Who are the NEPHILIM in Genesis 6

[SophieT]

I have likely already answered every, if not most, questions you have for me concerning this subject. I'm not going to re-argue my points in the same thread.
But here is a summary:
-Certain angels sinned
-Peter clarifies that they sinned during the time of Noah
-Jude described their sin as comparable to the sins on Sodom and Gomorrah ("leaving their proper abode...fornication"
-These are not the angels that Jesus referred to (Matt 22:30, Luke 12:25); Jesus spoke of the angels in heaven, not the fallen angels.
-Angels have been shown throughout the Scriptures to be able to materialize; they are not merely spiritual beings.
-(new) Not only are there very solid evidence for the angle view of Genesis 6:1-4, but there are dozens of cogent Biblical refutations for the Sethite view (For example, national and racial distinctions were not distinguished until the subsequent intervention of God in Genesis 11). "Where there is no law, there is no violation" (Rom 4). Since God didn't separate the nations based on lineage until Genesis 11, it was not sinful for them to marry other women. So the "sin" referred to by Peter cannot refer to human tribes marrying other human tribes prior to Genesis 11.

For details and references, feel free to review what I have already posted

Apparently, this is a topic that is crucial to those who do not believe what you posted here

I honestly wonder why. I don't find it fruitful to continue to supply the same answers over and over and I agree that all reasonable and biblical efforts have been made to no avail and at some point, it is better to just leave the thread. The anger from some is palitable.

 

[Diakonos]

The context of Genesis 6 is in that chapter. You can't use a few verses from the New Testament

Do you deny that Peter's and Jude's reference of angelic sinful activity is the same event?
If so, demonstrate with Scripture the distinction between these 2 events.

 

[Diakonos]

Apparently, this is a topic that is crucial to those who do not believe what you posted here

I honestly wonder why. I don't find it fruitful to continue to supply the same answers over and over and I agree that all reasonable and biblical efforts have been made to no avail and at some point, it is better to just leave the thread. The anger from some is palitable.

I have a number of purposes for responding to their denial:

1. I have changed people's minds before on this website (it does bear fruit to the open-minded).
2. It sharpens me doctrinally to present Scripture in a systematic manner.
3. It provides a record of my personal voice in dealing with these multifaceted doctrinal matters (for future reference).
4. It allows for me to be corrected (with the Word).

 

[CS1]

Do you deny that Peter's and Jude's reference of angelic sinful activity is the same event?
If so, demonstrate with Scripture the distinction between these 2 events.

I do not deny what the word says, what it doesn't say in the context that angels did sexual sin. The sin the angels did was not sexual it was rebellion.

 

[Diakonos]

I do not deny what the word says, what it doesn't say in the context that angels did sexual sin. The sin the angels did was not sexual it was rebellion.

Thank you for repeating your conclusion (again), I am very aware of your position and do not need reminding of it. Now let's move on to examine the details that support/refute that conclusion.
One issue at a time... We have to find common ground before we can even talk about the conclusions.
So I ask again (for like the 4th time now)...its a yes or no question:

Do you deny that Peter's and Jude's reference of angelic sinful activity is the same event?

 

[Dino246]

you have been here responding for some time and you only have now three posts clearly you blocked your previous responses

I have no idea why you can’t see my posts. As I have done nothing to block them, it’s not my problem.

 

[Diakonos]

I have no idea why you can’t see my posts. As I have done nothing to block them, it’s not my problem.

Are people even able to block their own posts? How? I thought every post was pertinently on here

 

[Magenta]

Jesus was resurrected in flesh, was He not? We are also told we shall have bodies like His when we make our final journey.

Thomas felt the wounds Jesus suffered and Jesus was solid...not some diaphanous floating spirit

That is not recorded in Scripture. It is simply an assumption people make.

 

[Diakonos]

Jesus was resurrected in flesh, was He not? We are also told we shall have bodies like His when we make our final journey.

Thomas felt the wounds Jesus suffered and Jesus was solid...not some diaphanous floating spirit

That is not recorded in Scripture. It is simply an assumption people make.

Whether Thomas actually did it is unimportant. What is important is that Jesus invited the disciples to verify his post-resurrected physical existence:
“Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.”” (John 20:27)
““See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.””
(Luke 24:39)

Jesus is the prototype/model of the resurrected body
“But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.” (1 Corinthians 15:20)
“For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,” (Romans 6:5)

 

[ewq1938]

Whether Thomas actually did it is unimportant.

He did because without touching he wouldn't believe:

Joh 20:25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

 

[CS1]

Thank you for repeating your conclusion (again), I am very aware of your position and do not need reminding of it. Now let's move on to examine the details that support/refute that conclusion.
One issue at a time... We have to find common ground before we can even talk about the conclusions.
So I ask again (for like the 4th time now)...its a yes or no question:

Do you deny that Peter's and Jude's reference of angelic sinful activity is the same event?

Don't tell me it's a yes or no question you do not control anyone here.


ok,
Are you speaking about 2 Pet 2:4? Jude 1:6?

