Who were the Nephilim?
Aug 23, 2019 09:56:40 #
How did God save the Human race?
Learn How to Read the Bible in Hebrew
Who were the sons of God?
The Hebrew words for “sons of God” is B’ney HaElohim (בני האלוהים). “Sons of God” is the Biblical name for angels. “Sons of God” were a group of angels who participated in a rebellion against the Lord, and who came to Earth and took human women as wives to have illicit relations. The offspring from this ungodly union between angels and human women were Nephilim – giants, ‘men’ of superhuman ability and strength.
What does Nephilim mean?
The fact that Nephilim were giants, is in itself proof that their parentage was superhuman. But these giants were also evil. How do we know that? It is precisely at this point that the Hebrew will help us. The word Nephilim comes from the word נפל, fall; the suffix ‘im’ simply adds plurality, hence they were the “fallen ones”. Having been born of corrupted, fallen, Satanic angels, Nephilim dominated the Earth and filled it with violence.
Discover the hidden meanings with Biblical Hebrew
The Nephilim were so significant that they are actually related to the story of the flood. The flood was not only God’s punishment for the sins of humanity, but also God’s way of preserving the “the seed of the woman” – the human race and its bloodline – before it became completely corrupted by the Nephilim giants. This is just an example of how reading the Bible in Hebrew changes your understanding of the story. Enroll today in our live online Biblical Hebrew course and discover the hidden meanings in the Scripture.
Learn How to Read the Bible in Hebrew
Who were the sons of God?
The Hebrew words for “sons of God” is B’ney HaElohim (בני האלוהים). “Sons of God” is the Biblical name for angels. “Sons of God” were a group of angels who participated in a rebellion against the Lord, and who came to Earth and took human women as wives to have illicit relations. The offspring from this ungodly union between angels and human women were Nephilim – giants, ‘men’ of superhuman ability and strength.
What does Nephilim mean?
The fact that Nephilim were giants, is in itself proof that their parentage was superhuman. But these giants were also evil. How do we know that? It is precisely at this point that the Hebrew will help us. The word Nephilim comes from the word נפל, fall; the suffix ‘im’ simply adds plurality, hence they were the “fallen ones”. Having been born of corrupted, fallen, Satanic angels, Nephilim dominated the Earth and filled it with violence.
Discover the hidden meanings with Biblical Hebrew
The Nephilim were so significant that they are actually related to the story of the flood. The flood was not only God’s punishment for the sins of humanity, but also God’s way of preserving the “the seed of the woman” – the human race and its bloodline – before it became completely corrupted by the Nephilim giants. This is just an example of how reading the Bible in Hebrew changes your understanding of the story. Enroll today in our live online Biblical Hebrew course and discover the hidden meanings in the Scripture.
Aug 24, 2019 12:26:36 #
Aug 24, 2019 12:30:27 #
Aug 24, 2019 12:35:10 #
Peewee
Loc: San Antonio, TX
bahmer wrote:
Glad you liked it.
You might enjoy some of L.A. Marzulli videos. He is on the trail of the Nephilim.
Aug 24, 2019 13:14:57 #
Peewee wrote:
You might enjoy some of L.A. Marzulli videos. He is on the trail of the Nephilim.
OK I will check him out later.
Aug 24, 2019 21:26:29 #
Within contemporary Judaism, as within Christianity, there are still differing opinions as to the correct interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4, and the literal meaning of "the sons of gods," who took mortal wives.
Certainly, the discussion goes on.
Encyclopedia Judaica:
Copywrite 2008
Table of Contents
History of Judaism
NEPHILIM (Heb. נְפִילִים), a race of giants said to have dwelt in pre-Israelite Canaan (Num. 13:33). Genesis 6:1–2 relates that the "sons of gods," i.e., divine or angelic beings, took mortal wives; verse 4 continues, "It was then, and later too, that the Nephilim appeared [lit., were] on earth–when the divine beings cohabited with the daughters of men, who bore them offspring. They were the heroes [Heb. gibborim] of old, the men of renown." This could mean that the Nephilim were contemporaneous, but not identical, with the offspring of divine beings and earthly women, who were called gibborim (so, e.g., Morgenstern, in HUCA 14 (1939), 85ff.). The above translation, however, follows an ancient tradition in equating the Nephilim and the gibborim as offspring of the union of *angels and mortals .
