The context will determine the meaning.
Also, the syntax of how the passage was written.
The BIG Question not asked, concerning Genesis 6:1-6?
- Thread starter Genez
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The context will determine the meaning.
Also, the syntax of how the passage was written.
The context is this. Food sent from heaven doesn't mean angel food
Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. John 6:31
It does not say Angel's in my translation.
It is wrong to even think the sons of God were have sex with people.
The big question is not even a question if you understand what "Sons of God" means.
Jesus was the only begotten Son of God.
Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Adam was the son of God. Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
We are the sons of God by faith in Jesus.
Joh 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:
Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
It is clear that in Gen 6 it is talking about those that were God's people, those that followed God's will. The sons of God were faithful until they started to have children with the daughters of men.
The downfall of many..
Presumption that these sons of God are Angel's will create many false teachings.
Evil Angel's would not have been called the sons of God.
It is wrong to even think the sons of God were have sex with people.
The big question is not even a question if you understand what "Sons of God" means.
Jesus was the only begotten Son of God.
Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Adam was the son of God. Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
We are the sons of God by faith in Jesus.
Joh 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:
Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
It is clear that in Gen 6 it is talking about those that were God's people, those that followed God's will. The sons of God were faithful until they started to have children with the daughters of men.
The downfall of many..
Presumption that these sons of God are Angel's will create many false teachings.
Evil Angel's would not have been called the sons of God.
as I was reading on this thread I heard you say something like you do not adhere to the Sons of G-D being fallen angels, now I say this all from an old memory. as I have not studied this in a very long time, and honestly I care very little concerning such matters. it is not my area of expertise that The GOOD LORD HAS GIFTED me with.
I have heard the argument about the Sons of Seth going into the daughters of men theory. the first thing that comes to my mind is man has already fallen, for we see this in Cane. to say that the sons of Seth so to speak are somehow more evolved than the daughters of men has me curious. for fallen man is fallen man, no Big restoration until JESUS & no full Restoration and HIS 2nd coming, here in this realm anyways.
Even if we say that the Sons of Seth were following G-D, this doesn't make sense to me as Cane was, and ISREAL was, and this didn't work out
Also how do you account for the giants, does it not say, right after the Sons of G-D saw the daughters of men were very beautiful and took unto them wives as they choose & there were giants on the earth in those days. the timing of this verse should be given some weight I would think.. either way how would one account for the giants, when all came forth from Adam.
like I said I did not research this in a very long time, this is from many years ago when I used to follow the late Chuck Missler back in the day, I enjoyed his adventures in preaching to say the least..
meaning if I got the information wrong, take this into account please in you response,
thank you for your time..
curious
Sons of God are those of faith who follow the holy spirit.
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. Romans 8:14
Cain had a form of godliness apart from faith. He offered the fruit of his efforts, which symbolizes works of the flesh, whereas Abel offered blood, which pretty much indicates that God's will had been revealed to them. In other words, Abel had faith in the revealed will of God that he could only be approached with blood of a sacrifice, but Cain tried to please God with the fruit of his own efforts
I agree. My point was not about Adam but about the beings that were called angels. Whatever they were, they were created with physical characteristics that enabled them to father children. In other words, not angels.
It's disputed that the Hebrew word nephilim means physical giants. We call people like Elon Musk giants in their field. Would somebody read that thousands of years from now and conclude he was 12' tall? Some translations have heroes, men of renown. If you want I can do a word study on it.
Thanks Genez, for your question about Genesis chapter 6. We read: "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. " This shows a group called the sons of God. This is the title used to describe true believers in Christ. We read : "Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. " All in Christ are the sons of God. Yet Genesis chapter 6 mentions that the true believers married the daughters of men. So, we have a group of true believers marrying what appear to be a non-believers (the daughters of men, not of God). Of course this causes problems because the spirit of God is not to be joined to another spirit contrary to God. The result is persons becoming what the Bible calls giants. The term giant in the Bible is not to be thought of just as a physical thing. As we see in the case of young David and Goliath, it is a term of someone who opposes God's spirit, God's annointed. That is why we read immediately about wickedness of the hearts of men once the Bible introduces the concept of giants. Giants are a word indicating how intimidating persons can be in the flesh, but we should remember that those in the flesh are no match for God. It's not by might, but by God's spirit. You introduced the notion of angels although I don't think Genesis 6:1-6 uses that term. Angels in the Bible simply mean God's messengers. All true believers are God's messengers. So, yes, the true believers (sons of God) in Genesis chapter 6 had sex with the non-believers (daughters of men). They were all humans, so of course they were capable of sex.
Sons of God...
The male children of God.
The males that followed God's ways.
The male children of God.
The males that followed God's ways.
Why did you stop there?
(I can tell you why) ....
Psalm 78:25
People ate the bread of angels. He sent them an abundant supply of food.
Man did eat the bread of angels; He sent them food in abundance.
Why do you like being the way you are?Are all Christians stupid to you?
........
So?
Was Paul not a man?
Was Jesus not a man?
God enabled both of them to father children...
Nothing conclusive there.
Matter of fact. Several things you said were true.
But, not applicable.
Again, that Hebrew word in Psalms 78:25 does not mean angels
H47 אַבִּיר 'abbiyr (ab-beer') adj.
mighty (spoken of created beings: men, angels, and beasts).
the Bible talks about Goliath, others giants that had 6 fingers and six toes, they say how big and heavy there weapons were, the length of their beds. when the spies went up, they came back saying we are like grasshoppers before these giants.
brother you are definitely smarter than I, for I am the foolish things of the world, yet I can't agree with you on this matter at this time.
in addition you say the Sons of G-D are the ones that followed G-D, yet they were fallen men like the rest of us, for they could not resist the daughters of men. ( I am not saying you said differently, it's like saying the Christians could not resist the Gentile women, or the Jews could not resist the Philistine women). I think the Fallen Angels fits better in my mind, at this time.
but thank you for your time,,,
I think they certainly would have been called Sons of G-D for before they fell, they were Angels, The Sons of G-D saw the daughters of men were beautiful.....,, seeing is not falling. once they took the women and left there station as man did, I presume this is when there name/position would have changed. And the verses are telling us who took the women it was the Sons of G-D
as I believe, yet this is not my area of expertise, just my understanding
in good faith
Well I answered what you said in English,
Here is what you said...
I agree. My point was not about Adam but about the beings that were called angels. Whatever they were, they were created with physical characteristics that enabled them to father children. In other words, not angels.
Do you see what you said? " In other words, not angels."
They were angels!
And, in turn?
I showed you how God created Paul and Jesus able to father children, but did not give them a woman.
Does that make them (according to your way of defining them) not human?
You said it as if the angels were not created to reproduce.
While? The evidence of Genesis 6 proves otherwise.
" In other words, not angels."
You stated what you did, as if God could not create angels to be able to father offspring.
God's angels as we know them to be, are celibate.
God gave them the special grace needed to remain single.
As I showed earlier. Angels were originally created to sire offspring.
But, the angelic rebellion, and conflict it caused, made God call off providing them with females.
Just as if Adam rebelled against God before it was time to give Adam his woman.
God would have called off providing Adam with Eve.
Are you getting it now?
We learn from the Scriptures that two thirds of the angels stayed with the Lord, and one third went with Satan.
Apparently, when the time to decide whom they would serve, some of the angels that stayed with God, did so for a wrong reason.
They were simply herd bound and went to the majority choice.
But, their hearts were not really 100% with the Lord.
God knowing this factor, finally weeded them out when He allowed some to wander into the realm of the human women, and thus cutting them off from remaining as an angel of God.