Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

[Walls]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

Here is the issue with Gen 6. Since the text does not specifically tell us that those 'sons of God' are angels we are left with no alternative but to apply a definition to 'sons of God.' The question is, what definition do we assign to the 'sons of God'? There are only two possibilities for assigning meaning - human imagination or scripture. If we assign angelic beings to this term we must then find where scripture itself assigns such a definition to 'sons of God'. We see repeated passages where 'sons of God' is used to describe men as the subject both in the old and new testament, but there is no text that ever defines angels in this way. The only possible passage that may indicate that this refers to angels is Job 38:6-7 but even this is inconclusive because the text does not mention angels. Scripture must ALWAYS be allowed to define its own use of language. We are not free to assign our own definitions to biblical terms.

Insisting that these are angels and could not possibly be anything else makes a number of unwarranted assumptions. This assumes that the term 'sons of god' must only refer to angels in Gen 6. It assumes that the angels which were cast down from heaven were cast down upon the earth. It assumes that if they were cast down upon the earth that they assumed human form. It assumes that if they took human form they became sexual creatures. It assumes that they were sufficiently genetically compatible with human DNA to produce offspring. It assumes that the appearance of the giants in the land can only be explained through this quantum leap of conjecture, none of which is supported by any biblical text. This was simply a matter of human genetics, nothing more. There is nothing in scripture to suggest that angels can reproduce after any fashion much less reproduce the human gene code. In fact, Jesus tells us that angels neither marry nor are they given in marriage. Since this is true, it is quite presumptuous to read Gen. 6:2 and insist that angels did precisely what Jesus said they do not do. The term sons of God must be understood according to the pattern of its usage in scripture. Every other time this phrase is used, it refers to man. That being true, by what rule of interpretation does one assign some other definition to this term?

You approach scripture, and this matter, in a correct manner. For this I applaud you. Scripture shall explain scripture. But here is my answer.

1. The Terms "sons of God" NEVER applies to MEN in the Old Testament. FOR MEN it is a New Testament description of men born to the Holy Spirit
2. The designation in Job Job 38:4-7 IS conclusive because MEN only inhabited the earth AFTER it was created. These "sons of God" were around BEFORE it was created so that they could applaud when the "foundations" of earth were laid
3. The restriction on angels marrying, according to the language used is, that they DO NOT marry - NOT that they CANNOT marry. Jude 1:6 makes this clear. "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) Their "first estate" could be left, (2) they could "give themselves over to fornication", and (3) they could "go after strange flesh".

I think that scripture has answered.

[grogers]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

You approach scripture, and this matter, in a correct manner. For this I applaud you. Scripture shall explain scripture. But here is my answer.

1. The Terms "sons of God" NEVER applies to MEN in the Old Testament. FOR MEN it is a New Testament description of men born to the Holy Spirit
2. The designation in Job Job 38:4-7 IS conclusive because MEN only inhabited the earth AFTER it was created. These "sons of God" were around BEFORE it was created so that they could applaud when the "foundations" of earth were laid
3. The restriction on angels marrying, according to the language used is, that they DO NOT marry - NOT that they CANNOT marry. Jude 1:6 makes this clear. "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) Their "first estate" could be left, (2) they could "give themselves over to fornication", and (3) they could "go after strange flesh".

I think that scripture has answered.

Even if the term sons of God only applied to the men in the NT, it is still a designation of men - redeemed men. But, this and similar terms are also used in the OT in the same way.
Hosea 2:10, “Yet the number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered; And in the place where it is said to them, 'You are not My people,' It will be said to them, 'You are the sons of the living God.'"
Psa. 82, “You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.”
Luke 3:38, "the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."
Prov. 7:1, "My son, keep my words, and treasure my commandments within you."
Prov. 7:24, "Now therefore, my sons, listen to me, and pay attention to the words of my mouth."

If the Lord said they DO NOT marry, it matters little whether or not they can. If they do, then Jesus did not tell us the truth in the matter.

[equinox]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

If you are going to insist that these are angels then you are going to have to find some place in scripture where it explicitly defines angels as sons of God or sons of God as angels. You will find no such example. The term sons of God is however repeated applied to men.

As far as Jude 1:6-7, perhaps you should diagram those two verses wo you can understand what the text is saying. Look at the construction of the text. "Which likewise indulged in sexual immorality" is not linking the angels who left their first estate to Sodom and Gomorrah, it is linking the behavior of the "surrounding cities" to the like behavior of Sodom and Gomorrah. The sin of the angels is specified simply as having left their "own position of authority" not sexual immorality.