In apocryphal writings of the Second Temple period this fragmentary narrative was elaborated and reinterpreted. The angels were then depicted as rebels against God: lured by the charms of women, they "fell" (Heb, nfl. נפל), defiled their heavenly purity, and introduced all manner of sinfulness to earth. Their giant offspring were wicked and violent; the Flood was occasioned by their sinfulness. (None of these ideas is in the biblical text.)
Because of their evil nature, God decreed that the Nephilim should massacre one another, although according to another view most of them perished in the Flood. One version asserts that the evil spirits originally issued from the bodies of the slain giants. These giants, or their offspring, are identified as Nephilim (See I En. 6–10, 15–16; Jub. 7:21ff.). As this dualistic myth does not appear in the apocalypses of Baruch and Esdras nor in the aggadah of the talmudic period, it was apparently rejected as incompatible with Jewish monotheism.
The "sons of God" are explained in the Targum to Genesis 6:4 and the Midrash (Gen. R. 26:5) as young aristocrats who married the daughters of commoners. The Targum renders both gibborim and Nephilim by gibbaraya; the Midrash (Gen. R. 26:7) lists seven names applied to giants. The Babylonian Talmud mentions the names of Shamhazzai, Uzza, and Uzziel, the leaders of the fallen *angels in Enoch , but does not say that they were angels: Yoma 67b alludes to the sins of Uzza and Uzziel; Niddah 61a states that Sihon and Og were descendants of Shamhazzai. In Deuteronomy 3:11 *Og is described as a giant, and this theme was developed to a large degree in aggadic legend. In post-talmudic literature (cf. Rashi, Yoma 67b) the long-suppressed myth came to the surface again.
The Palestinian Targum gives the orthodox rendering of Genesis 6:1, but translates verse 4 as: "Shamhazzai and Uzziel fell from heaven and were on earth in those days"–identifying the Nephilim as the fallen angels rather than their children. The same identification is found in a late Midrash, which calls the fallen angels Uzza and Uzziel; another passage in the same document says the Nephilim were descendants of Cain (Aggadat Bereshit, ed. S. Buber, introd., p. 38).
The Zohar (1:58a) also identifies the Nephilim with the fallen angels. The standard medieval Bible commentators generally followed the classical aggadah in rejecting the mythological interpretation and asserting that the marriages in Genesis 6 were human.
Some variant opinions about the "sons of God" are offered–e.g., that their distinction was not only social, but physical and even moral, and that the offspring were called Nephilim because they "fell short" of their fathers in these respects (Nahmanides, Abrabanel).
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
U. Cassuto, in: Sefer ha-Yovel… J.H. Hertz (1943), 35–44; B.J. Bamberger, Fallen Angels (1952), 3–59; H.L. Ginsberg, in: EM, 5 (1968), 896–7 (incl. bibl.).
[Bernard J. Bamberger]
Source: Encyclopaedia Judaica. © 2008
Certainly, the discussion goes on.
Encyclopedia Judaica:
Copywrite 2008
Table of Contents
History of Judaism
NEPHILIM (Heb. נְפִילִים), a race of giants said to have dwelt in pre-Israelite Canaan (Num. 13:33). Genesis 6:1–2 relates that the "sons of gods," i.e., divine or angelic beings, took mortal wives; verse 4 continues, "It was then, and later too, that the Nephilim appeared [lit., were] on earth–when the divine beings cohabited with the daughters of men, who bore them offspring. They were the heroes [Heb. gibborim] of old, the men of renown." This could mean that the Nephilim were contemporaneous, but not identical, with the offspring of divine beings and earthly women, who were called gibborim (so, e.g., Morgenstern, in HUCA 14 (1939), 85ff.). The above translation, however, follows an ancient tradition in equating the Nephilim and the gibborim as offspring of the union of *angels and mortals .
