Genesis 6

[Esaias]

continued...

From the theological standpoint, some have a hard time reconciling it with other phrases like Jesus speaking about marriage and angels. I think the explanation that it was rebelious angels leaving their place and role and trying to mingle with men and doing pseudo-miracles is more plausible and in line with the text than the alternative that fights against the text, and presents new theological challenges that are harder to reconcile.

But it is not more plausible (humans and non humans breeding and producing ... what? more humans? Demigods?) nor is it properly more theological. The text indicates nothing of the kind, and the only way to see that in the text is to have the preconceived idea of superhuman beings breeding with humans. If one were to use STRICTLY the bible, and the Bible ALONE, one would not come to the conclusion that all the heathen are actually correct that gods bred with humans. One has import the heathen and Jewish mythological tales into one's belief system, and THEN interpret the text accordingly.

This is bad hermeneutics. We should not interpret the Scripture "in the light of" heathen superstitions. We should instead reverse that, and understand heathen superstitions in the light of Scripture - the only true and correct record of what went on and what is going on.

So therefore, what is the source of heathen beliefs about "gods breeding with humans and producing demigods"? Why, it is right there in Genesis - the sons of God (God's covenanted people) began to marry heathen women. The sons of Seth and Adam were considered as gods or divine or semidivine beings in the corrupted "histories" passed down by the heathen. Only the Bible records the correct and accurate history of what happened back then. The heathen have numerous corrupted versions of the original story.

Let's look at something:

Genesis 6:4 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.

The giants were already in the earth BEFORE the sons of God intermarried with the daughters of men. Therefore, the giants are NOT the "offspring of fallen angels and human women". "When the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men" is stated explicitly as being "after that". After what? "There were giants in the earth in those days."

Let's look at something else:

Genesis 10:8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.

The term "mighty one" is gibbor, the same term used in Genesis 6:4 where it says the descendants of the sons of God/daughters of men became "mighty men". The offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men were NOT "the nephilim" or the Genesis 6 giants, they were the "gibborim" or "migty MEN" (like Nimrod).

According to the Bible, the nephilim are the giants, either the ones in Genesis 6 (obviously not offspring of the sons of God as before shown) or the ones mentioned during the Exodus, the sons of Anak (Numbers 13:33). Meanwhile, the sons of God produced "mighty men", great warriors and rulers. This is the origin of the pagan myth of the king or emperor being of divine origin, or descending from the gods. It is a corruption of the true history, which is recorded in the Bible.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Let's make this real simple.

Genesis 6:5 The LORD observed the extent of human wickedness on the earth, and he saw that everything they thought or imagined was consistently and totally evil.

What happened to the angels? No mention that God was upset because angels procreated with human women. The anger is totally being focused on mankind, and that mankind went astray and became wicked. No angels are referred to anywhere in the later verses.

Genesis 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

In Genesis 6:6 The Lord repented that He made man. His heart is grieved concerning man, not fallen angels. Man is God's focus, and men are the ones He is upset with.

Genesis 6:7 And the LORD said, “I will wipe this human race I have created from the face of the earth. Yes, and I will destroy every living thing—all the people, the large animals, the small animals that scurry along the ground, and even the birds of the sky. I am sorry I ever made them.”

No angels are mentioned, no giants are mentioned. Animals are mentioned, humans are mentioned. Because the mighty ones and the daughters of men, as well as the sons of God, were all humans.

[Amanah]

Thank you

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Esaias

continued...



But it is not more plausible (humans and non humans breeding and producing ... what? more humans? Demigods?) nor is it properly more theological. The text indicates nothing of the kind, and the only way to see that in the text is to have the preconceived idea of superhuman beings breeding with humans. If one were to use STRICTLY the bible, and the Bible ALONE, one would not come to the conclusion that all the heathen are actually correct that gods bred with humans. One has import the heathen and Jewish mythological tales into one's belief system, and THEN interpret the text accordingly.