In hebrew the words in Gen 6 are the same as the words in Job 2:1 the Bene Elohim which translates to Sons of God.

so Job 2:1 explicitly states that these sons of God are angels and some translations even have angels there instead of Sons of God. but its the same phrase used in Gen 6 and because the sons of God were there at the foundation of the earth we know they are angels. simple, really.

also Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, line upon line, here a little, and there a little:

so Jude not only tells us that we can entertain angels unaware but in a later verse in references sodom and gomorrah in relation to fallen angels
in sodom and gomorrah there just so happens to be a story about men wanting to have sex with angels.

also the parable of the wheat and the tares tells us there are two distinct seed lines

Matt 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: 25But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. 26But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. 27So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? 28He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? 29But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. 30Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

[equinox]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

Even if the term sons of God only applied to the men in the NT, it is still a designation of men - redeemed men. But, this and similar terms are also used in the OT in the same way.
Hosea 2:10, “Yet the number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered; And in the place where it is said to them, 'You are not My people,' It will be said to them, 'You are the sons of the living God.'"
Psa. 82, “You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.”
Luke 3:38, "the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."
Prov. 7:1, "My son, keep my words, and treasure my commandments within you."
Prov. 7:24, "Now therefore, my sons, listen to me, and pay attention to the words of my mouth."

If the Lord said they DO NOT marry, it matters little whether or not they can. If they do, then Jesus did not tell us the truth in the matter.

Galatians 2:26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

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

If one becomes a son of God through faith in christ jesus then the SONS of God mentioned in Gen 6 can not be men, as this was long before anyone had heard or even thought of christ jesus.

is israel were being instructed on becoming sons of God but fleshly israel never got there in fact we have yest to see the sons of Ggod made manifest and all of manifestation wait in eager anticipation for the revelation of the sons of God romans 8:19

Romans 9:4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons;

you see even israel are but ADOPTED sons. but Gen 6 is before any covenant is made with man. so there is no adoption here. these are angels

[grogers]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

Galatians 2:26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

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

If one becomes a son of God through faith in christ jesus then the SONS of God mentioned in Gen 6 can not be men, as this was long before anyone had heard or even thought of christ jesus.

is israel were being instructed on becoming sons of God but fleshly israel never got there in fact we have yest to see the sons of Ggod made manifest and all of manifestation wait in eager anticipation for the revelation of the sons of God romans 8:19

Romans 9:4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons;

you see even israel are but ADOPTED sons. but Gen 6 is before any covenant is made with man. so there is no adoption here. these are angels

That is utter nonsense. Psa. 82, “You are gods; you ARE all sons of the Most High.”

[Walls]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

Even if the term sons of God only applied to the men in the NT, it is still a designation of men - redeemed men. But, this and similar terms are also used in the OT in the same way.
Hosea 2:10, “Yet the number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered; And in the place where it is said to them, 'You are not My people,' It will be said to them, 'You are the sons of the living God.'"
Psa. 82, “You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.”
Luke 3:38, "the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."
Prov. 7:1, "My son, keep my words, and treasure my commandments within you."
Prov. 7:24, "Now therefore, my sons, listen to me, and pay attention to the words of my mouth."

If the Lord said they DO NOT marry, it matters little whether or not they can. If they do, then Jesus did not tell us the truth in the matter.

Good arguments. But as I said in my first posting, there is a difference between being BORN of God and having one's ORIGIN in God. I think you will, on close study, find your examples tending to the second way - having your ORIGIN in God. Hosea 2:10, for instance, prophesies that Israel, "Lo-ammi" for their sins, will one day we restored to "you are my people". But WHEN does this happen. AFTER RESURRECTION (Ezekiel 37 and Daniel 12:2). The resurrection is when we receive a body whose ORIGIN is in heaven (2nd Cor.5:1-2). And resurrection is regarded as a BIRTH for Christ is "first-born from the dead" (Col.1:18). In this will Israel be "sons of God" after being Lo-ammi.

Psalm 82 not only says, "children of God" (v.6), but it says that Israel, in matters of judgement in Law are "gods" (v.1, 6). Yet verse 7 confirms that they are but men. So the meaning of "children of God" (or "sons" if you wish) describes their POSITION given by God to judge in matters of His Law. This is not given to the Nations, so Israel have a special POSITION, or ORIGIN in matters of judging their fellows in matters of Law.

Luke 3:38 I explained in my first posting. It amounts to the same thing.

