The "Sons of God" issue has been settled. Did you get the memo?

[Buckethead Baptist]

Relating to the OP... Oh no not another book of fables!... Brother Glen

Deuteronomy 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.

I find it enlightening that you've got a problem with scholarly works concerning the parts of the bible that you do not understand.

 

[Deacon]

Michael Heiser has written fiction but also writes scholarly articles and books.
The Unseen Realm is a book aimed more toward seminary level bible students.

The popular version is called, "Supernatural, what the Bible teaches about the unseen world - and why it matters".
Another popular book of his is "I Dare You not to Bore me with the Bible".

Heiser begins his interpretational journey in the Unseen Realm around the 'heavenly council' mentioned in Psalm 82.

​

The evil contagion spreading through humanity in Genesis 6:5 is linked to the story in Genesis 6:1–4 about the sons of God fathering their own earthly children known as Nephilim.
The Bible doesn’t say much else in Genesis about what happened, but pieces of the story show up elsewhere in the Bible, and in Jewish traditions outside the Bible the New Testament authors knew well and quoted in their writings.
For example, Peter and Jude write about the angels who sinned before the flood (2 Pet. 2:4–6; see also Jude 5–6). Some of what they say comes from Jewish sources outside the Bible. Peter and Jude say that the sons of God who committed this transgression were imprisoned under the earth—in other words, they’re doing time in hell—until the last days. They’ll be part of God’s final judgment, something the Bible calls the “Day of the Lord.”

Michael S. Heiser, Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, ed. David Lambert (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015), 39–40.​

Both The Unseen Realm and Supernatural are worth a read.

...and may change the way your orientation to the scriptures.​

Rob

 

[Deacon]

Michael Heiser has written fiction but also writes scholarly articles and books.
The Unseen Realm is a book aimed at a seminary level students.

The popular version is called, "Supernatural, what the Bible teaches about the unseen world - and why it matters"

Heiser begins his journey of interpretation around the heavenly council mentioned in Psalm 82.

The evil contagion spreading through humanity in Genesis 6:5 is linked to the story in Genesis 6:1–4 about the sons of God fathering their own earthly children known as Nephilim.
The Bible doesn’t say much else in Genesis about what happened, but pieces of the story show up elsewhere in the Bible, and in Jewish traditions outside the Bible the New Testament authors knew well and quoted in their writings.
For example, Peter and Jude write about the angels who sinned before the flood (2 Pet. 2:4–6; see also Jude 5–6). Some of what they say comes from Jewish sources outside the Bible. Peter and Jude say that the sons of God who committed this transgression were imprisoned under the earth—in other words, they’re doing time in hell—until the last days. They’ll be part of God’s final judgment, something the Bible calls the “Day of the Lord.”
Michael S. Heiser, Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, ed. David Lambert (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015), 39–40.
​

Both titles are worth a read... and may change the way you orient yourself to scripture.

Rob

 

[tyndale1946]

I find it enlightening that you've got a problem with scholarly works concerning the parts of the bible that you do not understand.

Scripture interprets scripture, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little there a little... And I have no problem with that... I am into Biblical History and have no problem with that either and I have read various authors... I have read Josephus, Eusebius, Irenaeus, Strong's, Vines, Gill, Spurgeon, Hislop (bet that one surprised you didn't it) and a lot of other writing by preachers and teachers over the ages... And it is true I do not understand a lot of the Bible even though I've been studying it for over 50 years... But studying the Bible I have also studied others who also studied scripture and lead many away with the idea they had found something new that no one else has ever found... Btw there have been many false beliefs started this way and many blind shepherds leading blind sheep and starting there false cults... So before you go laying a charge against someone you know nothing about, stop and think... I agree with what Prmtvbpst1832 said in post #4 and also agree with what Brother Martin said in post #14... Btw you want to test your metal, drop down in the C/A Forum where I hang my hat... Brother Glen

 

[Van]

I am with some of the other posters that Genesis 6:1-4 is open to various interpretations, with none appearing to be worth betting the farm on. And, I do not see how Calvin's interpretation of this passage, whatever it was, caused others influenced by his writings to invent the bogus doctrines floated in his name.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I don't think that the interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 is too difficult if you look at the context.
Genesis 4:16-24 deals with the descendants of Cain, culminating in the evil Lamech.
Genesis 5: deals with the descendants of Seth, culminating in righteous Noah.
I suggest that the 'sons' of God are the male line of Seth, and the 'daughters of men' are the female line of Cain. There was inter-marrying between the two families with the result that the knowledge of God and His righteous laws was lost. As Elvis Presley said,
'A hard-headed woman; a soft-hearted man--
They've been the cause of trouble ever since the world began!'

