Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Are you taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

  • Looking to grow in the word of God more?

    See our Bible Studies and Devotionals sections in Christian Growth

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

  • Wearing the right shoes, and properly clothed spiritually?

    Join Elected By Him for a devotional on Ephesians 6:14-15

    https://christianforums.net/threads/devotional-selecting-the-proper-shoes.109094/

As it Was In The Days Of Noah...

Going through Strongs of the passage, none of the definitions even hint at a govermental entity.

I didn't write it, I'm trying to understand it.
What does Strongs say the Greek for "door" means? Yet "I am the door" seems clear enough to us. Words have meaning only within the context they are used.

I don't know anyone that does not recognize "Sons of God" can and does mean Angels at times. Sometimes it refers to humans. The ones that God calls His sons, that is.

You are right there, in my opinion. What does "mingle" mean?
What about "unnatural"?

Or for that matter "seed". Clearly "seed of man" means man's natural offspring. Daughters are the female type of offspring.

Nowhere does it say there's a sexual (genetic offspring) mixing of angels with humans that produced offspring. That's called unnatural for a reason. It just doesn't happen, again that's just my opinion. But there's been no Scripture posted that say it happened. Only pretty wild conjecture.
 
chessman: I don't know anyone that does not recognize "Sons of God" can and does mean Angels at times. Sometimes it refers to humans. The ones that God calls His sons, that is.


The term translated "the Sons of God" is, in the Hebrew, B'nai HaElohim, "Sons of Elohim," which is a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels, and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament. It was so understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, by the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ, and by the early church fathers. Attempts to apply this term to "godly leadership" or "humans" is without Scriptural foundation in the Old Testament.

Mingle
ערב
‛ărab
ar-ab'
(Chaldee); corresponding to H6148; to commingle: - mingle (self), mix./(Strongs)

Mingle (H6148)
ערב
‛ârab
aw-rab'
A primitive root; to braid, that is, intermix; technically to traffic (as if by barter); also to give or be security (as a kind of exchange): - engage, (inter-) meddle (with), mingle (self), mortgage, occupy, give pledges, be (-come, put in) surety, undertake./(Strongs)
 
chessman: Nowhere does it say there's a sexual (genetic offspring) mixing of angels with humans that produced offspring. That's called unnatural for a reason. It just doesn't happen, again that's just my opinion. But there's been no Scripture posted that say it happened. Only pretty wild conjecture.

Well, there is Genesis 6: 4
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./(KJV)

If the term "Sons of God" refers to Angels, then we do have our scripture. I know one thing for sure. Humans and humans mating together does not produce mighty men or unnatural offspring. So there's that.
 
So, Rome will mingle themselves with the seed of men? Huh. Let me chew on that for a bit...

If we substitute the term "the people" in Daniel 2:43, the sentence does not make sense then. It would be grammatically incorrect. Would you agree? "The people will mingle themselves with the seed of men"...It doesn't click for me brother.
The seed of men representing different races of people.
Rome was built on many peoples of the earth, and it crumbled.
 
unnatural
תּבל
tebel
teh'-bel
Apparently from H1101; mixture, that is, unnatural bestiality: - confusion./(Strongs)

H1101
בּלל
bâlal
baw-lal'
A primitive root; to overflow (specifically with oil); by implication to mix; also (denominative from H1098) to fodder: - anoint, confound, X fade, mingle, mix (self), give provender, temper./(Strongs)
 
Well, there is Genesis 6: 4
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./(KJV)

If the term "Sons of God" refers to Angels, then we do have our scripture. I know one thing for sure. Humans and humans mating together does not produce mighty men or unnatural offspring. So there's that.
And angels, never referred as giants in Scripture, could produce giants either.
Therefore, giants must refer to something else.
 
The seed of men representing different races of people.
Rome was built on many peoples of the earth, and it crumbled.

Seed (H2234)
זרע
zera‛
zer-ah'
(Chaldee); corresponding to H2233; posterity: - seed.

H2233
זרע
zera‛
zeh'-rah
From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time./(Strongs)

of men (H606)
אנשׁ אנשׁ
'ĕnâsh 'ĕnash
en-awsh', en-ash'
(Chaldee); corresponding to H582; a man: - man, + whosoever./(Strongs)

(H582)
אנושׁ
'ĕnôsh
en-oshe'
From H605; properly a mortal (and thus differeing from the more dignified H120); hence a man in general (singly or collectively). It is often unexpressed in the English Version, especially when used in apposition with another word: - another, X [blood-] thirsty, certain, chap [-man], divers, fellow, X in the flower of their age, husband, (certain, mortal) man, people, person, servant, some (X of them), + stranger, those, + their trade. It is often unexpressed in the Engl. version, especially when used in apposition with another word. Compare H376./(Strongs)

H376
אישׁ
'ı̂ysh
eesh
Contracted for H582 (or perhaps rather from an unused root meaning to be extant); a man as an individual or a male person; often used as an adjunct to a more definite term (and in such cases frequently not expressed in translation.) : - also, another, any (man), a certain, + champion, consent, each, every (one), fellow, [foot-, husband-] man, (good-, great, mighty) man, he, high (degree), him (that is), husband, man [-kind], + none, one, people, person, + steward, what (man) soever, whoso (-ever), worthy. Compare H802./(Strongs)

H802
נשׁים אשּׁה
'ishshâh nâshı̂ym
ish-shaw', naw-sheem'
The first form is the feminine of H376 or H582; the second form is an irregular plural; a woman (used in the same wide sense as H582).: - [adulter]ess, each, every, female, X many, + none, one, + together, wife, woman. Often unexpressed in English./(Strongs)

Let me chew on this one for a bit allen...
 
