Son's of God Genesis 6:1-8

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mother5
  • Start date Start date
  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
followjesus said:
lol bro make your point like you said, im open to it, show the scriptures in the "context" you are proclaimimg you can do, im open to it, im always looking to learn something new but im looking for scripture i was reading earlier many saying " man is never referred to as children or sons of God, obviously they are i gave like 5 examples of it. im open to what ur saying so......show me with scripture what you are saying i love to learn new things from the word.
Click to expand...
We'll see who has the last laugh go to post #352 and brake it down contextually as done in that post to prove your non-sense, as jaybird says IHO not the fact of his contextual exegete of Genesis 4:11-5:32 to determine who the daughters are being born to. Then in that context of Genesis 4:11-6:1 show how fallen angels are the contextual outcome in Genesis 6:2, 4, it can not be done, unless you twist the Scriptures or go outside the context or outside the Bible.

Why do you think no one has done this to shut me up, because it can't be done, have at the contextual exegete of Genesis 4:11-6:1 to show how fallen angels are the sons of God. All jaybird does is come up with rabbit trails, he won't deal with the true meaning of the text, that's why he says IHO not here's the contextual exegete of the Scriptures and you will done that same and if you do prove me wrong I will repent. Post #352 read it and do the contextual exegete, I'd love to read it as would others. I will post this challenge every time someone regurgitates this non-sense. It's been at least two weeks now and no takers and we have diehard believers in that garbage, some even came to jaybirds rescue until they were challenged, then they were gone. They will keep believing the lie because of pride, they don't want to know the truth of these Scriptures. If you can not get tis frat contextual challenge of the Holy Spirit you will always have trouble contextually understanding the Bible.

Since you are so sure of yourself to the point of an immature laugh out loud, bring it in the guidelines set, it's not a trick it's how the Bible should always be read.
 
Johnny_B said:
We'll see who has the last laugh go to post #352 and brake it down contextually as done in that post to prove your non-sense, as jaybird says IHO not the fact of his contextual exegete of Genesis 4:11-5:32 to determine who the daughters are being born to. Then in that context of Genesis 4:11-6:1 show how fallen angels are the contextual outcome in Genesis 6:2, 4, it can not be done, unless you twist the Scriptures or go outside the context or outside the Bible.

Why do you think no one has done this to shut me up, because it can't be done, have at the contextual exegete of Genesis 4:11-6:1 to show how fallen angels are the sons of God. All jaybird does is come up with rabbit trails, he won't deal with the true meaning of the text, that's why he says IHO not here's the contextual exegete of the Scriptures and you will done that same and if you do prove me wrong I will repent. Post #352 read it and do the contextual exegete, I'd love to read it as would others. I will post this challenge every time someone regurgitates this non-sense. It's been at least two weeks now and no takers and we have diehard believers in that garbage, some even came to jaybirds rescue until they were challenged, then they were gone. They will keep believing the lie because of pride, they don't want to know the truth of these Scriptures. If you can not get tis frat contextual challenge of the Holy Spirit you will always have trouble contextually understanding the Bible.

Since you are so sure of yourself to the point of an immature laugh out loud, bring it in the guidelines set, it's not a trick it's how the Bible should always be read.
Click to expand...

i thought you were gonna show the scriptures? im notgonna go searching through all of this post when you are making challenges proclaiming you can show in context with scripture that the sons of God are angels. i was actually responding to the op. if you have the time to write all that, why not get those in context scriptures and show them ? i wasnt laughing at you man, i was seeing if maybe you knew something i could learn from.

i see now that i dont remember those scriptures because there probably not there, is there even one scripture that says " the sons of God are angels? or even one reference to angels as Gods children? im not aware of it, but maybe you are. are you or not? if so im open to that. it seems you have no scripture and are just explaining how you know something what scriptures and context are you even referring to? i really cant even follow your post seems like an argument ur seeking, i thought for a moment you could back up your claim. again though ill check back another time and see if you left that clear explaination or found a scripture
 
Denadii said:
I'm sorry my friend..You'll have to talk to me as if I'm an old guy....BTW Thank you so much for serving....I do appreciate it.
Click to expand...