Or more prosaically, 'Take heed to yourself, lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land where you are going, lest it be a snare in your midst......and you take of [their] daughters for your sons.........' (Exodus 34:12, 16).
And
'Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers................etc.' (2 Corinthians 6:14-18).

If you put one rotten apple in a barrel of good apples, it will spoil the rest, but it doesn't work the other way around.

I suspect this may be Calvin's interpretation, but I haven't checked. It is surely the simplest and most obvious one.

 

[Darrell C]

I don't think that the interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 is too difficult if you look at the context.
Genesis 4:16-24 deals with the descendants of Cain, culminating in the evil Lamech.
Genesis 5: deals with the descendants of Seth, culminating in righteous Noah.
I suggest that the 'sons' of God are the male line of Seth, and the 'daughters of men' are the female line of Cain. There was inter-marrying between the two families with the result that the knowledge of God and His righteous laws was lost. As Elvis Presley said,
'A hard-headed woman; a soft-hearted man--
They've been the cause of trouble ever since the world began!'

Or more prosaically, 'Take heed to yourself, lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land where you are going, lest it be a snare in your midst......and you take of [their] daughters for your sons.........' (Exodus 34:12, 16).
And
'Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers................etc.' (2 Corinthians 6:14-18).

If you put one rotten apple in a barrel of good apples, it will spoil the rest, but it doesn't work the other way around.

I suspect this may be Calvin's interpretation, but I haven't checked. It is surely the simplest and most obvious one.

Perhaps simpler is to view the "sons of God" as referring to men of power, or in other words, men who were in place of ruling.


Genesis 6
King James Version (KJV)

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.


We know that what takes place is something not pleasing to God, so I would just suggest the concept of ruling men taking from among the people women at their whim.


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.

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.


It is Man, not Angels, with whom God is not pleased. God is Just so it makes little sense to find God exacting penalty for something that is the result of Angels' actions. The resulting offspring also become notable.

It also seems as though the "giants" precede the coming in of the sons of God unto the daughters of men.

We see the concept of "sons of God" here...


Psalm 82
King James Version (KJV)

1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.


The instruction pertains to those in ruler-ship over the people, and a demand for just ruler-ship. The "Fatherhood" of GOd in relation to man, though not to be equated with the Fatherhood of New Covenant relationship, can be sen in relation to both all people of the world at times as well as to Israel.

So my own view would be that we have those in place of ruler-ship taking advantage of their power and basically violating God's will in regards to how those in positions of leadership are to rule. It is not unusual that their descendants would be mighty men, men of renown.


God bless.

 

[Buckethead Baptist]

Michael Heiser has written fiction but also writes scholarly articles and books.
The Unseen Realm is a book aimed more toward seminary level bible students.

Both The Unseen Realm and Supernatural are worth a read.

...and may change the way your orientation to the scriptures.​

Rob

Thanks Rob... I appreciate the comments.

 

[reformed_baptist]

Michael Heiser has written fiction but also writes scholarly articles and books.

Many 'scholarly articles' are fiction

The Unseen Realm is a book aimed more toward seminary level bible students.

The popular version is called, "Supernatural, what the Bible teaches about the unseen world - and why it matters".
Another popular book of his is "I Dare You not to Bore me with the Bible".

Heiser begins his interpretational journey in the Unseen Realm around the 'heavenly council' mentioned in Psalm 82.

​

The evil contagion spreading through humanity in Genesis 6:5 is linked to the story in Genesis 6:1–4 about the sons of God fathering their own earthly children known as Nephilim.
The Bible doesn’t say much else in Genesis about what happened, but pieces of the story show up elsewhere in the Bible, and in Jewish traditions outside the Bible the New Testament authors knew well and quoted in their writings.
For example, Peter and Jude write about the angels who sinned before the flood (2 Pet. 2:4–6; see also Jude 5–6). Some of what they say comes from Jewish sources outside the Bible. Peter and Jude say that the sons of God who committed this transgression were imprisoned under the earth—in other words, they’re doing time in hell—until the last days. They’ll be part of God’s final judgment, something the Bible calls the “Day of the Lord.”

