Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 69

Thread: Sons of God in Genesis 6

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    2,997
    Blog Entries
    1

    Sons of God in Genesis 6

    I have heard compelling arguments for both sides. So, what is it?! Are they descendents of the Godly line of Seth, or something more sinister? Why would God destroy an entire world of people just because Seth's descendants intermingled with Cain's?

    What line was Noah from? Were Cain and Seth the only sons Adam and Eve had?

    I used to think along the lines of the Seth argument, but now I'm beginning to think that these "sons of God" were not human. Ya, the Bible says that angels in heaven do not marry nor are given in marriage -- but what about the fallen ones? They can still possess people.

    What do you guys think?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Avondale, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    46

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Angels can become physical beings. The reference in Peter and Jude hint of it. But not only then, it happened after that.
    GOD forgives - rocks don't
    Colorado Spring Christian Four Wheelers

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    In the battle field
    Posts
    11,529

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Didn't you hear??? satan use to hang around with Seth's descendents, I mean the sons of GOD.

    Job 2:1 KJV Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.

    The NIV, On another day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them to present himself before him.

    The NLT, One day the members of the heavenly court came again to present themselves before the LORD, and the Accuser, Satan, came with them.

    Boy are they wrong. (sarcasm)
    If Satan can keep us busy swinging our swords at one another, there is no hope of a united attack on the kingdom of darkness. KJV, NIV, ESV or ABCDEFG; there is no time to bicker over such things. We'll devour each other if allowed to continue. We should grab the marching orders written in the way we best understand and get to work.

    Andrew_no_one





  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    2,997
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    LOL....Ya, I note the sarcasm, MightySword, but seriously -- I have been reading your contributions as well as others in the thread that was roaming around contro last year. I seriously didn't see any real compelling arguments as to why they would be the descendants of Seth.

    Someone used the "angels cannot marry" argument -- well, as I see it that doesn't really apply, because that verse is talking abou the angels in heaven, who are in the presence of God...not the fallen angels. Well, yes, the angels in heaven do not have sexual relations with people -- but if you know anything about the occult, and certain entities, you will know that demons CAN engage in sexual practices with humans. That is all I will say about that.

    And what about demonic possession? Isn't it possible for a demon to inhabit a person and have sexual relations that way? The verse in Jude said that these angels left their holy habitation, and this is the same word used in 2 Cor. 5:2, which talks about our habitation which is from heaven. Its not talking about leaving heaven -- it's talking about being disrobed from their heavenly bodies.

    Others have said that God didn't talk about judging angels, but about judging man. Well, the way I see it, in order for Satan to work in a person's life, that person has to invite Satan in. I think the whole point is that these "rulers" were oppressive and the practiced violence, and a lot of this was because their wicked behaviour allowed Satan to take full control of what was going on at the time. This doesn't mean that demons were not involved, but God was judging man for the part he played in it.

    And the phrase "took wives" -- the word "took" indicates taking them by force, does it not? I have also heard the interpretation that these were women who were already married, so these men were taking wives who were already married by force.

    Well, this certainly sounds like demonic activity to me. I just don't see how the whole line of Seth thing could be possible when in the Old testament, every time the word "sons of God" is used it is used to refer to angels. Why would mixed marriage bring the wrath of God to such a level?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    under the pain of the wish
    Posts
    11,818
    Blog Entries
    16

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Quote Originally Posted by Equipped_4_Love View Post
    I have heard compelling arguments for both sides. So, what is it?! Are they descendents of the Godly line of Seth, or something more sinister? Why would God destroy an entire world of people just because Seth's descendants intermingled with Cain's?

    What line was Noah from? Were Cain and Seth the only sons Adam and Eve had?

    I used to think along the lines of the Seth argument, but now I'm beginning to think that these "sons of God" were not human. Ya, the Bible says that angels in heaven do not marry nor are given in marriage -- but what about the fallen ones? They can still possess people.

    What do you guys think?
    The phrase "son of God" often applies to Kings or men of royal line. I think the picture is that mighty men of valor and strength (sons of God) were taking women of common rank, (daughters of men) to be their wives. The guilt was not that aristocratic men were taking common woman as wives, but that these men were taking whom ever they wanted and were making the choice based on beauty.

    These men were litrally taking the women, not asking, not courting, not getting the father's permission, but abducting them against their will. The clue to this interpretation is in the phrase "whomever they chose". It wasn't a mututal agreement or an arranged marriage, or a courtship period, or asking the father's permission. They simply took whomever THEY chose.

    Their guilt was also the fact that they based their choice on beauty -- a woman's external qualities. Thus, the focus of powerful men was on the lusts of the eyes, not on the inner beauty of a woman.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    948
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    The bible isn't real clear about this. But Adam is called a son of God in Luke 3:38.