Proverbs no doubt are the Words of God. But the grammar of 1:8 makes these proverbs directed at Solomon's son.

[equinox]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

That is utter nonsense. Psa. 82, “You are gods; you ARE all sons of the Most High.”

through abraham but at the time of gen 6 there is no covenant there fore no adoption. so these sons of God are angels

[equinox]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

also you just said that john 1:12 is utter nonsense. the bible says that those who received jesus to them he gave power to BECOME sons of God. we are not just all automatically sons of God

[grogers]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

Good arguments. But as I said in my first posting, there is a difference between being BORN of God and having one's ORIGIN in God. I think you will, on close study, find your examples tending to the second way - having your ORIGIN in God. Hosea 2:10, for instance, prophesies that Israel, "Lo-ammi" for their sins, will one day we restored to "you are my people". But WHEN does this happen. AFTER RESURRECTION (Ezekiel 37 and Daniel 12:2). The resurrection is when we receive a body whose ORIGIN is in heaven (2nd Cor.5:1-2). And resurrection is regarded as a BIRTH for Christ is "first-born from the dead" (Col.1:18). In this will Israel be "sons of God" after being Lo-ammi.

Psalm 82 not only says, "children of God" (v.6), but it says that Israel, in matters of judgement in Law are "gods" (v.1, 6). Yet verse 7 confirms that they are but men. So the meaning of "children of God" (or "sons" if you wish) describes their POSITION given by God to judge in matters of His Law. This is not given to the Nations, so Israel have a special POSITION, or ORIGIN in matters of judging their fellows in matters of Law.

Luke 3:38 I explained in my first posting. It amounts to the same thing.

Proverbs no doubt are the Words of God. But the grammar of 1:8 makes these proverbs directed at Solomon's son.

None of that really matters though does it. The point it illustrates is that the term is applied to men, not angels. Let me challenge you to find one single passage of scripture anywhere in the Bible that uses "sons of God" and "angel" together to describe one another. Scripture never uses these together to define one another. This definition does not come from scripture, it comes from human speculation and conjecture.

[grogers]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

through abraham but at the time of gen 6 there is no covenant there fore no adoption. so these sons of God are angels

You are still missing the point. The term is still applied to men. Adam was called the son of God before the Abrahamic covenant was ever made so this has nothing to do with the covenant.

also you just said that john 1:12 is utter nonsense. the bible says that those who received jesus to them he gave power to BECOME sons of God. we are not just all automatically sons of God

That passage is quite correct and it applies to men, not angels.

[equinox]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

None of that really matters though does it. The point it illustrates is that the term is applied to men, not angels. Let me challenge you to find one single passage of scripture anywhere in the Bible that uses "sons of God" and "angel" together to describe one another. Scripture never uses these together to define one another. This definition does not come from scripture, it comes from human speculation and conjecture.

no, men are only sons of God through adoption. but the first covenant was made with noah AFTER the flood

[grogers]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

no, men are only sons of God through adoption. but the first covenant was made with noah AFTER the flood

I quite agree, but the fact remains, it is men and not angels to who the term applies, regardless of the manner in which sonship is bestowed. Again, show me one single passage where sons of God and angels are used together in the same verse.

[equinox]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

I quite agree, but the fact remains, it is men and not angels to who the term applies, regardless of the manner in which sonship is bestowed. Again, show me one single passage where sons of God and angels are used together in the same verse.

job 2:1 the term bene Elohim "sons of God" is translated as angels the sons of God in Job can no be men either as they were there at the foundation of the earth. so there you have a verse where the term sons of God clearly refers to angels. also in Gen 6 it is referring to angels job and gen are two of the oldest books around and they both apply the term son of God to angels

also we must remember an angel is simply a messenger of God this is how Christians become like the angels as they are told to go out an "preach the good NEWS if you are spreading the good news you are spreading the good message therefore you are like an angel. the prophets were Gods messengers and were also like angels but God did not give men the fullness of sonship such as the angels have. that still remains to occur.

God made covenants with his faithful and thereby adopted them. but there was no covenant at the time of Gen 6 so these Sons of God are of the same type which witnessed the creation of the earth and shouted for joy as the morning stars sang.

[grogers]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

job 2:1 the term bene Elohim "sons of God" is translated as angels the sons of God in Job can no be men either as they were there at the foundation of the earth. so there you have a verse where the term sons of God clearly refers to angels. also in Gen 6 it is referring to angels job and gen are two of the oldest books around and they both apply the term son of God to angels

also we must remember an angel is simply a messenger of God this is how Christians become like the angels as they are told to go out an "preach the good NEWS if you are spreading the good news you are spreading the good message therefore you are like an angel. the prophets were Gods messengers and were also like angels but God did not give men the fullness of sonship such as the angels have. that still remains to occur.

