Is there Marriage & Sex in Heaven and the New Earth?

[Guest]

Human beings are intimate by nature. If God made us sex organs and a way for us to enjoy pleasure with our partners and reproduce, why wouldn't marriage and sex exist in the afterlife? Does this exist at all in the afterlife? Does this exist only on the New Earth and not in Heaven? Does scripture help us discern the truth?

 

[iLOVE]

When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. Mark 12:25

He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." Revelation 21:4

 

[Obadiah]

I wouldn't worry too much about it. I can't see why we would have reproductive organs on our heavenly bodies since there will be no need to reproduce. But as far as the feeling of intimacy and ecstasy of sex, even without reproductive organs, I like to imagine living in heaven will feel like that all the time, not just for a minute or two once in a while. I think we will be so caught up in the grandeur and glory of God that we won't even think much about what our lives here on earth were like.

 

[iLOVE]

Heaven will be all about Jesus!

 

[Matthew G]

When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. Mark 12:25

He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." Revelation 21:4

Exactly. I'm not a Bible expert by any stretch of the imagination, but if I'm not mistaken Mark 12:25 is one of only a few (and possibly the only one) passages that deal with marriage after death. Jesus plainly states there is no marriage in heaven, because we will be as the angels are. Angels are not given in marriage. Furthermore, we are taught in Scripture that men and women are bound by marriage only as long as they live.

" Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." - Romans 7:1-3 (KJV)

That is why marriage vows include, "Til death do us part." Once one spouse dies, the marriage covenant has ended, and no one is bound to it. Therefore, when the other spouse dies, why would they be held to a covenant that was already fulfilled? Yes, I realize one spouse doesn't always pass before the other, but you see what I mean.

Honestly, it would be like getting to Heaven, only to be told we can't come in because we didn't keep all of God's laws laid out in the OT. What would we say? "But I was under grace! Under the new covenant! Not the old one!"

.....Exactly.

If I'm off-base, someone please feel free to correct me, but that's the way I see it, for whatever that's worth.

 

[Agape]

Heaven will be all about Jesus!

:amen

 

[Matthew G]

It occurs to me that in the 6th chapter (I think) of Genesis, it talks about angels coming to earth and mating with human females, which is where we got the giants (the Nephilim). So if angels have sexual organs...maybe...hhmmm....

I agree with Obadiah, though. Regardless of whether you think there will or won't be sex and marriage in Heaven, you probably shouldn't worry about it. I'm willing to bet (assuming there's not any in Heaven) that it won't even cross our minds once.

 

[iLOVE]

Exactly. I'm not a Bible expert by any stretch of the imagination, but if I'm not mistaken Mark 12:25 is one of only a few (and possibly the only one) passages that deal with marriage after death. Jesus plainly states there is no marriage in heaven, because we will be as the angels are. Angels are not given in marriage. Furthermore, we are taught in Scripture that men and women are bound by marriage only as long as they live.

" Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man." - Romans 7:1-3 (KJV)

That is why marriage vows include, "Til death do us part." Once one spouse dies, the marriage covenant has ended, and no one is bound to it. Therefore, when the other spouse dies, why would they be held to a covenant that was already fulfilled? Yes, I realize one spouse doesn't always pass before the other, but you see what I mean.

Honestly, it would be like getting to Heaven, only to be told we can't come in because we didn't keep all of God's laws laid out in the OT. What would we say? "But I was under grace! Under the new covenant! Not the old one!"

.....Exactly.

If I'm off-base, someone please feel free to correct me, but that's the way I see it, for whatever that's worth.

OT...?????????

 

[iLOVE]

We must remember our spirits was once with God in Heaven before He sent us into time. Also our spirits were all unmarried in heaven.

 

[Matthew G]

OT...?????????

Old Testament, sorry. In the Book of Leviticus.

 

[Agape]

Genesis 6:1-4

 

[iLOVE]

Matthew G: It occurs to me that in the 6th chapter (I think) of Genesis, it talks about angels coming to earth and mating with human females, which is where we got the giants (the Nephilim). So if angels have sexual organs...maybe...hhmmm....

Thats why Satan has a purpose on earth...to make sure another trader like himself will never enter into heaven again.

 

[iLOVE]

Old Testament, sorry. In the Book of Leviticus.

I know what OT stands for, however please explain further about your statement about the OT.

 

[Agape]

Question: "Who were the sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4?"

Answer: Genesis 6:1-4 refers to the sons of God and the daughters of men. There have been several suggestions as to who the sons of God were and why the children they had with daughters of men grew into a race of giants (that is what the word Nephilim seems to indicate).

The three primary views on the identity of the sons of God are 1) they were fallen angels, 2) they were powerful human rulers, or 3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Giving weight to the first theory is the fact that in the Old Testament the phrase “sons of God” always refers to angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). A potential problem with this is in Matthew 22:30, which indicates that angels do not marry. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that angels have a gender or are able to reproduce. The other two views do not present this problem.