    Some people believe that the sons of God in Genesis 6 were the children of Seth. And that they were called the sons of God because Jesus was going to be descended from them. And they also believe that God didn't want the Messiah to be descended from Cain. They also believe that because the descendants of Seth and Cain were intermarrying this was leading to a moral breakdown of the human race.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    2,997
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Quote Originally Posted by BroRog View Post
    The phrase "son of God" often applies to Kings or men of royal line. I think the picture is that mighty men of valor and strength (sons of God) were taking women of common rank, (daughters of men) to be their wives. The guilt was not that aristocratic men were taking common woman as wives, but that these men were taking whom ever they wanted and were making the choice based on beauty.

    These men were litrally taking the women, not asking, not courting, not getting the father's permission, but abducting them against their will. The clue to this interpretation is in the phrase "whomever they chose". It wasn't a mututal agreement or an arranged marriage, or a courtship period, or asking the father's permission. They simply took whomever THEY chose.

    Their guilt was also the fact that they based their choice on beauty -- a woman's external qualities. Thus, the focus of powerful men was on the lusts of the eyes, not on the inner beauty of a woman.
    Well, this makes good sense, and I do agree with the part about the men taking them by force. I honestly, from the reading, get the idea that there was no sanctity of marriage at all in that day. I don't think it was limited to just the men in power.

    Although, I am still not fully convinced.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    2,997
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Quote Originally Posted by nzyr View Post
    The bible isn't real clear about this. But Adam is called a son of God in Luke 3:38.

    Some people believe that the sons of God in Genesis 6 were the children of Seth. And that they were called the sons of God because Jesus was going to be descended from them. And they also believe that God didn't want the Messiah to be descended from Cain. They also believe that because the descendants of Seth and Cain were intermarrying this was leading to a moral breakdown of the human race.
    Yes, Adam was called a son of God....but the descendants of Adam were called "sons of Adam." Adam was the first created man, which is why he is called a "son of God."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,609

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Quote Originally Posted by Equipped_4_Love View Post
    I have heard compelling arguments for both sides. So, what is it?! Are they descendents of the Godly line of Seth, or something more sinister? Why would God destroy an entire world of people just because Seth's descendants intermingled with Cain's?

    What line was Noah from? Were Cain and Seth the only sons Adam and Eve had?

    I used to think along the lines of the Seth argument, but now I'm beginning to think that these "sons of God" were not human. Ya, the Bible says that angels in heaven do not marry nor are given in marriage -- but what about the fallen ones? They can still possess people.

    What do you guys think?
    Unfortunately, you're being swayed by one of the three classic blunders...

    1) never go into a land war in Asia
    2) never go in with a Scicilian when death is on the line
    3) never allow extra-biblical myth be interjected into Genesis 6
    (first two lines credited to the Scicilian from the 'Princess Bride' movie, couldn't resist.)

    Nowhere in the bible is the notion of angels mating and procreating hybrid children with humans taught. It isn't taught in Genesis 6, it isn't taught in Job 1, it isn't taught in Jude....all are vague speculations twisted to attempt to substantiate and prooftext this occultic myth.

    If you read about the nephilim, they are nothing more than human "men". Genesis 6 tells us they are "men". Throughout the rest of the OT, when nephilim is used, it is pinned to "men" (albeit of a larger than normal size variety). Likewise, when the term Anakim or any association to anyone vaguely referred to in the O.T. as a giant is used, they are referred to men, of the tribes of men.

    For that matter, the entire notion of human/angel procreation in and of itself, flies in the face of God's intended design. God didn't design butterflies to mate and produce offspring with hippos. No matter how much the devil might want to breed hippos and butterfiles, God's design doesnt' allow it. God designed the species of creation to be and remain unique to their own species. Humans and Angels are different species. They cannot breed, because it is against God's design to begin with. Satan cannot trump God's design. Sure there is hybridization within same-species (donkey+horse=mule) but never across different species (hippo+butterfly=hippopotafly or human+angel=nephilim hybrid).

    As far as the lineages go, there is also no 'godly line' and no 'wicked line'.

    There are only godly and wicked individuals.

    We know that out of Seth's lineage, only Noah survived the flood. That means that 99.999999999% of Seth's other descendents were wicked and perished in the flood. (not a very godly line, after all, was Seth's?)

    And we also don't know that representatives of other non-Seth lineages were not present on the Ark. We don't know the lineages of Mrs. Noah, nor of Noah's son's wives. They could have all been descendents of Cain....the scriptures just don't tell us, because none of that mattered.

    The only reason that Seth is mentioned as a descendent of Noah, is because it shows the fulfillment of the prophesied Messianic line from Eve through Seth who was given to her after Abel's death and Cain's banishment.