This is bad hermeneutics. We should not interpret the Scripture "in the light of" heathen superstitions. We should instead reverse that, and understand heathen superstitions in the light of Scripture - the only true and correct record of what went on and what is going on.

So therefore, what is the source of heathen beliefs about "gods breeding with humans and producing demigods"? Why, it is right there in Genesis - the sons of God (God's covenanted people) began to marry heathen women. The sons of Seth and Adam were considered as gods or divine or semidivine beings in the corrupted "histories" passed down by the heathen. Only the Bible records the correct and accurate history of what happened back then. The heathen have numerous corrupted versions of the original story.

Let's look at something:

Genesis 6:4 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.

The giants were already in the earth BEFORE the sons of God intermarried with the daughters of men. Therefore, the giants are NOT the "offspring of fallen angels and human women". "When the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men" is stated explicitly as being "after that". After what? "There were giants in the earth in those days."

Let's look at something else:

Genesis 10:8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.

The term "mighty one" is gibbor, the same term used in Genesis 6:4 where it says the descendants of the sons of God/daughters of men became "mighty men". The offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men were NOT "the nephilim" or the Genesis 6 giants, they were the "gibborim" or "migty MEN" (like Nimrod).

According to the Bible, the nephilim are the giants, either the ones in Genesis 6 (obviously not offspring of the sons of God as before shown) or the ones mentioned during the Exodus, the sons of Anak (Numbers 13:33). Meanwhile, the sons of God produced "mighty men", great warriors and rulers. This is the origin of the pagan myth of the king or emperor being of divine origin, or descending from the gods. It is a corruption of the true history, which is recorded in the Bible.

Can you show me one example in the rest of the Bible that the union between the "sons of God" as covenant people, and the "daughter of men" as heathens produced "mighty men"? Context gives meaning to words. Some of the texts you quote give the right meaning to terms like "sons" and "children" and "daughters", in the sense of relationship. The text in Genesis uses the term "daughter of men" as used by Moses, right after creation. Did Moses use that phrase to refer to heathens again? Why the cause-effect relationship producing "mighty men"? That can only be explained if the "sons of God" and "daughter of men" have a different meaning than just covenant people and non-covenant people. Also, what covenant?
There is more in that Gen 6 text than just the use of the terms like a metaphor as it is used in Psalm 82 to contrast expectation of glory and invincibility to the reality of future ruin and death.


Also, let me clarify this so we stop debating on this. I do not believe the "gods" actually procreated with "women" and produced demigods. I have never said that. I believe it was just as a pseudo miracle, and the "mighty men" were possessed people. Thinking of some sort of a beast like of the ones seeing in Revelation, a man of iniquity producing might signs by acts of the devil. In line with this: [2 Thessalonians 2:9 KJV] 9 [Even him], whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

I also do not believe the offsprings of that union were the giants. The text actually gives room for both kinds of translations, but the giants already being there is the most plausible to me as well.

I also totally agree that the term Son of God in the case of Jesus is called so because he is dual nature. 100% human, from the mom, and 100% God, from the Spirit. And since God can't be two distinct entities, having the full nature of God means Jesus is no other than God himself.
Adam was created from dirt, and given life,... Jesus was not created like Adam. Adam was like a son to God, but Jesus IS the Son of God.

[diakonos]

Where did the giants come from?

[diakonos]

Where did the dinosaurs go?

[diakonos]

Are the Philistines descendants of the Flintstone’s?

And

How did the Flintstone’s celebrate Christmas before the incarnation of Christ?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Can you show me one example in the rest of the Bible that the union between the "sons of God" as covenant people, and the "daughter of men" as heathens produced "mighty men"?

Why? Genesis 6 explicitly says what it says, that the offspring were "mighty men". Just as Nimrod was a "mighty man" and many others throughout Scripture were "mighty men". It simply means they were powerful bigshots. There is no reason to think they were mighty men because their dads were superhuman or nonhuman. Was Nimrod's father superhuman or nonhuman? Not sure where you are trying to go with that.

