delusion". Lol.