Nephelim

Jude describes the fallen angels and Gen 6:4 refers to the giants that were born from the intermixing of angels and flesh.

While I don't disagree with you necessarily, your assertion in the previous post is not supported by either of those passages.

If you mix a spiritual body with a flesh body it is a perversion of what is natural and the results are not the same as mixing flesh with flesh.

Jesus Christ, Who is both fully flesh and fully spirit.

.



Jesus is sometimes described as a demigod, i.e. a singular amalgam of
human and divine.

But the Word isn't a singularity. He's actually a plurality, i.e. according to
John 1:1-3, John 1:14, 1Cor 15:45-47, and 1John 1:1-2, the Word exists as
an eternal spirit being whose origin is currently unknown, and as a temporal
material being whose origin can be easily traced from David all the way back
to the dust from which Adam was created, viz: the Word exists as a creator
and as a creation simultaneously.

This particular construct is unpopular among many of the Christians with
whom I've dialogued online the past 25 years. They're okay with Jesus as
fully God and fully Man, but not as one of two distinct individuals. They'd
rather Jesus be God and Man blended into one person.
_

Trying to explain the dual nature of Christ with pagan terminology is bound
to fail. It's a category error.

Were the sons of God angels or the sons of Seth in Genesis where the women had giant babies. I personally side with the story that angels slept with women.

.



Sometimes it's helpful to use ordinary terms and expressions to illustrate the
mysteries of God.

For example: "Jesus is the son of God" doesn't really say very much to the
average rank and file pew warmer, but when it's said "Jesus is God's
descendant, i.e. God's biological progeny, and thus rates a place in God's
genealogy" that raises some eyebrows and perks up some ears because
there's some real meat in that statement.
_

Trying to explain the dual nature of Christ with pagan terminology is bound to fail. It's a category error.

If you mix a spiritual body with a flesh body it is a perversion of what is natural and the results are not the same as mixing flesh with flesh.

.



Sometimes it's helpful to use ordinary terms and expressions to illustrate the
mysteries of God.

For example: "Jesus is the son of God" doesn't really say very much to the
average rank and file pew warmer, but when it's said "Jesus is God's
descendant, i.e. God's biological progeny, and thus rates a place in God's
genealogy" that raises some eyebrows and perks up some ears because
there's some real meat in that statement.
_

Using ordinary terms without appropriate caveats is no more helpful. In this case it would be highly misleading because Jesus is not God's biological progeny.

That WOULD explain some tings, including the reason for the flood.

The body and blood of Jesus are from God.

Sometimes I wonder whether you think before responding, or, seeing that it is my post, you just look for something to criticize and snap off a retort. Think this issue through before responding further.

amen they weren’t literal giants they were rhetorical giants , men of great renown

“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 ‭KJV‬‬

the world might say Elvis was a giant in music , Muhammad Ali a giant of boxing

we say this rhetorically the giants in the at verse there are the men of great renown and accomplishment think of it how much could we accomplish if we lived hindreds even near a thousand years like they did ?

the giants in the earth are the mighty men of great renown

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

If there were “ giants “ they would be more like Goliath rather than the four hundred foot giants that the book of enoch describes.

there still are large humans Robert wadlow was as tall as Goliath taller than a stop sign

I think if we look at Enoch’s account it basically falls apart when you realize he’s explaining almost five hundred foot giants supposedly born of normal women who were bedded by angels

and the scriptire sort of tells us the giants are the men of great renown born after Seth’s line mixed with cains line leading to the division your pointing to regarding noahs three sons

remember they were there during this time and would be there after also “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that,”

so they would have been before the cursing of Noah’s son

he’s cursed in genesis nine but the nephilim are noted already in the earth in genesis 6

It would have to go all the way back to cains seperation and the replacing of abel who cain killed , with Seth this is where the division of men began.

the two lines of men

“And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand; when thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech. And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭4:11-12, 16-21, 25-26‬ ‭

you have Seth’s line and cains line separated there by God which continues through scripture

No. He was a son of God because he came from God, at least his spirit did. It was breathed into Adam and he then became a living being.

Angels can be "sons of God" insofar as they were created by God. In that sense, God is their father. But much like Henry Ford is the father of the modern automobile, the angels were made not to inherit God's estate but only to serve those who are part of it, they are ministering spirits only. Not even capable of love (at least there is no Biblical account of angels loving anyone).

Creation was made with each living thing having its seed within itself. This was a limit imposed by God. That is why, today, organisms of crossed-species are not viable.

Knowing this, the sons of God who had sex with the daughters of women were men, humans. Just like the sons of God are today.

Isn't that what Jesus did, both human and divine?

If you mix a spiritual body with a flesh body it is a perversion of what is natural and the results are not the same as mixing flesh with flesh.