Context gives meaning to words. Some of the texts you quote give the right meaning to terms like "sons" and "children" and "daughters", in the sense of relationship.

Are you suggesting some of the other texts I quoted give the WRONG MEANING?

The text in Genesis uses the term "daughter of men" as used by Moses, right after creation. Did Moses use that phrase to refer to heathens again? Why the cause-effect relationship producing "mighty men"? That can only be explained if the "sons of God" and "daughter of men" have a different meaning than just covenant people and non-covenant people.

How so? Why do you say "that can only be explained if the sons of God and daughters of men have a different meaning than just covenant people and non covenant people"? You seem to be suggesting only nonhuman or superhuman parentage can produce mighty men?

Also, let me clarify this so we stop debating on this. I do not believe the "gods" actually procreated with "women" and produced demigods. I have never said that.

I wasn't saying you believed that the gods procreated with human females and produced demigods. What I am saying is that your belief that Genesis 6 describes superhumans procreating with human females producing abnormally powerful offspring is essentially equivalent to the pagan belief that gods bred with humans to produce demigods. *I* am saying the pagan belief in such things is a corruption of the Biblical truth.


[/quote]
Adam was created from dirt, and given life,... Jesus was not created like Adam. Adam was like a son to God, but Jesus IS the Son of God.[/QUOTE]

Well, the Bible specifically says Adam was the son of God, not just "like" a son to God. And it speaks of Christ as the Second Man, the Second Adam. While also stating the differences - that the first Adam became a living soul, and Chrisrt became a life giving spirit.

[Esaias]

Once again, if a person had no pre-existing belief or concept of superhuman beings mating with human women to produce demigod-like offspring, then upon reading Genesis 6 they would not come to that conclusion. If a person understood how the Bible uses the concept of sons/children of God, and what "mighty men" are (usually rulers, commanders, or (in)famous warriors), and understood Genesis 10 and 11 as describing the establishment of kingdoms and empires by various mighty men, then they would have the understanding that what is being described has to do with the people of God - specifically, those who would be in positions of responsibility, as in , priest-kings - marrying outside of what was expected of them and the sons that were born became rulers and empire builders.

It would also be noted that technically there is nothing particularly BAD or negative said about these marriages besides perhaps the fact that they married whomever they wanted. I think THAT little detail is what denotes any negativity to the subject, not just that they married daughters of men. In fact, it may be that sons of God is referring to a particular class of God's people - what would be recognizable as a priesthood - marrying whomever they wanted and those sons becoming (by virtue of their descent from the official priests of God) rulers claiming a divine right to rule. IE "mighty men" who began to impose their will upon others.

Over time, the nations that forgot God (see Romans 1) transformed the original history into fanciful tales of superhuman entities marrying human women (or vice versa) and producing the great demigods/Heroes (Hercules, Achilles, etc) and the ancient kings and early emperors.

Hebrews 1 clearly establishes that the Bible never calls angels "sons". And there is no reason to think the sons of God in Genesis 6 are some OTHER class of superhuman entities.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Let's make this real simple.

Genesis 6:5 The LORD observed the extent of human wickedness on the earth, and he saw that everything they thought or imagined was consistently and totally evil.

What happened to the angels? No mention that God was upset because angels procreated with human women. The anger is totally being focused on mankind, and that mankind went astray and became wicked. No angels are referred to anywhere in the later verses.

Genesis 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

In Genesis 6:6 The Lord repented that He made man. His heart is grieved concerning man, not fallen angels. Man is God's focus, and men are the ones He is upset with.

Genesis 6:7 And the LORD said, “I will wipe this human race I have created from the face of the earth. Yes, and I will destroy every living thing—all the people, the large animals, the small animals that scurry along the ground, and even the birds of the sky. I am sorry I ever made them.”

No angels are mentioned, no giants are mentioned. Animals are mentioned, humans are mentioned. Because the mighty ones and the daughters of men, as well as the sons of God, were all humans.

This is a key point that is often overlooked.