The battle between Erasmus, DefendChrist and Faiz goes into the second round. Tulip joins the fray. The discussion about the sons of God in Genesis chapter six continues. Are they angels or men?

  1. LOL DC! You appealed to Hosea 1:10 in response to my challenge but you just exposed your own ignorance and shabby research! I asked where in the Tanakh does it mention “sons of God”, which in the Hebrew is “bene ha-elohim”. You quoted Hosea 1:10 which states:

    “Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God (bene el-hay)“.

    And as a Christian source states:

    “The term translated “the Sons of God” is, in the Hebrew, B’nai HaElohim, “Sons of Elohim,” which is a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels,4 and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament” (http://www.khouse.org/articles/1997/110/).

    Try again, DC! Where in the Tanakh is the phrase “bene ha-elohim” used in reference to human beings?
    You know the answer. Just admit it. You don’t want your cheerleader madman celebrating prematurely again!! LOL!!

    Here is some more proof for the sons of God being angels. In the other other thread, you appealed to the church fathers in a desperate attempt to legitimize the trinity idea. Well, let’s see what they said about Genesis 6, shall we? I have a feeling you will soon disown these very same church fathers!

    St. Justin Martyr (c. 100 – 165): God, when He had made the whole world, and subjected things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruits and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law – for these things also He evidently made for man – committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they enslaved by lustful passions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate needs, and all wickedness. . . . (Second Apology, “How the Angels Transgressed,” #5)

    Tatian the Assyrian (ca. 120 – 180 AD): “[God]… committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by the love of women, and begat children who are those who are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and the punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they were enslaved by lustful passions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness.” [2nd Apology, #5].

    St. Irenaeus of Lyons (d. 202): And for a very long while wickedness extended and spread, and reached and laid hold upon the whole race of mankind, until a very small seed of righteousness remained among them and illicit unions took place upon the earth, since angels were united with the daughters of the race of mankind; and they bore to them sons who for their exceeding greatness were called giants. And the angels brought as presents to their wives teachings of wickedness,1 in that they brought them the virtues of roots and herbs, dyeing in colors and cosmetics, the discovery of rare substances, love-potions, aversions, amours, concupiscence, constraints of love, spells of bewitchment, and all sorcery and idolatry hateful to God; by the entry of which things into the world evil extended and spread, while righteousness was diminished and enfeebled. [Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, #18].

    Tertullian (ca. 160 – 225 AD): For they, withal, who instituted them are assigned, under condemnation, to the penalty of death, — those angels, to wit, who rushed from heaven on the daughters of men; so that this ignominy also attaches to woman…Was it that women, without material causes of splendour, and without ingenious contrivances of grace, could not please men, who, while still unadorned, and uncouth and — so to say — crude and rude, had moved (the mind of) angels? or was it that the lovers would appear sordid and — through gratuitous use — contumelious, if they had conferred no (compensating) gift on the women who had been enticed into connubial connection with them?… Women who possessed angels (as husbands) could desire nothing more; they had, forsooth, made a grand match! [On the Apparel of Women, Chapter 2, “The Origin of Female Ornamentation, Traced Back to the Angels who had Fallen”].

    So, there you go. The church fathers, at least the “earlier” ones, believed that the “sons of God” were angels. Sorry to disappoint you, but your Bible says that angels copulated with human women. You may be embarrassed by it, but it doesn’t change anything.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Both expressions show that men or angels are the sons of God in the OT.

    Do your homework next time.

    The church fathers are not inspired.

    Like

    • Lol, oh please. You obviously haven’t done your homework which is why you are struggling to provide any concrete answers. I’m not interested in your personal opinions and presuppositions. It’s obvious that you will do anything to avoid the traditional interpretation because it is so embarrassing.

      I ask again. Where in the Tanakh is the phrase “bene ha-elohim” used in a clear reference to humans?

      And why does Genesis 6 differentiate between the “sons of God” and human women if they were really just men?

      Why do the authors of Jude and 2 Peter refer to angela in the same context as Sodom and Gamorrha?

      Do your homework. No one cares about your personal opinions.

      Like

    • Hi Faiz
      Correct me if I’m wrong but you wanted a single verse that spoke of Sons of God as humans, the verse in Hosea 1:10’says Sons of the living God (EL)

      Is EL a God different from Elohim or are we talking about the same God?

      Like I said before Jude is using events to describe the characters of false teachers.

      In 2nd Peter he is telling us the these false teachers are not going to escape judgement.

      Just like the angels who revelled…The people of Noah’s day…the People of Sodom. All of them were judged.

      You said…
      So, there you go. The church fathers, at least the “earlier” ones, believed that the “sons of God” were angels. Sorry to disappoint you, but your Bible says that angels copulated with human women. You may be embarrassed by it, but it doesn’t change anything.

      These are the same people who you say are forging scriptures etc now you want to use them to prove your case.

      So these fallen angels got married right?

      Who is God holding responsible?