In apocryphal writings of the Second Temple period this fragmentary narrative was elaborated and reinterpreted. The angels were then depicted as rebels against God: lured by the charms of women, they "fell" (Heb, nfl. נפל), defiled their heavenly purity, and introduced all manner of sinfulness to earth. Their giant offspring were wicked and violent; the Flood was occasioned by their sinfulness. (None of these ideas is in the biblical text.)
Because of their evil nature, God decreed that the Nephilim should massacre one another, although according to another view most of them perished in the Flood. One version asserts that the evil spirits originally issued from the bodies of the slain giants. These giants, or their offspring, are identified as Nephilim (See I En. 6–10, 15–16; Jub. 7:21ff.). As this dualistic myth does not appear in the apocalypses of Baruch and Esdras nor in the aggadah of the talmudic period, it was apparently rejected as incompatible with Jewish monotheism.
The "sons of God" are explained in the Targum to Genesis 6:4 and the Midrash (Gen. R. 26:5) as young aristocrats who married the daughters of commoners. The Targum renders both gibborim and Nephilim by gibbaraya; the Midrash (Gen. R. 26:7) lists seven names applied to giants. The Babylonian Talmud mentions the names of Shamhazzai, Uzza, and Uzziel, the leaders of the fallen *angels in Enoch , but does not say that they were angels: Yoma 67b alludes to the sins of Uzza and Uzziel; Niddah 61a states that Sihon and Og were descendants of Shamhazzai. In Deuteronomy 3:11 *Og is described as a giant, and this theme was developed to a large degree in aggadic legend. In post-talmudic literature (cf. Rashi, Yoma 67b) the long-suppressed myth came to the surface again.
The Palestinian Targum gives the orthodox rendering of Genesis 6:1, but translates verse 4 as: "Shamhazzai and Uzziel fell from heaven and were on earth in those days"–identifying the Nephilim as the fallen angels rather than their children. The same identification is found in a late Midrash, which calls the fallen angels Uzza and Uzziel; another passage in the same document says the Nephilim were descendants of Cain (Aggadat Bereshit, ed. S. Buber, introd., p. 38).
The Zohar (1:58a) also identifies the Nephilim with the fallen angels. The standard medieval Bible commentators generally followed the classical aggadah in rejecting the mythological interpretation and asserting that the marriages in Genesis 6 were human.
Some variant opinions about the "sons of God" are offered–e.g., that their distinction was not only social, but physical and even moral, and that the offspring were called Nephilim because they "fell short" of their fathers in these respects (Nahmanides, Abrabanel).
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
U. Cassuto, in: Sefer ha-Yovel… J.H. Hertz (1943), 35–44; B.J. Bamberger, Fallen Angels (1952), 3–59; H.L. Ginsberg, in: EM, 5 (1968), 896–7 (incl. bibl.).
[Bernard J. Bamberger]
Source: Encyclopaedia Judaica. © 2008
bahmer wrote:
How did God save the Human race? br Learn How to ... (show quote)
Aug 25, 2019 12:10:16 #
Zemirah wrote:
Within contemporary Judaism, as within Christianit... (show quote)
Very interesting Zemirah thanks for posting this I always enjoy furthering my education and your posts most definitely do that. Thanks again for this post.
Aug 25, 2019 21:09:50 #
The Nephilim is a fascinating subject, bahmer.
It will definitely be on my list of questions when I am able to bow before our God.
Personally, I don't believe nor do I read in scripture how a spiritual being without a human body of flesh, bones and human semen can impregnate a human woman.
Repeatedly in Genesis, we are told that every creature God created "can reproduce only after its own kind."