God made covenants with his faithful and thereby adopted them. but there was no covenant at the time of Gen 6 so these Sons of God are of the same type which witnessed the creation of the earth and shouted for joy as the morning stars sang.

Yes, Job 2:1 is poorly translated as angels in is some of the paraphrase versions including the NIV. It is also translated as angels in at least one version of the LXX.
But the Hebrew word for angel - mal-awk, does not appear in the Hebrew text. This is a misrepresentation of the language of the Hebrew text.

Yes, angel does mean messenger and is at times applied to men who serve as messengers of God. This defines function, not nature. The second person of the triadic Unity is referred to many times in the OT as "The Angel of Jehovah." This does not define his nature but is function as the spokesman of deity. The word angel and the phrase "sons of God" never appear together anywhere in scripture.

As I said earlier, the covenant has nothing to do with it because Adam was called the son of God before the covenant was ever established.

job 2:1 the term bene Elohim "sons of God" is translated as angels the sons of God in Job can no be men either as they were there at the foundation of the earth. so there you have a verse where the term sons of God clearly refers to angels. also in Gen 6 it is referring to angels job and gen are two of the oldest books around and they both apply the term son of God to angels

also we must remember an angel is simply a messenger of God this is how Christians become like the angels as they are told to go out an "preach the good NEWS if you are spreading the good news you are spreading the good message therefore you are like an angel. the prophets were Gods messengers and were also like angels but God did not give men the fullness of sonship such as the angels have. that still remains to occur.

God made covenants with his faithful and thereby adopted them. but there was no covenant at the time of Gen 6 so these Sons of God are of the same type which witnessed the creation of the earth and shouted for joy as the morning stars sang.

Yes, Job 2:1 is poorly translated as angels in is some of the paraphrase versions including the NIV. It is also translated as angels in at least one version of the LXX.
But the Hebrew word for angel - mal-awk, does not appear in the Hebrew text. This is a misrepresentation of the language of the Hebrew text.

Yes, angel does mean messenger and is at times applied to men who serve as messengers of God. This defines function, not nature. The second person of the triadic Unity is referred to many times in the OT as "The Angel of Jehovah." This does not define his nature but is function as the spokesman of deity. The word angel and the phrase "sons of God" never appear together anywhere in scripture.

As I said earlier, the covenant has nothing to do with it because Adam was called the son of God before the covenant was ever established.

job 2:1 the term bene Elohim "sons of God" is translated as angels the sons of God in Job can no be men either as they were there at the foundation of the earth. so there you have a verse where the term sons of God clearly refers to angels. also in Gen 6 it is referring to angels job and gen are two of the oldest books around and they both apply the term son of God to angels

also we must remember an angel is simply a messenger of God this is how Christians become like the angels as they are told to go out an "preach the good NEWS if you are spreading the good news you are spreading the good message therefore you are like an angel. the prophets were Gods messengers and were also like angels but God did not give men the fullness of sonship such as the angels have. that still remains to occur.

God made covenants with his faithful and thereby adopted them. but there was no covenant at the time of Gen 6 so these Sons of God are of the same type which witnessed the creation of the earth and shouted for joy as the morning stars sang.

Yes, Job 2:1 is poorly translated as angels in is some of the paraphrase versions including the NIV. It is also translated as angels in at least one version of the LXX.
But the Hebrew word for angel - mal-awk, does not appear in the Hebrew text. This is a misrepresentation of the language of the Hebrew text.

Yes, angel does mean messenger and is at times applied to men who serve as messengers of God. This defines function, not nature. The second person of the triadic Unity is referred to many times in the OT as "The Angel of Jehovah." This does not define his nature but is function as the spokesman of deity. The word angel and the phrase "sons of God" never appear together anywhere in scripture.

As I said earlier, the covenant has nothing to do with it because Adam was called the son of God before the covenant was ever established.

job 2:1 the term bene Elohim "sons of God" is translated as angels the sons of God in Job can no be men either as they were there at the foundation of the earth. so there you have a verse where the term sons of God clearly refers to angels. also in Gen 6 it is referring to angels job and gen are two of the oldest books around and they both apply the term son of God to angels

also we must remember an angel is simply a messenger of God this is how Christians become like the angels as they are told to go out an "preach the good NEWS if you are spreading the good news you are spreading the good message therefore you are like an angel. the prophets were Gods messengers and were also like angels but God did not give men the fullness of sonship such as the angels have. that still remains to occur.