That's all Greek to me Edward, or Hebrew, or Chinese, it's makes no difference.
I guess I don't have the intelligence to follow you.
I'll have to drop out of this I guess.
 
That's all Greek to me Edward, or Hebrew, or Chinese, it's makes no difference.
I guess I don't have the intelligence to follow you.
I'll have to drop out of this I guess.

Yeah, I'm looking the words up in the Hebrew dictionary. Looking for definitions and usage of the terms to help shed light. Otherwise I could assume too much and get it wrong.

I don't understand this conclusively either brother, but I sure would like to so I'm on here asking for help from me brothers and sisters. Boy, when I crack those pages open and it starts throwing out of this world curve-balls at me, it blows my mind and makes me want to dig deeper and ask for help and stuff! Drives me batty at times! :screwloose2
 
The big problem I have with the Nephilim being angels is that my researching great Rabbi scholars on this subject shows that none of them could agree with each other on whom the Nephilim are.
So how can we research Hebrew words and figure it out.
I think some things were not meant to be.
 
The big problem I have with the Nephilim being angels is that my researching great Rabbi scholars on this subject shows that none of them could agree with each other on whom the Nephilim are.
So how can we research Hebrew words and figure it out.
I think some things were not meant to be.

The Nephilim were not Angels. They were the hybrid offspring of the Angels/humans mix. The term "Giants" doesn't even mean Giants (though I understand they were) but it means "earth born". They were born on earth, the Angels come from heaven.
 
And angels, never referred as giants in Scripture, could produce giants either.
Therefore, giants must refer to something else.

A male lion and female tiger produce an animal twice their size. According to your logic, even though they do, they don't.
 
And angels, never referred as giants in Scripture, could produce giants either.
Therefore, giants must refer to something else.
Define 'giant' and it's significance. In medieval art, which was usually religious in nature, a figure's size often signified their importance. It seems abstract to our way of thinking today, but consider the term 'giants of industry'. Nobody here is going to argue that Henry Ford or Steve Jobs were physically huge, rather they were simply powerful in their fields.
 
Define 'giant' and it's significance. In medieval art, which was usually religious in nature, a figure's size often signified their importance. It seems abstract to our way of thinking today, but consider the term 'giants of industry'. Nobody here is going to argue that Henry Ford or Steve Jobs were physically huge, rather they were simply powerful in their fields.


It means very tall or of great stature, but the word in Genesis "giant" does not mean that, it means "earth born".

Numbers 13: 32-33
32 And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature.
33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight./(KJV)
 
Quotes from Josephus concerning Giants www.generationword.com

Get access to the entire text of Josephus here

"For many angels (11- This notion, that the fallen angels were, in some sense, the fathers of the old giants, was the constant opinion of antiquity.) of God accompanied with
women, and begat sons that proved unjust, and despisers of all that was good, on account of the confidence they had in their own strength;
for the tradition is, that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants."

"These kings had laid waste all Syria, and overthrown the offspring of the giants. And when they were come over against Sodom. . ."

"They told them also, that they found at Hebron the posterity of the giants. Accordingly these spies, who had seen the land of Canaan,
when they perceived that all these difficulties were greater there than they had met with since they came out of Egypt, they were aftrighted
at them themselves, and endeavored to affright the multitude also."

"For which reason they removed their camp to Hebron; and when they had taken it, they slew all the inhabitants. There were till then left the
race of giants, who had bodies so large, and countenances so entirely different from other men, that they were surprising to the sight, and
terrible to the hearing. The bones of these men are still shown to this very day,
unlike to any credible relations of other men. Now they
gave this city to the Levites as an extraordinary reward. . "

"A little afterward the king made war against the Philistines; and when he had joined battle with them, and put them to flight, he was left
alone, as he was in pursuit of them; and when he was quite tired down, he was seen by one of the enemy, his name was Achmon, the
son of Araph, he was one of the sons of the giants. He had a spear, the handle of which weighed three hundred shekels, and a breastplate
of chain-work, and a sword. He turned back, and ran violently to slay [David] their enemy's king, for he was quite tired out with labor; but
Abishai, Joab's brother, appeared on the sudden, and protected the king with his shield, as he lay down, and slew the enemy. Now the
multitude were very uneasy at these dangers of the king, and that he was very near to be slain; and the rulers made him swear that he
would no more go out with them to battle, lest he should come to some great misfortune by his courage and boldness, and thereby
deprive the people of the benefits they now enjoyed by his means, and of those that they might hereafter enjoy by his living a long time among them. "

"When the king heard that the Philistines were gathered together at the city Gazara, he sent an army against them, when Sibbechai the
Hittite, one of David's most courageous men, behaved himself so as to deserve great commendation, for he slew many of those that
bragged they were the posterity of the giants, and vaunted themselves highly on that account, and thereby was the occasion of victory to the Hebrews."