 

[Magenta]

Whether Thomas actually did it is unimportant. What is important is that Jesus invited the disciples to verify his post-resurrected physical existence:
“Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.”” (John 20:27)
““See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.””
(Luke 24:39)

Jesus is the prototype/model of the resurrected body
“But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.” (1 Corinthians 15:20)
“For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,” (Romans 6:5)

All of that is quite beside the point I made, the point being, it is not recorded in Scripture that Thomas actually stuck his hands in Jesus's wounds. Saying Thomas did it is an assumption.

I am not sure why you bring resurrected bodies into the discussion, either. Angels are not resurrected.

 

[49]

Don't tell me it's a yes or no question you do not control anyone here.

???

 

[CS1]

Humble my self doesn't mean I'm to groom one's ego To God no man surely not those in this setting I will take respect and dish out what dish in thank you very much

 

[SophieT]

I have a number of purposes for responding to their denial:

1. I have changed people's minds before on this website (it does bear fruit to the open-minded).
2. It sharpens me doctrinally to present Scripture in a systematic manner.
3. It provides a record of my personal voice in dealing with these multifaceted doctrinal matters (for future reference).
4. It allows for me to be corrected (with the Word).

I did not tell anyone to stop posting.

However, you did say this: I have likely already answered every, if not most, questions you have for me concerning this subject. I'm not going to re-argue my points in the same thread.

So I guess you changed your mind. (shrugs)

Whether Thomas actually did it is unimportant. What is important is that Jesus invited the disciples to verify his post-resurrected physical existence:
“Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.”” (John 20:27)
““See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.””
(Luke 24:39)

Jesus is the prototype/model of the resurrected body
“But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.” (1 Corinthians 15:20)
“For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,” (Romans 6:5)

You don't find that important? Well somehow, God slipped it in there anyway; maybe for the rest of us.

 

[SophieT]

Apparently, this is a topic that is crucial to those who do not believe what you posted here

I honestly wonder why. I don't find it fruitful to continue to supply the same answers over and over and I agree that all reasonable and biblical efforts have been made to no avail and at some point, it is better to just leave the thread. The anger from some is palitable.

I'll just finish with that. Which is what I had in mind anyway.

 

[Dino246]

Humble my self doesn't mean I'm to groom one's ego To God no man surely not those in this setting I will take respect and dish out what dish in thank you very much

Once again, but in proper English this time?

 

[Major]

I have likely already answered every, if not most, questions you have for me concerning this subject. I'm not going to re-argue my points in the same thread.
But here is a summary:
-Certain angels sinned
-Peter clarifies that they sinned during the time of Noah
-Jude described their sin as comparable to the sins on Sodom and Gomorrah ("leaving their proper abode...fornication"
-These are not the angels that Jesus referred to (Matt 22:30, Luke 12:25); Jesus spoke of the angels in heaven, not the fallen angels.
-Angels have been shown throughout the Scriptures to be able to materialize; they are not merely spiritual beings.
-(new) Not only are there very solid evidence for the angle view of Genesis 6:1-4, but there are dozens of cogent Biblical refutations for the Sethite view (For example, national and racial distinctions were not distinguished until the subsequent intervention of God in Genesis 11). "Where there is no law, there is no violation" (Rom 4). Since God didn't separate the nations based on lineage until Genesis 11, it was not sinful for them to marry other women. So the "sin" referred to by Peter cannot refer to human tribes marrying other human tribes prior to Genesis 11.

For details and references, feel free to review what I have already posted

IF the Nephilim Giants are only the children of fallen angels, then how did Cush the son of Ham which is the son of Noah, have a giant for a son?????

Genesis 10:6-9 ......
The sons of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put and Canaan. 7The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteka. The sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan. 8Cush was the father of Nimrod, who became a mighty warrior on the earth. 9He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; that is why it is said, "Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the LORD."

The word MIGHTY, is the Hebrew word "Gibbor". That is the exact same word used in Genesis 6:4....The same became MIGHTY MEN which were of old.

Please feel free to ask me about anything on this subject and I will be glad and blessed to help you.

 

[Major]

What about those who have 'entertained' angels unawares? Is that because they are invisible?

Nah. I don't think so. I have my own 'ministering spirit' story and they were not invisible. Be glad to relate it, but really finding the denials obnoxious and not biblical, but rather interpretive. Nothing to do with sex so don't even go there

Sophie...I appreciate you comment but this is not about whether or not we have been visited by angels. It is about WHO were the "Sons of God" in Genesis 6.

The passages in Hebrews about entertainng angels unawares is a "comparative" Scripture and not a Doctrinal one.

Angels DID visit men. 3 came to Abrahma and Sari. One came to Joshua. Jacob foungt with one. Moses saw one in the burning bush.

However, which a little study we can see that those appearances were the "Angel of the Lord" which was a CHRISTOPHANY. A visual manifestation of diety which would make those appearances Jesus Christ pre-incarnation.

That being the case....the book of Hebrews compares those events and says that we should show love and hospitality to strangers because that stranger just might be an angel.

Now remember.....the word of ANGEL is actually "MESSANGER". We should not expect a vist from an angel but we just might meet some very wonderful people instead.

 

[Major]

I'll just finish with that. Which is what I had in mind anyway.

I understand. When faced with truth, the instinct in all of us is to fight or flee.