Gen 6:4
There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%206%20;&version=50;
2007-10-11 08:48:34 · 6 answers · asked by kimmyisahotbabe 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
yes.. apparently they were called the nephlim. and they were giants.... but if im correct, that was all before the flood. or whatever
2007-10-11 08:52:34 · answer #1 · answered by ~testube Jebus~ 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The three primary views on the identity of the "sons of God" are that (1) they were fallen angels, or (2) they were powerful human rulers, or (3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Giving weight to (1) 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 (1) is the fact that Matthew 22:30 indicates that angels do not marry. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that angels have a gender, or are able to reproduce. Views (2) and (3) do not have 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 forbidden 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.
The weakness of view (1) 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, this weakness can be overcome by noting that the text does not say “angels are not able to marry.” Rather, it indicates only that angels do not marry. Secondly, 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, apocryphal, and pseudopigriphal 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.
Recommended Resource: Angels: Elect & Evil by C. Fred Dickason.
2007-10-11 08:53:55 · answer #2 · answered by Freedom 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I personally believe that these "sons of God" were in fact angels who were able to take physical form and cohabitate with women. I further believe that these particular angels are now chained in a spiritual prison awaiting the final judgment.
I cannot give scripture for this. This is just what I've been taught and I could be very wrong.
I Cr 13;8a
2007-10-11 18:17:46 · answer #3 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The "sons of God" are thought by many to be a reference to demons, which would explain how quickly the world's population was totally corrupted (and virtually wiped out a mere 1650 years after Adam was created).
2007-10-11 08:55:09 · answer #4 · answered by Rossonero NorCal SFECU 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
God al mighty is one , he didn't born or get birth , he don't have sons or daughters or wifes , its a great disbelief in god to think that Jesus is God's son
Jesus is just a prophet same as all the other prophets
he's like Adam God created him without a father
Jesus never said that he's God or God's son
2007-10-11 08:58:39 · answer #5 · answered by Zahran 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Wow!!! I never realized the bible mentioned aliens!!!
2007-10-11 09:02:55 · answer #6 · answered by Cave Dweller 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