      Like

    • DC, you naivete is showing. Surely even you realize that we must look at the original text, and not necessarily the translation? Why is it that “bene ha-elohim” is used consistently for angels? Even Christian sources agree with me, but you think you know better. Really?

      Look at it this way. If you think the phrases “bene ha-elohim” and “bene el-hayy” are interchangeable and mean the same thing, then can you show me a verse from the Tanakh where angels are referred to as “bene el-hay”? You already failed one challenge, so here is another one for you.

      Regarding the church fathers, the point is that your double standards are exposed. You were the one who said that you don’t rely on scholars to learn the Bible, right? So, why do you appeal to them when it suits your purpose and ignore them when they don’t? Why is it that so many of the church fathers (in fact, the “earliest” ones) interpreted Genesis 6 so differently than you?

      Also, your appeal to the church fathers for proving the trinity cannot be compared to my appeal to them for proving that the sons of God were angels. Genesis is much older than your New Testament, and thus the interpretations are older as well (in contrast, the church fathers lived centuries after Jesus). Those verses were already well known even before Christianity. In the Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars found the “Book of Giants”, which also mentions angels copulating with human women. In fact, the fragments of the “Book of Giants” add that the angels even copulated with animals (!):

      “1Q23 Frag. 1 + 6 [ . . . two hundred] 2donkeys, two hundred asses, two hundred . . . rams of the] 3flock, two hundred goats, two hundred [ . . . beast of the] 4field from every animal, from every [bird . . . ] 5[ . . . ] for miscegenation [ . . . ]”http://www.gnosis.org/library/dss/dss_book_of_giants.htm

      I know it’s embarrassing, but the evidence once against you. Your Bible says that angels had sex with human women. Get over it.

      The authors of Jude and 2 Peter referred to the angels in the same context as Sodom and Gamorrha. A bit too coincidental, don’t you think? Why did they both refer to them together? If it was simply about rebelling against God, then surely they could have mentioned other acts of rebellion, not simply sexual rebellion, right?

      In the end, it’s up to you whether you choose to remain bound by your presuppositions or whether you want to look at the available evidence. The truth will set you free, but if you feel more comfortable living in a fantasy world, no one can stop you. As the saying goes:

      “You can’t teach old dog new tricks.”

      I find this statement to be very true when it comes to Christian apologists.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hey Faiz
      I already told you that Jude was dealing with false teachers characters which were…

      Rebellion…unbelief…sexual immorality.

      In 2nd Peter he was dealing with the judgement of the false teachers.

      For example…The fallen angels…the people in Noah’s day…and sodom. Judgement came to all of them the false teachers will not escape judgement either.

      Where does the bible say fallen angels had sex with human women? Form what I can see in the text these men got married…sodom’s sin is homosexual fornication

      Why did God destroy man off the earth what do you think the reason?

      Like

  3. “Why did they both refer to them together? If it was simply about rebelling against God, then surely they could have mentioned other acts of rebellion, not simply sexual rebellion, right? ”

    They didn’t mention just sexual rebellion.

    Like

  4. ok, you asked for it.

    5And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

    5I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

    Where’s the sexual sin here?

    Like

    • Oh Lord, are you really that naive? Notice that the author mentioned Noah and Lot as being saved. Noah was saved during the flood, while Lot was saved during the destruction of Sodom. Noah is mentioned after the angels, and Lot is mentioned after Sodom and Gamorrha. Surely, you can put two and two together?

      Like

  5. Sorry, I can’t follow your train of thought. Perhaps you can explain in more detail how you construct your argument.

    Like

    • It’s simple. The angels and the wicked people before the flood are mentioned, then Noah. Then the author mentioned Sodom and Gamorrha, then Lot. Do you see the comparison?

      Like

  6. There is continuity back to the creation which would be broken if the angels had intermarried with man:

    ” 7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, ”

    In other words there is no change in the constitution of man’s being.

    He is still just the same as God created him on the sixth day.

    Like

    • Who said anything about a “change in the constitution of man’s being”? The “daughters of men” were still humans and not all human women married angels and then had hybrid children. In fact, Genesis 6 clearly states the the “Nephilim” (the Giants) were in the earth in those days and “ALSO AFTERWARD”. How did they continue to exist “afterward”? The text tells us the reason:

      “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterwardwhen the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.”

      If the “sons of God” were simply other human beings, then how did they have “Nephilim” children with the “daughters of men”?

      Like

  7. DC< you keep ignoring the overwhelming evidence against you. Genesis 6 very clearly states that angels (sons of God) had sex with humans. The early Jews believed that, and so did your church fathers. I’m afraid you have no where to run.

    “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.”

    These were the “angels” who rebelled against God, because they left their heavenly habitation and chose to settle on earth and have unnatural unions with humans (and according to the Dead Sea Scrolls, with animals as well). Their rebellion was settling on earth and mating with humans, in violation of the order God had set-up.

    Why don’t you answer me challenge? I know you already failed one, but there is another. Can you show me where the phrase “bene el-hay” is used to refer to angels? Just one example will suffice.

    Like

    • Hi Faiz
      You use early Jews and church fathers when it suits you…they also believed in the two powers in heaven as well!

      Genesis 6:1-4.

      One question I need to ask is where in the bible does God call fallen angels…his sons?

      Gen 6:1  And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
      Gen 6:2  That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they werefair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

      Where did you read that what is happening in this text is unnatural?

      They got married where is the sexual sin here?

      …there were Giants in the land in those days, and also afterwards….after what? Obviously the marriage unions…these unions have no bearing on the Giants.

      If you want to believe demons have sperm and humans bodies to be able marry women then that’s down to you.

      The bible does not give the indication of any immorality taking only that place, but it does say wickedness and evil thoughts continually.

      You are putting that meaning on the text by what certain scholars have said, and that’s what you want to believe.

      I think I will rather go by what the text says than put my own meaning on it. Just the natural flow of the text is fine for me.

      It’s not about shame for me if it happened or not, it is more sad for the human race who have been attacked and ruined by the enemy.

      You still have to get around this verse…

      Gen 6:7  And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

      …I WILL DESTROY MAN WHOM I HAVE CREATED.

      I don’t think these verses have anything to do with fallen angels and women. This is a man in sin issue and its Gods decision to destroy all.

      Can you explain how Noah and his family are not infected by this weird mixture of the demonic and human relationship.

      Remember Faiz you are defending this belief!

      If you think I’m running away from answering you then the answer that is no!

      You are really in the twilight zone here

      Like

  8. “It’s simple. The angels and the wicked people before the flood are mentioned, then Noah. Then the author mentioned Sodom and Gamorrha, then Lot. Do you see the comparison?”

    I see the similarity that a group of people were disobedient and that they were punished.

    What is the other comparison?

    Like

  9. “If the “sons of God” were simply other human beings, then how did they have “Nephilim” children with the “daughters of men”?”

    If the nephilim were created before and after then there was no invasion of angels.

    Like

  10. The other problem is that angels are spirits but you cannot copulate without a body.

    The only way they could get this body is if God created it for them.

    In that case how could they be condemned and judged by God if he made it possible in the first place?

    Another problem is that angels have no feelings or emotions so how could they participate in human life in this state?

    Of course if you are coming from a religion that has it’s roots in paganism where everything is transformable then this poses no problem.

    Like

  11. “Erasmus, you are again inserting your own presuppositions into the text. What you need to understand is that the author of Genesis did not have the same theology as Paul.”

    But the writer of Luke had the same anthropology of man as Paul:

    Luke 3 v 38: Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

    Adam is the first son of God so all humans after him are potentially sons of God depending on whether they are chosen by God to walk with him.

    So those human beings in Genesis 6 can also rightfully be called the sons of God, just as the angels are, depending on whether or not they are walking with God.

    Thus it is not correct to say that the term sons of God can only be applied to the angels in the OT.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The battle between Erasmus, DefendChrist and Faiz goes into the second round. Tulip joins the fray. The discussion about the sons of God in Genesis chapter six continues. Are they angels or men?

  1. Anonymous says:

    “defendchrist says: One question I need to ask is where in the bible does God call fallen angels…his sons?
    Where did you read that what is happening in this text is unnatural?
    They got married where is the sexual sin here?
    If you want to believe demons have sperm and humans bodies to be able marry women then that’s down to you.
    The bible does not give the indication of any immorality taking only that place, but it does say wickedness and evil thoughts continually.”

    Nevertheless, both the Tanach and the NT Bible include the fallen angels as children of the Father.
    Mt 5:45
    That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
    Mal 2:10
    Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?

    Definition for the word “Gods” in the Tanach is children of Jehovah the Most High. In Hebrew theology Jehovah is more than just god. Jehovah is God of gods. Hence Jehovah is worshiped by children of the Most High.
    Now, who are children of the Most High? In Psalm 8:5 the word “Elohim” (gods) is given for angels, regardless whether they are fallen or not, hence angels are indeed categorised as children of the Most High per Psalm 82:6.

    Jehovah fathered all angels, both good and fallen ones. At worst the fallen angels are still the “Prodigal son” of Jehovah.

    It is unfortunate that the Torah doesn’t elaborate more to solve a question whether “Son of God” in Gen.6:4 are just humans, or only good angels, or even the fallen angels. The answer that comes from the book of Enoch is not accepted by Christians who reject the book from canon.

    Nevertheless, the NT Bible reaffirms Psalm by re-including again the fallen angels – at least in the sense of prodigal one – as children of the Father.
    Mt 5:45
    That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
    Eph 4:6
    One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

  2. Anonymous says:

    “defendchrist says: Where did you read that what is happening in this text is unnatural?
    The bible does not give the indication of any immorality taking only that place, but it does say wickedness and evil thoughts continually.”

    It is hinted that an unnatural marriage between angels in human form and daughters of men reduces the generation’s longevity afterward, except Noah’s alone.
    Gen 6:3
    And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Hosea 1:10 and Zechariah 12:8 apparently correlate the word “sons of the living God” to the angel of Jehovah.
    Zech 12:8
    In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

    Hos 1:10
    Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s