Posted on 11/22/2023 1:20:09 AM PST by spirited irish
Amen bro. 🙃
Something to consider:
THE MEANING OF “SONS OF GOD” IN GENESIS 6:1-4
https://www.friendsofsabbath.org/Further_Research/Miscellaneous/Sons-of-God-in-Genesis-6.pdf
Thank y’all for the good read.
Thank you for the link. I read the conclusion and I have heard that explanation before. I don't agree with it, because it does not make sense within the greater context of Genesis 6.
I considered just posting his conclusion, but didn’t, because he makes his case in the body of the article, point by point. it’s worth the read.
I tend to agree with this idea.
"These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God." - Genesis 6:9
There's debate about what exactly the Hebrew word "tamim" means in this context. Many people go with the straightforward interpretation that Noah was good, but that same word is used in describing animals that are fit for sacrifice - those animals weren't flawed physically. In my opinion, because of the larger context of what else was going on in Genesis 6, I believe it means Noah was not afflicted by whatever was going on with the rest of humanity at that time.
Then there’s this: (no angel sex)
https://www.equip.org/PDF/JAG062.pdf
The angels view also assumes that angels can have sexual relations with female humans. Bruce Waltke points out, however, “This interpretation…contradicts Jesus’ statement that angels do not marry (Matt. 22:30; Mark 12:25). It is one thing for angels to eat and drink (see Gen. 19:1–3), but quite another to marry and reproduce.” Some interpreters respond that Jesus was referring only to the marriage contract and not to the marriage bed, but this makes Jesus’ statement nonsensical in its own context. Jesus was responding to the question about having a marital relation resulting in children, and He clearly denied that heavenly angels can have sexual relations.
Christ declared before the so called ‘New’ testament was placed on plant fibers or animal skins He had foretold all things...( Mark 13:23 ) That is why when some take credit for the Holy Scripture one knows they are blowing smoke... because by the time they put their crusty digits on the WORD none could change that so called ‘OLD’... That is also why there is this man made rule about individuals reading with understanding ‘sola scripture’... I mean really now the Heavenly Father allows individuals to read with understanding ... leaves some of the really high mucky - ducks- naked as a new born babe.
There’s only one correct interpretation of this that doesn’t violate the bible and common sense.
The sons of God are those who worship and continued to worship the true God. Daughters of men are those who rejected God. So the sons of God married with the daughters of men. Age old lesson about marrying outside the faith.
So you conclude from Jesus’s statement that angels in heaven do not marry that fallen angels cannot have sex?
I tend to think, the fallen angels that sired the Nephilim, also messed with animals, not just women. I am not positive, but I think weird animals were running around too, animals that God never created. Unicorns, centaurs, Minotaurs, maybe the T rex. There was some off the wall stuff going on. I am pretty sure those weird things were not allowed on the Ark.
No he wasn't. The question put to Jesus was about multiple brothers marrying the same woman (because brothers assumed responsibility after the death of brothers). The question was straightforward..."Whose wife is she?"
It is not about sex.
There was no mention of or implication about sex.
And it is quite possible that the sex between fallen angels and human women was not sex as we know it (and in fact might have been beyond human comprehension). Humans often assume that everything in heaven and earth is completely understandable in human terms (i.e., anthropocentrism).;-)
The article is long but the end when the author addresses Enoch is interesting.
It makes one wonder if all the mythology of the Roman and Greek gods is based on the *sons of God* who came to earth to defile the human race, or they were the offspring of that union.
——>It is not about sex.
Yes, it is.
Matthew 22:24Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, AND RAISE UP SEED UNTO HIS BROTHER.
Since it appears that the corrupting of the human genome was part of the whole days of Noah thing, I don't think the *sons of God* need to come back a second time. Human beings are doing a fine job of corrupting DNA in living things on the earth. And then there's the whole WEF/Klaus Scwab/Havari transhumanism thing they are aiming for.
Demonically driven for sure.
Revelation 11: whole chapter but in particular verse 13
13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.
These are the 'fake' disciples of the fake Jesus which gets kicked out of heaven to deceive all but the elect .. Revelation 12 .. so no the objective is not to corrupt the flesh but to seduce the church just as was Eve ... Paul says as much ..
11 Corinthians 11:12 “For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.”
3But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. 5For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.
A wedding out of season.
BTW, the issue is not sex. It is a question about the Torah-mandated marriage (a levirate marriage) where a brother has to marry his childless dead brother's widow and have children to keep his name alive. It isn't about sex, it is about keeping the dead childless brother's name alive.
And once again I mention that this was an overcomplicated trick question posed by the Sadducees to trap Jesus.
It is not about sex but simply a question of whose wife is she who has had to marry two brothers under the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.