The weakness of views 2) and 3) is that ordinary human males marrying ordinary human females does not account for why the offspring were “giants” or “heroes of old, men of renown.” Further, why would God decide to bring the flood on the earth (Genesis 6:5-7) when God had never forbade powerful human males or descendants of Seth to marry ordinary human females or descendants of Cain? The oncoming judgment of Genesis 6:5-7 is linked to what took place in Genesis 6:1-4. Only the obscene, perverse marriage of fallen angels with human females would seem to justify such a harsh judgment.

As previously noted, the weakness of the first view is that Matthew 22:30 declares, “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” However, the text does not say “angels are not able to marry.” Rather, it indicates only that angels do not marry. Second, Matthew 22:30 is referring to the “angels in heaven.” It is not referring to fallen angels, who do not care about God’s created order and actively seek ways to disrupt God’s plan. The fact that God’s holy angels do not marry or engage in sexual relations does not mean the same is true of Satan and his demons.

View 1) is the most likely position. Yes, it is an interesting “contradiction” to say that angels are sexless and then to say that the “sons of God” were fallen angels who procreated with human females. However, while angels are spiritual beings (Hebrews 1:14), they can appear in human, physical form (Mark 16:5). The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to have sex with the two angels who were with Lot (Genesis 19:1-5). It is plausible that angels are capable of taking on human form, even to the point of replicating human sexuality and possibly even reproduction. Why do the fallen angels not do this more often? It seems that God imprisoned the fallen angels who committed this evil sin, so that the other fallen angels would not do the same (as described in Jude 6). Earlier Hebrew interpreters and apocryphal and pseudopigraphal writings are unanimous in holding to the view that fallen angels are the “sons of God” mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. This by no means closes the debate. However, the view that Genesis 6:1-4 involves fallen angels mating with human females has a strong contextual, grammatical, and historical basis.
source:http://www.gotquestions.org/sons-of-God.html

 

[Matthew G]

I know what OT stands for, however please explain further about your statement about the OT.

I only meant that, before Christ came, we had the laws laid out in Leviticus. These were given to us to live by, and essentially provided the way to Heaven. When Christ came, we were no longer under the law, but under His grace, which provided our way to Heaven through His sacrifice for us. I only meant that going to Heaven and denied admittance because you didn't keep all of God's laws would be a shock to us because we are allowed entrance under grace because of Christ's sacrifice if we believe.

As I said, I'm not a Bible expert, but that's how I see the issue of marriage in Heaven.

 

[iLOVE]

I only meant that, before Christ came, we had the laws laid out in Leviticus. These were given to us to live by, and essentially provided the way to Heaven. When Christ came, we were no longer under the law, but under His grace, which provided our way to Heaven through His sacrifice for us. I only meant that going to Heaven and denied admittance because you didn't keep all of God's laws would be a shock to us because we are allowed entrance under grace because of Christ's sacrifice if we believe.

As I said, I'm not a Bible expert, but that's how I see the issue of marriage in Heaven.

Thank you.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Question: "Who were the sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4?"

Answer: Genesis 6:1-4 refers to the sons of God and the daughters of men. There have been several suggestions as to who the sons of God were and why the children they had with daughters of men grew into a race of giants (that is what the word Nephilim seems to indicate).

The three primary views on the identity of the sons of God are 1) they were fallen angels, 2) they were powerful human rulers, or 3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Giving weight to the first theory is the fact that in the Old Testament the phrase “sons of God†always refers to angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). A potential problem with this is in Matthew 22:30, which indicates that angels do not marry. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that angels have a gender or are able to reproduce. The other two views do not present this problem.

The weakness of views 2) and 3) is that ordinary human males marrying ordinary human females does not account for why the offspring were “giants†or “heroes of old, men of renown.†Further, why would God decide to bring the flood on the earth (Genesis 6:5-7) when God had never forbade powerful human males or descendants of Seth to marry ordinary human females or descendants of Cain? The oncoming judgment of Genesis 6:5-7 is linked to what took place in Genesis 6:1-4. Only the obscene, perverse marriage of fallen angels with human females would seem to justify such a harsh judgment.

As previously noted, the weakness of the first view is that Matthew 22:30 declares, “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.†However, the text does not say “angels are not able to marry.†Rather, it indicates only that angels do not marry. Second, Matthew 22:30 is referring to the “angels in heaven.†It is not referring to fallen angels, who do not care about God’s created order and actively seek ways to disrupt God’s plan. The fact that God’s holy angels do not marry or engage in sexual relations does not mean the same is true of Satan and his demons.

View 1) is the most likely position. Yes, it is an interesting “contradiction†to say that angels are sexless and then to say that the “sons of God†were fallen angels who procreated with human females. However, while angels are spiritual beings (Hebrews 1:14), they can appear in human, physical form (Mark 16:5). The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to have sex with the two angels who were with Lot (Genesis 19:1-5). It is plausible that angels are capable of taking on human form, even to the point of replicating human sexuality and possibly even reproduction. Why do the fallen angels not do this more often? It seems that God imprisoned the fallen angels who committed this evil sin, so that the other fallen angels would not do the same (as described in Jude 6). Earlier Hebrew interpreters and apocryphal and pseudopigraphal writings are unanimous in holding to the view that fallen angels are the “sons of God†mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. This by no means closes the debate. However, the view that Genesis 6:1-4 involves fallen angels mating with human females has a strong contextual, grammatical, and historical basis.
source:http://www.gotquestions.org/sons-of-God.html

I can't agree with this.
Show me a writing by a famous historical rabbi who takes this view.
I've never found one.