God made covenants with his faithful and thereby adopted them. but there was no covenant at the time of Gen 6 so these Sons of God are of the same type which witnessed the creation of the earth and shouted for joy as the morning stars sang.

Yes, Job 2:1 is poorly translated as angels in is some of the paraphrase versions including the NIV. It is also translated as angels in at least one version of the LXX.
But the Hebrew word for angel - mal-awk, does not appear in the Hebrew text. This is a misrepresentation of the language of the Hebrew text.

Yes, angel does mean messenger and is at times applied to men who serve as messengers of God. This defines function, not nature. The second person of the triadic Unity is referred to many times in the OT as "The Angel of Jehovah." This does not define his nature but is function as the spokesman of deity. The word angel and the phrase "sons of God" never appear together anywhere in scripture.

As I said earlier, the covenant has nothing to do with it because Adam was called the son of God before the covenant was ever established.

job 2:1 the term bene Elohim "sons of God" is translated as angels the sons of God in Job can no be men either as they were there at the foundation of the earth. so there you have a verse where the term sons of God clearly refers to angels. also in Gen 6 it is referring to angels job and gen are two of the oldest books around and they both apply the term son of God to angels

also we must remember an angel is simply a messenger of God this is how Christians become like the angels as they are told to go out an "preach the good NEWS if you are spreading the good news you are spreading the good message therefore you are like an angel. the prophets were Gods messengers and were also like angels but God did not give men the fullness of sonship such as the angels have. that still remains to occur.

God made covenants with his faithful and thereby adopted them. but there was no covenant at the time of Gen 6 so these Sons of God are of the same type which witnessed the creation of the earth and shouted for joy as the morning stars sang.

Yes, Job 2:1 is poorly translated as angels in is some of the paraphrase versions including the NIV. It is also translated as angels in at least one version of the LXX.
But the Hebrew word for angel - mal-awk, does not appear in the Hebrew text. This is a misrepresentation of the language of the Hebrew text.

Yes, angel does mean messenger and is at times applied to men who serve as messengers of God. This defines function, not nature. The second person of the triadic Unity is referred to many times in the OT as "The Angel of Jehovah." This does not define his nature but is function as the spokesman of deity. The word angel and the phrase "sons of God" never appear together anywhere in scripture.

As I said earlier, the covenant has nothing to do with it because Adam was called the son of God before the covenant was ever established.

[TMarcum]

Re: Who were The Sons of God in genesis 6?

Here is the issue with Gen 6. Since the text does not specifically tell us that those 'sons of God' are angels we are left with no alternative but to apply a definition to 'sons of God.' The question is, what definition do we assign to the 'sons of God'? There are only two possibilities for assigning meaning - human imagination or scripture. If we assign angelic beings to this term we must then find where scripture itself assigns such a definition to 'sons of God'. We see repeated passages where 'sons of God' is used to describe men as the subject both in the old and new testament, but there is no text that ever defines angels in this way. The only possible passage that may indicate that this refers to angels is Job 38:6-7 but even this is inconclusive because the text does not mention angels. Scripture must ALWAYS be allowed to define its own use of language. We are not free to assign our own definitions to biblical terms.

Insisting that these are angels and could not possibly be anything else makes a number of unwarranted assumptions. This assumes that the term 'sons of god' must only refer to angels in Gen 6. It assumes that the angels which were cast down from heaven were cast down upon the earth. It assumes that if they were cast down upon the earth that they assumed human form. It assumes that if they took human form they became sexual creatures. It assumes that they were sufficiently genetically compatible with human DNA to produce offspring. It assumes that the appearance of the giants in the land can only be explained through this quantum leap of conjecture, none of which is supported by any biblical text. This was simply a matter of human genetics, nothing more. There is nothing in scripture to suggest that angels can reproduce after any fashion much less reproduce the human gene code. In fact, Jesus tells us that angels neither marry nor are they given in marriage. Since this is true, it is quite presumptuous to read Gen. 6:2 and insist that angels did precisely what Jesus said they do not do. The term sons of God must be understood according to the pattern of its usage in scripture. Every other time this phrase is used, it refers to man. That being true, by what rule of interpretation does one assign some other definition to this term?

Great response and I agree with your viewpoint. Especially with the part where Jesus said that angels neither marry nor are they given in marriage.