"They had a man who was six cubits tall, and had on each of his feet and hands one more toe and finger than men naturally have. Now the person
who was sent against them by David out of his army was Jonathan, the son of Shimea, who fought this man in a single combat, and slew him; and
as he was the person who gave the turn to the battle, he gained the greatest reputation for courage therein. This man also vaunted himself to be
of the sons of the giants. But after this fight the Philistines made war no more against the Israelites."
 
Well, there is Genesis 6: 4
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./(KJV)

If the term "Sons of God" refers to Angels, then we do have our scripture. I know one thing for sure. Humans and humans mating together does not produce mighty men or unnatural offspring. So there's that.
:thumbsup:amen
 
The big problem I have with the Nephilim being angels is that my researching great Rabbi scholars on this subject shows that none of them could agree with each other on whom the Nephilim are.
So how can we research Hebrew words and figure it out.
I think some things were not meant to be.

You said you were going to drop out?

God is not the Author of confusion.


JLB
 
Humans and humans mating together does not produce mighty men or unnatural offspring. So there's that.
You sure?

sultan_kosen.jpg

  • WHO:SULTAN KOSEN

  • WHAT:WORLD'S TALLEST MAN

  • WHERE:ANKARA, TURKEY
The tallest man living is Sultan Kösen (Turkey, b.10 December 1982) who measured 251 cm (8 ft 3 in) in Ankara, Turkey, on 08 February 2011.

And that's just the one living now.

There's a genetic mutation/disease that causes humans to never stop growing and to have more digits than normal.


left hand with postaxial polydactyly

Do you have a genetic profile of your own DNA? What if you did and found you had mutation(s) in your genes that made you tall or have extra digits or dark brown eyes or whatever. Does that mean demon 1/2 breed way back in your ancestry?

The term translated "the Sons of God" is, in the Hebrew, B'nai HaElohim, "Sons of Elohim," which is a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels, and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament.

"Never", sounds like your mind is made up on this. A bit too circular in your reasoning for a discussion on who the "sons of God" are, right?

Is "sons of God" = 100% spirit, resulting in 50/50 offspring when mixed with 100% humans here in Gen 6?

I go with the context within the text itself (and indeed other uses elsewhere) telling me what's intended by the Author. I find it's often overwhelmingly made clear what the Author means if you simply have an open mind. Not always, though.

For example. Take Gen 6:2-3: The Author (evidently God Himself speaking to Moses) says: 3 Then the [LORD] said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”

Right? My spirit in man's flesh! Sounds just like another way to say "son of God" to me. Why bring in demons?

Directly in the context and even referring to the same subject "Sons of God" is who sins and receives the punishment.

I allow for that option versus Angels here for "Sons of God", anyway. It seems better evidenced anyway.

Who's God mad at here? Man, right? He limits man's years, right? Not demon's years. Zero mention of a demon curse here.

It could be any sin needing a curse (like eating forbidden fruit) but God says the sin here was marrying daughters that, in my opinion, did not have God's Spirit. i.e. not Daughters of God, but rather daughters of man. Um, just like He tells us not to be unequally yoked, right? Cause they married whomever they wanted, those "attractive" women yet without God's Spirit in them;

1 Cor 6:14 (ESV) Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?

Gen 6:2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”

You know what comes after 1:Cor 6:14 for those that avoid an unequal yoke? One guess....

and be separate from them, says the Lord,
and touch no unclean thing;
then I will welcome you,
18 and I will be a father to you,
and you shall be sons and daughters to me,
says the Lord Almighty.”


1Cor 6 is not about 1/2 breeds with demons, neither in Gen 6.

The curse itself explains why, in this particular passage Daughters of Man, is female humans without God's Spirit, and Sons of God are male human's with God's spirit.

X sins. X receives a curse. Plain and simple, really.

So demon offspring 1/2 breeds? It's fantasy, in my opinion. But either way, it's certainly not in the text unless one forces it there by circular reasoning and stating "Sons of Gods" always means angels. .
 
The term translated "the Sons of God" is, in the Hebrew, B'nai HaElohim, "Sons of Elohim," which is a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels, and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament.


"Never", sounds like your mind is made up on this. A bit too circular in your reasoning for a discussion on who the "sons of God" are, right?

I can not find any passages in the Old Testament where the term is used of believers. Do you have a reference to any? I've looked and looked. I'm ready willing and able to be corrected here with scripture, brother. :)
 
Back
Top