The only way in which a fallen angel, i.e., demonic being, follower of Satan, full of hatred and evil intent, could have physical sex with a woman would be by mentally, spiritually and physically taking "possession" of the body of a human male being...
for some passages in Enoch, which is not Scripture, say these "men"(?) actually married with women, taking them as their literal wives, becoming a family with children... something a spirit cannot do.
The following paragraphs are from:
http://creationhistory.com/Nephilim.shtml
A book on Eastern Orthodox traditions (GENESIS, CREATION and EARLY MAN -- The Orthodox Christian Vision) rejects the idea that angels married women before the Flood by saying:
"Some have speculated that the 'sons of God' were heavenly beings or angels. The Holy Fathers were aware of this interpretation and they refuted it, saying that angels cannot beget men."
[b][Here a footnote adds the following: "The identification of the 'sons of God' as angels or heavenly beings was based in part on the apocryphal book of Enoch....Some of the early Christian writers mistakenly accepted this interpretation....[/b]
The first extant Christian reference to the 'sons of God' as descendants of Seth is in the Five Books of Chronology by the early Christian writer Julius Africanus (A.D. 200-245) (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 6, p. 131). This interpretation became the consistent teaching of the Church, being set forth on theological grounds by Chrysostom (Commentary on Genesis 22:6-7), Ephraim the Syrian (Commentary on Genesis 6:3, Hymns on the Nativity 1:48, Hymns on Faith 46:9, Hymns against Heresies 19:1-8, and Hymns on Paradise 1:11), John Cassian (Conferences 8:20-21), Augustine (City of God 15:23), St. Gregory Palamas ('Topics of Natural and Theological Science' 62), Athanasius (Four Discourses against the Arians 4:22), Cyril of Alexandria, and others."] (page 244).
The New Testament warns against believing fables (see Titus 1:14, I Timothy 1:4; 4:7 and II Timothy 4:4). Unfortunately, at times, the early Church Fathers -- as is still true today among various Church leaders -- did err. The guiding principle must always remain sola scriptura.
It will definitely be on my list of questions when I am able to bow before our God.
Personally, I don't believe nor do I read in scripture how a spiritual being without a human body of flesh, bones and human semen can impregnate a human woman.
Repeatedly in Genesis, we are told that every creature God created "can reproduce only after its own kind."
The only way in which a fallen angel, i.e., demonic being, follower of Satan, full of hatred and evil intent, could have physical sex with a woman would be by mentally, spiritually and physically taking "possession" of the body of a human male being...
for some passages in Enoch, which is not Scripture, say these "men"(?) actually married with women, taking them as their literal wives, becoming a family with children... something a spirit cannot do.
The following paragraphs are from:
http://creationhistory.com/Nephilim.shtml
A book on Eastern Orthodox traditions (GENESIS, CREATION and EARLY MAN -- The Orthodox Christian Vision) rejects the idea that angels married women before the Flood by saying:
"Some have speculated that the 'sons of God' were heavenly beings or angels. The Holy Fathers were aware of this interpretation and they refuted it, saying that angels cannot beget men."
[b][Here a footnote adds the following: "The identification of the 'sons of God' as angels or heavenly beings was based in part on the apocryphal book of Enoch....Some of the early Christian writers mistakenly accepted this interpretation....[/b]
The first extant Christian reference to the 'sons of God' as descendants of Seth is in the Five Books of Chronology by the early Christian writer Julius Africanus (A.D. 200-245) (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 6, p. 131). This interpretation became the consistent teaching of the Church, being set forth on theological grounds by Chrysostom (Commentary on Genesis 22:6-7), Ephraim the Syrian (Commentary on Genesis 6:3, Hymns on the Nativity 1:48, Hymns on Faith 46:9, Hymns against Heresies 19:1-8, and Hymns on Paradise 1:11), John Cassian (Conferences 8:20-21), Augustine (City of God 15:23), St. Gregory Palamas ('Topics of Natural and Theological Science' 62), Athanasius (Four Discourses against the Arians 4:22), Cyril of Alexandria, and others."] (page 244).
The New Testament warns against believing fables (see Titus 1:14, I Timothy 1:4; 4:7 and II Timothy 4:4). Unfortunately, at times, the early Church Fathers -- as is still true today among various Church leaders -- did err. The guiding principle must always remain sola scriptura.
bahmer wrote:
Very interesting Zemirah thanks for posting this I always enjoy furthering my education and your posts most definitely do that. Thanks again for this post.
Aug 26, 2019 10:58:42 #
[quote=Zemirah]The Nephilim is a fascinating subject, bahmer.
It will definitely be on my list of questions when I am able to bow before our God.
Personally, I don't believe nor do I read in scripture how a spiritual being without a human body of flesh, bones and human semen can impregnate a human woman.
Repeatedly in Genesis, we are told that every creature God created "can reproduce only after its own kind."
The only way in which a fallen angel, i.e., demonic being, follower of Satan, full of hatred and evil intent, could have physical sex with a woman would be by mentally, spiritually and physically taking "possession" of the body of a human male being...
for some passages in Enoch, which is not Scripture, say these "men"(?) actually married with women, taking them as their literal wives, becoming a family with children... something a spirit cannot do.
The following paragraphs are from:
http://creationhistory.com/Nephilim.shtml
A book on Eastern Orthodox traditions (GENESIS, CREATION and EARLY MAN -- The Orthodox Christian Vision) rejects the idea that angels married women before the Flood by saying:
"Some have speculated that the 'sons of God' were heavenly beings or angels. The Holy Fathers were aware of this interpretation and they refuted it, saying that angels cannot beget men."
[b][Here a footnote adds the following: "The identification of the 'sons of God' as angels or heavenly beings was based in part on the apocryphal book of Enoch....Some of the early Christian writers mistakenly accepted this interpretation....[/b]
The first extant Christian reference to the 'sons of God' as descendants of Seth is in the Five Books of Chronology by the early Christian writer Julius Africanus (A.D. 200-245) (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 6, p. 131). This interpretation became the consistent teaching of the Church, being set forth on theological grounds by Chrysostom (Commentary on Genesis 22:6-7), Ephraim the Syrian (Commentary on Genesis 6:3, Hymns on the Nativity 1:48, Hymns on Faith 46:9, Hymns against Heresies 19:1-8, and Hymns on Paradise 1:11), John Cassian (Conferences 8:20-21), Augustine (City of God 15:23), St. Gregory Palamas ('Topics of Natural and Theological Science' 62), Athanasius (Four Discourses against the Arians 4:22), Cyril of Alexandria, and others."] (page 244).
The New Testament warns against believing fables (see Titus 1:14, I Timothy 1:4; 4:7 and II Timothy 4:4). Unfortunately, at times, the early Church Fathers -- as is still true today among various Church leaders -- did err. The guiding principle must always remain sola scriptura.[/quote]
My original post here was from a biblical Hebrew course that is offered and I had become curious at one time about Hebrew. I had some friends that had a music ministry and they in fact moved to Israel for some periods of time and they eventually started studying Hebrew themselves. He has since passed away and I am not sure whether his wife is still alive living in Israel or what. I do not know Hebrew and so I cannot prove or disprove this rendition of nephilim and will have to wait for the rapture and talking with the Lord face to face to finally understand what actually occurred back then. I know Peewee believes in the nephilim and so I posted this in a sense for him. He has given me a web site to look up for more info on this subject. Thanks again for posting this there are many questions regarding these creatures that have yet to be answered fully.
It will definitely be on my list of questions when I am able to bow before our God.
Personally, I don't believe nor do I read in scripture how a spiritual being without a human body of flesh, bones and human semen can impregnate a human woman.
Repeatedly in Genesis, we are told that every creature God created "can reproduce only after its own kind."
The only way in which a fallen angel, i.e., demonic being, follower of Satan, full of hatred and evil intent, could have physical sex with a woman would be by mentally, spiritually and physically taking "possession" of the body of a human male being...
for some passages in Enoch, which is not Scripture, say these "men"(?) actually married with women, taking them as their literal wives, becoming a family with children... something a spirit cannot do.
The following paragraphs are from:
http://creationhistory.com/Nephilim.shtml
A book on Eastern Orthodox traditions (GENESIS, CREATION and EARLY MAN -- The Orthodox Christian Vision) rejects the idea that angels married women before the Flood by saying:
"Some have speculated that the 'sons of God' were heavenly beings or angels. The Holy Fathers were aware of this interpretation and they refuted it, saying that angels cannot beget men."
[b][Here a footnote adds the following: "The identification of the 'sons of God' as angels or heavenly beings was based in part on the apocryphal book of Enoch....Some of the early Christian writers mistakenly accepted this interpretation....[/b]
The first extant Christian reference to the 'sons of God' as descendants of Seth is in the Five Books of Chronology by the early Christian writer Julius Africanus (A.D. 200-245) (Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 6, p. 131). This interpretation became the consistent teaching of the Church, being set forth on theological grounds by Chrysostom (Commentary on Genesis 22:6-7), Ephraim the Syrian (Commentary on Genesis 6:3, Hymns on the Nativity 1:48, Hymns on Faith 46:9, Hymns against Heresies 19:1-8, and Hymns on Paradise 1:11), John Cassian (Conferences 8:20-21), Augustine (City of God 15:23), St. Gregory Palamas ('Topics of Natural and Theological Science' 62), Athanasius (Four Discourses against the Arians 4:22), Cyril of Alexandria, and others."] (page 244).
The New Testament warns against believing fables (see Titus 1:14, I Timothy 1:4; 4:7 and II Timothy 4:4). Unfortunately, at times, the early Church Fathers -- as is still true today among various Church leaders -- did err. The guiding principle must always remain sola scriptura.[/quote]
My original post here was from a biblical Hebrew course that is offered and I had become curious at one time about Hebrew. I had some friends that had a music ministry and they in fact moved to Israel for some periods of time and they eventually started studying Hebrew themselves. He has since passed away and I am not sure whether his wife is still alive living in Israel or what. I do not know Hebrew and so I cannot prove or disprove this rendition of nephilim and will have to wait for the rapture and talking with the Lord face to face to finally understand what actually occurred back then. I know Peewee believes in the nephilim and so I posted this in a sense for him. He has given me a web site to look up for more info on this subject. Thanks again for posting this there are many questions regarding these creatures that have yet to be answered fully.
Aug 26, 2019 20:03:47 #
Peewee
Loc: San Antonio, TX
I always trust scripture if scripture and commentaries don't agree. Gen 6: clearly refers to two types of beings "the sons of God" and the "daughters of men". Then it moves to giants on the earth in those days.
Somebody built all the giant structures around the earth. You can see a building in Peru with three types of construction. The base is huge stones with no gaps. Then the next level is smaller stones and the third is again smaller stones. The cones heads are elongated skulls and the skull plates have different fusion lines, unlike a normal human skull. Cradle boarding wouldn't change that. Also where the spine connects to the head is set further back than a normal human's.
Here is an L. A. Marzulli video about it.
https://youtu.be/zHOXgBttkf4
Somebody built all the giant structures around the earth. You can see a building in Peru with three types of construction. The base is huge stones with no gaps. Then the next level is smaller stones and the third is again smaller stones. The cones heads are elongated skulls and the skull plates have different fusion lines, unlike a normal human skull. Cradle boarding wouldn't change that. Also where the spine connects to the head is set further back than a normal human's.
Here is an L. A. Marzulli video about it.
https://youtu.be/zHOXgBttkf4
Aug 27, 2019 00:48:55 #
The unsolved mysteries concealed within human genetics won't likely all be resolved within our lifetimes, and it is human nature to never stop investigating.
The account in Genesis 6:1-4 is perhaps the single most enigmatic passage in the Old Testament, raising numerous puzzling questions. Who were these “sons of God”? Who were the “daughters of men”? What was wrong with the former taking wives from among the latter? Who – or what – were the nephilim, and how exactly were they connected to the sons of God and daughters of men?
Historically, many rulers have assumed titles such as son of God, son of a god or son of heaven. The term "son of God" is sometimes used in the Old and New Testaments of the Christian Bible to refer to those with special relationships with God. In the Old Testament, angels, just and pious men, and the kings of Israel are all called "sons of God."
Among the popular beliefs are:
The “sons of God” were fallen angels who married and had conjugal relations with “the daughters of men” who were human females. (Those who champion this idea may also faver that the nephilim were the angel/human hybrid offspring of these relations.)
The “sons of God” were the descendants of the Godly line of Seth and the “daughters of men” were the descendants of the ungodly line of Cain.
The “sons of God” were exalted kings or rulers who were taking wives, perhaps by force, and building harems for themselves.
The “sons of God” were men possessed by demons (i.e. fallen angels).
As of this year of 2019, none of these theories have been proven, nor are they provable with the knowledge we presently possess, so we are each free to promote whatever arguments we can find to push our own belief as being most likely.
No one has been proven right, no one has been proven wrong.
The account in Genesis 6:1-4 is perhaps the single most enigmatic passage in the Old Testament, raising numerous puzzling questions. Who were these “sons of God”? Who were the “daughters of men”? What was wrong with the former taking wives from among the latter? Who – or what – were the nephilim, and how exactly were they connected to the sons of God and daughters of men?
Historically, many rulers have assumed titles such as son of God, son of a god or son of heaven. The term "son of God" is sometimes used in the Old and New Testaments of the Christian Bible to refer to those with special relationships with God. In the Old Testament, angels, just and pious men, and the kings of Israel are all called "sons of God."
Among the popular beliefs are:
The “sons of God” were fallen angels who married and had conjugal relations with “the daughters of men” who were human females. (Those who champion this idea may also faver that the nephilim were the angel/human hybrid offspring of these relations.)
The “sons of God” were the descendants of the Godly line of Seth and the “daughters of men” were the descendants of the ungodly line of Cain.
The “sons of God” were exalted kings or rulers who were taking wives, perhaps by force, and building harems for themselves.
The “sons of God” were men possessed by demons (i.e. fallen angels).
As of this year of 2019, none of these theories have been proven, nor are they provable with the knowledge we presently possess, so we are each free to promote whatever arguments we can find to push our own belief as being most likely.
No one has been proven right, no one has been proven wrong.
Peewee wrote:
I always trust scripture if scripture and commenta... (show quote)
Aug 27, 2019 11:00:12 #
Peewee
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Zemirah wrote:
The unsolved mysteries concealed within human gene... (show quote)
So true. I have always wondered why the great libraries in the ancient world all seem to burn down. All that knowledge and history, poof, gone. So all we are left with is finding clues in and around the earth. I do know that portions of Enoch were found in the caves of Qumran. But they are starting to be released and see the light of day again. Ever so slowly.
Aug 27, 2019 11:28:38 #
Peewee wrote:
I always trust scripture if scripture and commenta... (show quote)
Very interesting video so many questions and so few answers can't wait to get to heaven and have all of those answers given to us.
Aug 27, 2019 12:41:36 #
Peewee
Loc: San Antonio, TX
bahmer wrote:
Very interesting video so many questions and so few answers can't wait to get to heaven and have all of those answers given to us.
Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning. Genesis and Revelation are bookends. Things will be far worse than as in the days of Noah. With all this splicing DNA, who knows. The mad scientists are even working on transhumanism (man & machine). Always wondered how men would seek death in the last days and not find it. Maybe that's transhumanism.
Aug 27, 2019 12:43:51 #
Peewee wrote:
Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning. Genesis and Revelation are bookends. Things will be far worse than as in the days of Noah. With all this splicing DNA, who knows. The mad scientists are even working on transhumanism (man & machine). Always wondered how men would seek death in the last days and not find it. Maybe that's transhumanism.
Could be but I am not looking forward to being here in those days.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.