Michael S. Heiser, Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches about the Unseen World—And Why It Matters, ed. David Lambert (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015), 39–40.​

Both The Unseen Realm and Supernatural are worth a read.

...and may change the way your orientation to the scriptures.​

Rob

There is just one one I want to pick up on in regards to that quote, and that is the claim that both Peter and Jude speak of the Angels who sinned before the flood - and seems to link those sins to Gen 6:1-4. I have a problem with that - the bible doesn't that, and those verses certainly don't say that, they say:

2 Peter 2:4-6 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;

Jude 1:6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;

How does the author link these texts exegetically to Gen 6:1-4?

 

[reformed_baptist]

Is bible study of the supernatural a problem for you... or do you do this when discussing the resurrection too?

So, if we believe the resurrection we must also believe every other claim of the supernatural.

 

[reformed_baptist]

Calvin made a choice to follow a version of the Sethite view of Genesis 6.

It was a mistake.

Unfortunately... the choice to follow that path... affected his doctrinal path through the remainder of scripture.

Those who have embraced the tenets of Calvinism today... have also inherited that flaw.

There are things to be re-learned because of this.

I had to.

I suggest it to you as a challenge... not an ultimatum or a dismissive blanket statement against Calvinism.

Personally... I feel its Calvinism's Achilles heel... but I've got better things to do than to argue with Calvinists much anymore.

Besides... they inherited the propensity of burning brothers with green wood too.

I love to see that enlarged upon - assertions are easy to make - this one is impossible to back up and support either from Calvin's own works or from the works of other Calvinists - I think you will find that it is reformed theology that effects the exegesis of this passage (our demand for consistency and comparing scripture to scripture) rather then the exegesis of this passage that effects reformed thought.

 

[Yeshua1]

Is bible study of the supernatural a problem for you... or do you do this when discussing the resurrection too?

No, but what is a problem is when we go outside the teaching of the scriptures themselves!

 

[Yeshua1]

And why has the Holy Spirit not taught you?

That would be implying that I was not saved, correct? as he teaches all who are saved of God!

 

[percho]

Many 'scholarly articles' are fiction



There is just one one I want to pick up on in regards to that quote, and that is the claim that both Peter and Jude speak of the Angels who sinned before the flood - and seems to link those sins to Gen 6:1-4. I have a problem with that - the bible doesn't that, and those verses certainly don't say that, they say:

2 Peter 2:4-6 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;

Jude 1:6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;

How does the author link these texts exegetically to Gen 6:1-4?

I agree, I also do not think they are exegetical connected to Gen 6:1-4 but let me ask are they exegetical, chronological ?

1. Angels that sinned.
2. Worldwide flood.
3. Sodom and Gomorrah

Is, " And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep," the result of the Angels that sinned and should, "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, " be verse 3 or a part of verse three?

Now another thought.

And in the synagogue there was a man, which had a spirit of an unclean devil, and cried out with a loud voice, Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God. Luke 4:33,34
And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ. Luke 4:41
And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? Matt 8:28,29

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

At that moment, did that old serpent, called the devil and Satan know the Son of God, the Christ would be born of woman and that his time was measured?

Rev 12:2-4 Matt 2:16

Did Herod have the spirit of an unclean devil ie Luke 4:33?

I am for sure of one thing concerning, the elect, There was an, elect, line from Adam unto the Christ, the Son of the living God.

BTW It didn't go through Ham the father of Canaan, the devil was at work, for that shows us his corruption of men as an example.

 

[reformed_baptist]

I agree, I also do not think they are exegetical connected to Gen 6:1-4 but let me ask are they exegetical, chronological ?

1. Angels that sinned.
2. Worldwide flood.
3. Sodom and Gomorrah

yes, I believe so.

Is, " And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep," the result of the Angels that sinned

There is nothing scripture to suggest that is the case?

and should, "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, " be verse 3 or a part of verse three?

The verse divisions are a recent innovation and as such, they should not impact understanding of the text, so I don't understand the question.

Now another thought.

And in the synagogue there was a man, which had a spirit of an unclean devil, and cried out with a loud voice, Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God. Luke 4:33,34
And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ. Luke 4:41
And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? Matt 8:28,29

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

At that moment, did that old serpent, called the devil and Satan know the Son of God, the Christ would be born of woman and that his time was measured?

Rev 12:2-4 Matt 2:16

Did Herod have the spirit of an unclean devil ie Luke 4:33?

I am for sure of one thing concerning, the elect, There was an, elect, line from Adam unto the Christ, the Son of the living God.

BTW It didn't go through Ham the father of Canaan, the devil was at work, for that shows us his corruption of men as an example.

I don't understand what your getting at, sorry

 

[percho]

yes, I believe so.



There is nothing scripture to suggest that is the case?

If you believe so and yet do not think nothing in scripture suggest to you that the sin of the angels had anything to do with what I suggested, then when do you think the sin of the angels took place and what effect did that sin have upon their environment whatever that might have been?

If sin results in death, see James 1, then what death did the sin of the angels cause? Could their sin have caused the death of a planet, the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep. Period................And the curtain falls and time passes.................

And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

When do you think the sin of the angels took place relative to the worldwide flood?

You did answer, Yes, I believe so.

 

[tyndale1946]

I don't think that the interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 is too difficult if you look at the context.
Genesis 4:16-24 deals with the descendants of Cain, culminating in the evil Lamech.
Genesis 5: deals with the descendants of Seth, culminating in righteous Noah.
I suggest that the 'sons' of God are the male line of Seth, and the 'daughters of men' are the female line of Cain. There was inter-marrying between the two families with the result that the knowledge of God and His righteous laws was lost. As Elvis Presley said,
'A hard-headed woman; a soft-hearted man--
They've been the cause of trouble ever since the world began!'

Or more prosaically, 'Take heed to yourself, lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land where you are going, lest it be a snare in your midst......and you take of [their] daughters for your sons.........' (Exodus 34:12, 16).
And
'Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers................etc.' (2 Corinthians 6:14-18).

If you put one rotten apple in a barrel of good apples, it will spoil the rest, but it doesn't work the other way around.

I suspect this may be Calvin's interpretation, but I haven't checked. It is surely the simplest and most obvious one.

I agree with what you said Brother Martin and it make perfect sense to me... Some try to wrest scripture to their own understanding and try to prove something is there that isn't... Let scripture interpret scripture as it always does and not us delve in speculation and fables... And Brother Martin... Elvis has not left the building... Brother Glen

 

[Buckethead Baptist]

I am with some of the other posters that Genesis 6:1-4 is open to various interpretations, with none appearing to be worth betting the farm on. And, I do not see how Calvin's interpretation of this passage, whatever it was, caused others influenced by his writings to invent the bogus doctrines floated in his name.

Van... actually it's NOT open to "various interpretations" anymore... that's the whole point of my original post.

We HAVE the research and scholarship on this subject now... we know far more authentic sources for the original meanings and intent of the passages...

There IS a wrong interpretation that permeates the comfortable doctrines of certain theologians... but it is wrong nevertheless.

It's not my purpose to instigate an argument over it... I just want to know how it affects others thinking now that we have definitive proof of textual intent.

 

[Buckethead Baptist]

2 Peter 2:4-6

Jude 1:6

How does the author link these texts exegetically to Gen 6:1-4?

I'm not even sure how you're having a contextual blind spot with the 2nd Peter reference. The Jude reference is pretty well documented as the belief and understanding of any 1st Century Jew as to pointing to Genesis 6:1-4. There is no other event listed in the Torah that it could possibly be about. There's only one.

 

[Yeshua1]

I'm not even sure how you're having a contextual blind spot with the 2nd Peter reference. The Jude reference is pretty well documented as the belief and understanding of any 1st Century Jew as to pointing to Genesis 6:1-4. There is no other event listed in the Torah that it could possibly be about. There's only one.

I'm not even sure how you're having a contextual blind spot with the 2nd Peter reference. The Jude reference is pretty well documented as the belief and understanding of any 1st Century Jew as to pointing to Genesis 6:1-4. There is no other event listed in the Torah that it could possibly be about. There's only one.

I'm not even sure how you're having a contextual blind spot with the 2nd Peter reference. The Jude reference is pretty well documented as the belief and understanding of any 1st Century Jew as to pointing to Genesis 6:1-4. There is no other event listed in the Torah that it could possibly be about. There's only one.

Are you saying that the ONLY way tosee that is it meaning fallen angels?