    There is so much baloney and hogwash being bandied about regarding Angel hybrids and godly/ungodly lines that it is ridiculous. People constantly want to avoid individual responsibility for their own sins, and always want an easy scapegoat...the devil, no the evil Cainite line, no the evil nephilim hybrids....but that's not how God works. Never has, never will. Each person is accountable for their own sins and their own consequences.

    Do angels really mate with humans? Only when Hippopotamuses fly. (with butterfly wings)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,645
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Many early church fathers believed it. Josephus wrote about it. Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch which has an extended (and mind boggling) version of Gen 6, thus more or less endorsed the idea. Paul says women should cover their heads because of the angels. It all points the thought was not uncommon in those days. If it's true can't be said with certainty but it fits nicely in my overall theology so I tend to believe it.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,609

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Quote Originally Posted by ProDeo View Post
    Many early church fathers believed it. Josephus wrote about it. Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch which has an extended (and mind boggling) version of Gen 6, thus more or less endorsed the idea. Paul says women should cover their heads because of the angels. It all points the thought was not uncommon in those days. If it's true can't be said with certainty but it fits nicely in my overall theology so I tend to believe it.
    Josephus wasn't an early church father, but an unbelieving Jew. Unbelievers always buy off into the occultic stuff.

    Likewise, Jude didn't endorse angel hybrids at all. He referenced a totally different topic when referencing the writing of Enoch that was present in that day. We don't even know if the present pagan books of Enoch we have today, even remotely resembled the work that Jude referenced.

    Even if the writing of Enoch Jude referenced were the same, it wouldn't be an endorsement of the entire writing....That's like saying if someone cited an event or a lesson from Mother Goose stories as true, that then all Mother Goose stories and lessons are true.

    Just referencing a common teaching from a popular book of the day doesn't endorse the entire book or all of it's teachings.

    That it is a occultic myth is of no doubt...that is it a biblical truth, is completely unfounded; and contrary to both God's natural design, and what the Scriptures do clearly teach.

    Believe it if you want, but it just creates another myth you are perpetuating to others that provides no benefit and no edification to anyone's growth or understanding of the scriptures.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    In the slave pits of manmade Christianity, setting the captives free.
    Posts
    17,053

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Princess Bride allusion.

    +15


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    2,997
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Hey, David....ProDeo is right. Many early church fathers believed it....so do many Jewish scholars. I have heard very sound, sane Biblical teachers hold to this theory.

    To me, it is not all that improbable. I think the reason most people do not accept it is because they cannot fathom angels pro-creating with men. Like I said,these were fallen anegels. What is so improbable about them inhabiting the bodies of men?!

    Believing this interpretation is not really my first choice. Honestly, it is disturbing, but it just makes more sense to me than the other explanations. It doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever that God would destroy an entire race of people because of intermarriage. No sense whatsoever!! Ya, THIS was the horrible sin that brought worldwide destruction?!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,609

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Quote Originally Posted by Equipped_4_Love View Post
    Hey, David....ProDeo is right. Many early church fathers believed it....so do many Jewish scholars. I have heard very sound, sane Biblical teachers hold to this theory.

    To me, it is not all that improbable. I think the reason most people do not accept it is because they cannot fathom angels pro-creating with men. Like I said,these were fallen anegels. What is so improbable about them inhabiting the bodies of men?!

    Believing this interpretation is not really my first choice. Honestly, it is disturbing, but it just makes more sense to me than the other explanations. It doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever that God would destroy an entire race of people because of intermarriage. No sense whatsoever!! Ya, THIS was the horrible sin that brought worldwide destruction?!


    There's a big difference in an evil spirit posessing someone (a biblical construct), and that posessed person procreating with another person, and creating a child. That's 100% human mating with 100% human; even though one of them is being misguided or tormented by an evil spirit affecting their actions and mental state.

    However, the occultic myth of Angels (a created spiritual being species) being designed by God to mate with human beings (a different created species) is totally different.

    Many Jewish scholars rejected Christ.
    Many ECF also held to a variety of unsound and unbiblical heresies.

    The horrible sin that brought about the destruction of Noah's flood wasn't mating; it was human beings who rejected following God, plain and simple.
    God destroyed everyone who was not deemed by Him to be faithful; aka Noah and his immediate family of 8.

    All races of humankind were destroyed in the flood; except Noah's family. All giants, all midgets, all fat and skinny people....people of every single variety and race were destroyed because of sinfulness and faithlessness....no specific race was targetted; they all were wiped out.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    2,997
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Sons of God in Genesis 6

    Quote Originally Posted by David Taylor View Post
    Believe it if you want, but it just creates another myth you are perpetuating to others that provides no benefit and no edification to anyone's growth or understanding of the scriptures.
    Actually, this is untrue

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Mrs F and her sons
    By SweetEnigma in forum Prayer
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Dec 20th 2009, 04:48 AM
  2. Please Help Sons name
    By neverleaveunorfors in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Dec 22nd 2008, 01:01 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •