Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Those who support the "sons of God" not being human (Seth's decendents) cannot duck out on the required follow-up that this type of union must be possible throughout the rest of history, including today. I know that there are those who teach this, but most who claim that these were "fallen angels" or some other spirit being shy away from this necessary corollary....

Bro Tim, a couple of thoughts...

1. You are projecting a requirement that it "must" be still possible, but keep in mind there may have been vast differences not only in the atmosphere but also in the physical abilities and DNA of early humans, for example in Gen. 5 we see that people lived 800, 900 years. That's a long time. Clearly this has CHANGED, and those life spans are not possible today—so who is to say that the interaction of Genesis 6 between the Sons of God and females did not change as well, perhaps God prevents it now? Either way I don't think we can claim it's a "necessity" to think that it can still happen today. We just don't know.

2. This is an interesting verse below, it would seem that there is a concern over how women dress and appear to angels, even in N.T. churches...

1 Cor. 11:10 "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

Matthew Henry:
"She ought to have "power," that is, a veil, on her head, because of the angels. Their presence should keep Christians from all that is wrong while in the worship of God."

[greenbear]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Those who support the "sons of God" not being human (Seth's decendents) cannot duck out on the required follow-up that this type of union must be possible throughout the rest of history, including today. I know that there are those who teach this, but most who claim that these were "fallen angels" or some other spirit being shy away from this necessary corollary.

It seems that most who are of this position also have some difficulty reading the plain chronology of the verse.

Brother Tim,

Those who support the "sons of God" not being human (Seth's decendents) cannot duck out on the required follow-up that this type of union must be possible throughout the rest of history, including today.

where does your necessary corollary come from? God's Word tells us why we don't see fallen angels producing offspring with human women today:

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 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.

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:

There is no difficulty reading the plain chronology of this verse Please refer to post #28 by kevinvw regarding the chronology of 6.4:

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.

I agree with kevin here.
Jennifer

[Brother Tim]

I don't think we can claim it's a "necessity" to think that it can still happen today.

The necessity is to consider it a possibility, since there is no evidence other than pure speculation*** that something intervened to stop the activity prior to the flood. The age argument doesn't work because that continued past the flood for a number of generations.

*** Of course, the whole angels-mating-with-women is speculation based on a phrase, "sons of God" which we have seen may have several meanings, although NO SCRIPTURE equates the phrase with angels.

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

The necessity is to consider it a possibility, since there is no evidence other than pure speculation*** that something intervened to stop the activity prior to the flood. The age argument doesn't work because that continued past the flood for a number of generations.

*** Of course, the whole angels-mating-with-women is speculation based on a phrase, "sons of God" which we have seen may have several meanings, although NO SCRIPTURE equates the phrase with angels.

Ahhh Bro. Tim you rascal, perhaps it is you who is ducking, I provided the CLEAR SCRIPTURE back in post 23, then I provided it AGAIN in post 25. Since you won't believe the Bible you are holding, at least read this, the author may not be KJV only but I think gives each interpretation a fair shot, including the Sethite error...
http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=67

[Winman]

I personally lean toward the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 being angels which kept not their first estate (Jude 1:6).

As others have written, perhaps Satan was trying to corrupt the "seed of Eve", so as to prevent Jesus from coming. I think it is pretty safe to assume that Noah and his three sons were not of this corrupted seed. But perhaps the wife of Ham was of this corrupted seed. From Ham we have;

Gen 10: 6 And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.
7 And the sons of Cush; Seba, and Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabtecha: and the sons of Raamah; Sheba, and Dedan.
8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.
10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.
11 Out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and the city Rehoboth, and Calah,
12 And Resen between Nineveh and Calah: the same is a great city.
13 And Mizraim begat Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, and Naphtuhim,
14 And Pathrusim, and Casluhim, (out of whom came Philistim,) and Caphtorim.
15 And Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth,
16 And the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgasite,
17 And the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite,
18 And the Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite: and afterward were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad.
19 And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon, as thou comest to Gerar, unto Gaza; as thou goest, unto Sodom, and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboim, even unto Lasha.
20 These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, and in their nations.

I think it was Bro Parrish who sometime ago showed that Ruckman teaches that those tribes with "im" on the end were giants. Here we have Mizraim, Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, Pathrusim, Casluhim, Philistim, and Caphtorim. I think it is significant that Nimrod also has "im" in his name.

I think it is also significant that Sodom and Gomorrah are mentioned in vs. 19, cities known for their wickedness, especially fornication and going after strange flesh.

I have posted this before, but here is a site that claims that Sodom and Gomorrah have been found. You can find several sites with information on this, but this is a good one with photos.

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/sodom_&_gomorrah.htm

I don't know if this is the specific site, but awhile back I did a study on this, and it was written that the doorways and rooms found here were very large, tending to imply that the residents of these cities were much larger than ordinary people, in fact, giants. I will try to find that site and post here.

And of course we know of giants such as Goliath, so giants persisted some time after Genesis.

[chette777]

Maybe the sons of God knew that God was going to save men and that they Angels could not be forgiven their sin. so by becoming men they could find a way to enjoy the salvation that men can get from God.
Just a thought

[Brother Tim]

Okay folks, this has to be explained... No more skipping around the words...

Genesis 6:1-5
[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.

Verse 1 "sets up" verse 2. In verse 2, the union is first described which is between either some type of spiritual beings and human women or between the Godly seed (Sethites) and non-Sethite women.

NOW verse 3... What offended God? The deeds of MEN! Fleshly men, not angelic "men".

THEN we come to verse 4. It begins with a NEW SENTENCE! No linking words exist that connect back to either verse 3 or verse 2! It is a statement. Following it is the phrase "and also after that," a phrase which separates the topic. It does not provide a link between "giants" and the offspring of the offending union. The offspring become the "men of renown", not "giants".

FINALLY, verse 5 AGAIN enforces that God is offended at MANKIND!

- Where is the judgment against some kind of spiritual beings? If these creatures have some kind of power over women, why is God offended at MAN (verse 3 and 5)???

- Why is NOTHING said ever again about these half-breeds?

- If the union was possible, and I can see no evidence anywhere else in the Scriptures that it is, then it must still be possible today as well as throughout history. Where are the giants?


This is a difficult passage of Scripture. I will readily grant that. The absence of any other observable evidence of the capability of some type of spirit beings to go around gathering harems of beautiful virgins screams out at me that this interpretation is very flawed.

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

The absence of any other observable evidence of the capability of some type of spirit beings to go around gathering harems of beautiful virgins screams out at me that this interpretation is very flawed.

Bro. Tim, how did Jesus get on Earth as a human child?

[Winman]

Brother Tim

You know from scripture that angels can take on the form of men.

Gen 19:1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.
3 And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

They ate food.

Gen 19:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

They looked like men.

Gen 19:10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door

They physically pulled Lot into the house and shut the door.

Gen 19:16 And while he lingered, the men laid hold upon his hand, and upon the hand of his wife, and upon the hand of his two daughters; the LORD being merciful unto him: and they brought him forth, and set him without the city.

Once again, they physically laid hold of Lot, his wife, and two daughters.

So, to insist angels cannot assume the physical characteristics of men does not agree with the Bible.

Now if angels could take on a physical body as these two angels did, it is also completely possible that the "sons of God" in Gen. 6 were also angels that took on the physical form of man and mated with women. The children born would be flesh, they would be men.

That said, if this indeed did happen, I agree with you that normal men were also very wicked, and that God did indeed flood the world to kill them. It's not like man needs any help being wicked. In this, I agree with you.

But notice this, Genesis speaks of the serpent's "seed"

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Perhaps this is only speaking of spiritual seed, or perhaps it is speaking of physical seed, I do not know. But the Bible says the serpent will have seed. But in the geneologies of both Joseph and Mary in the NT, it is physical seed that is described to trace both back to David, and in Luke 3 back to Adam (and Eve).

[greenbear]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Those who support the "sons of God" not being human (Seth's decendents) cannot duck out on the required follow-up that this type of union must be possible throughout the rest of history, including today. I know that there are those who teach this, but most who claim that these were "fallen angels" or some other spirit being shy away from this necessary corollary.

It seems that most who are of this position also have some difficulty reading the plain chronology of the verse.

Hello??? I'm feeling invisible here. Have I been blocked?

Brother Tim, you said:

Those who support the "sons of God" not being human (Seth's decendents) cannot duck out on the required follow-up that this type of union must be possible throughout the rest of history, including today. I know that there are those who teach this, but most who claim that these were "fallen angels" or some other spirit being shy away from this necessary corollary.

The Bible says:
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 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.

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:

God hasn't allowed it to go on!!! He locked the offending angels in prision unto the day of judgement. There is no necessary corollary!!!