 

[Agape]

I can't agree with this.
Show me a writing by a famous historical rabbi who takes this view.
I've never found one.

A rabbi?

 

[Sparkey]

Question: "Who were the sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4?"

Answer: Genesis 6:1-4 refers to the sons of God and the daughters of men. There have been several suggestions as to who the sons of God were and why the children they had with daughters of men grew into a race of giants (that is what the word Nephilim seems to indicate).

The three primary views on the identity of the sons of God are 1) they were fallen angels, 2) they were powerful human rulers, or 3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Giving weight to the first theory is the fact that in the Old Testament the phrase “sons of God” always refers to angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). A potential problem with this is in Matthew 22:30, which indicates that angels do not marry. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that angels have a gender or are able to reproduce. The other two views do not present this problem.

The weakness of views 2) and 3) is that ordinary human males marrying ordinary human females does not account for why the offspring were “giants” or “heroes of old, men of renown.” Further, why would God decide to bring the flood on the earth (Genesis 6:5-7) when God had never forbade powerful human males or descendants of Seth to marry ordinary human females or descendants of Cain? The oncoming judgment of Genesis 6:5-7 is linked to what took place in Genesis 6:1-4. Only the obscene, perverse marriage of fallen angels with human females would seem to justify such a harsh judgment.

As previously noted, the weakness of the first view is that Matthew 22:30 declares, “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” However, the text does not say “angels are not able to marry.” Rather, it indicates only that angels do not marry. Second, Matthew 22:30 is referring to the “angels in heaven.” It is not referring to fallen angels, who do not care about God’s created order and actively seek ways to disrupt God’s plan. The fact that God’s holy angels do not marry or engage in sexual relations does not mean the same is true of Satan and his demons.

View 1) is the most likely position. Yes, it is an interesting “contradiction” to say that angels are sexless and then to say that the “sons of God” were fallen angels who procreated with human females. However, while angels are spiritual beings (Hebrews 1:14), they can appear in human, physical form (Mark 16:5). The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to have sex with the two angels who were with Lot (Genesis 19:1-5). It is plausible that angels are capable of taking on human form, even to the point of replicating human sexuality and possibly even reproduction. Why do the fallen angels not do this more often? It seems that God imprisoned the fallen angels who committed this evil sin, so that the other fallen angels would not do the same (as described in Jude 6). Earlier Hebrew interpreters and apocryphal and pseudopigraphal writings are unanimous in holding to the view that fallen angels are the “sons of God” mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. This by no means closes the debate. However, the view that Genesis 6:1-4 involves fallen angels mating with human females has a strong contextual, grammatical, and historical basis.
source:http://www.gotquestions.org/sons-of-God.html

The question from your quoted text was, "Who were the sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4?"
The real question that this article tried to address would be better worded as, "Who were the giants (Nephilim) mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4" because this is what the article you cited speaks about. There is lots of speculation from various groups that would indicate that the "sons of God" were angels and that angels married women in order to produce "mighty men" (called gibbowr in Hebrew). Genesis 6 and Numbers 13 (pre-Flood and post-Flood) use of the term “Nephilim” has been the center of discussion for many years.

There is a great deal of confusion over the word Nephilim. It is translated as "giants" in the two places (Genesis and Numbers) that the word is used. They are clearly shown to be the "Sons of Anak" mentioned in Numbers 13:33. The sons of Anak are described as "A people great and tall" in Deuteronomy 9:2. No one today really knows what "Nephilim" means in the strict sense because it was only used a couple of times so we don't have many contextual examples. It is related to the verb series “to fall” (naphal) in Hebrew, which is why some direct this to fallen angels or more appropriately, the offspring thereof. That is also why others suggest it means "fallen men" (like Seth, offspring of Adam).

Can we really conclude that "sons of God" means "angels" and that they had sexual relations with women? I can't. Not on the strength of simple assertion alone, and especially not when Jesus contradicts that conclusion (as others have posted) in Mark 12:25.

Who married the "daughters of men" to produce the 'mighty men' (gibbowr)? Simple answer: the sons of God; the "ben 'elohiym". When we look at the Scripture in Genesis we see that sons of God saw daughters of Adam (who were 'fair'), they took them as wives and some "mighty men" were the offspring. No need to introduce strange theories that contradict what Jesus clearly explained about angels and heaven there.

 

[Free]

We must remember our spirits was once with God in Heaven before He sent us into time. Also our spirits were all unmarried in heaven.

No, that is not at all biblical.


As to the OP, no, there is no marriage or sex in the new heaven and new earth.