My point was simple...if one buys into the Sethite lineage thing then one must believe a saved man had sex with a lost woman and it produced giants....if that was the case then we should have the same thing non stop world wide as saved men have taken lost women throughout the ages....point being....it had to he something other than saved men and lost women having sex which led to giants.....I have no problem acknowledging something different than saved men and lost women....it doez not bear out....that was the point my friend....and thanks for the statement about serving.....Semper Fi bro
 
Denadii said:
Huh? Why is that, my friend? Two humans mating would produce human offspring. Not Nephilim monstrosities
Click to expand...

dcontroversal said:
Exactly the point.....facetious <---was being mate....
Click to expand...
You both of you prove my point, you can not ever get the contextual exegete of one verse making it understandable, that's why you do not get the greater context of Genesis 4:11-6:1.

Genesis 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, (in what days and also after?) when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. (who are the children born to them?) These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

How hard is that? No wonder you come up with the non-sense you believe. You do not, believe what you read, you read what you believe. No reading into the verse to fit a belief, it's reading the verse and believing it. But that was one rabbit trail that I went down. Take the contextual exegete challenge in post #352 to prove fallen angel, you two can even team up if that makes you feel better. I'd love to read it, as I'm sure others would too.


 
Johnny_B said:
You both of you prove my point, you can not ever get the contextual exegete of one verse making it understandable, that's why you do not get the greater context of Genesis 4:11-6:1.

Genesis 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, (in what days and also after?) when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. (who are the children born to them?) These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

How hard is that? No wonder you come up with the non-sense you believe. You do not, believe what you read, you read what you believe. No reading into the verse to fit a belief, it's reading the verse and believing it. But that was one rabbit trail that I went down. Take the contextual exegete challenge in post #352 to prove fallen angel, you two can even team up if that makes you feel better. I'd love to read it, as I'm sure others would too.
Click to expand...

Hahha you can not even get the English right....blah blah blah<---can you read that

and will Add....come up with? You should lay off the juice pal......I never came up with anything and yet you would have us believe a saved man and a lost woman had sex and it prodjuced a giant....yeahhhhhh okkkkkkk.....right!
 
Last edited:
Johnny_B said:
You both of you prove my point, you can not ever get the contextual exegete of one verse making it understandable, that's why you do not get the greater context of Genesis 4:11-6:1.

Genesis 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, (in what days and also after?) when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. (who are the children born to them?) These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

How hard is that? No wonder you come up with the non-sense you believe. You do not, believe what you read, you read what you believe. No reading into the verse to fit a belief, it's reading the verse and believing it. But that was one rabbit trail that I went down. Take the contextual exegete challenge in post #352 to prove fallen angel, you two can even team up if that makes you feel better. I'd love to read it, as I'm sure others would too.
Click to expand...

first man i think dc and the other both agree with you that they are angels, im not positive but i think so.

now calm down a little first :)

im not really following you this post i kind of see that you are making the point that the children are the nephilim? is that correct to think thats what you are saying? that they produced the nephilim?
 
dcontroversal said:
My point was simple...if one buys into the Sethite lineage thing then one must believe a saved man had sex with a lost woman and it produced giants....if that was the case then we should have the same thing non stop world wide as saved men have taken lost women throughout the ages....point being....it had to he something other than saved men and lost women having sex which led to giants.....I have no problem acknowledging something different than saved men and lost women....it doez not bear out....that was the point my friend....and thanks for the statement about serving.....Semper Fi bro
Click to expand...
LOL Wonderful...Sometimes I display just enough intelligence to avoid running into walls...I understand you now...My daughter is a marine too.
 
Hahha you can not even get the English right....blah blah blah<---can you read that
Click to expand...


i made the mistake of mouthing off to DC with the blah blah blah, he slapped me in the face, made me drop and give him twenty. he is so strict!
 
followjesus said:
first man i think dc and the other both agree with you that they are angels, im not positive but i think so.

now calm down a little first :)

im not really following you this post i kind of see that you are making the point that the children are the nephilim? is that correct to think thats what you are saying? that they produced the nephilim?
Click to expand...
Brother I do not believe these are angels fallen or other wise. The idea that fallen angels had sex with women if the perverted thinking of the natural mind. The reason I keep making this challenge is because if you can not exegete the context of these Scriptures, you will pervert others as well. Everyone that holds and regurgitates this non-sense have an attitude that they have this special understanding of the Bible by reading books outside of the Bible and twisting other verses to fit their teaching. I am not talking commentaries, I'm talking about books that people what to hold in the same esteem as the Bible.

They make immature comments, but they will not do an contextual exegete of the Scriptures in question to prove their point of fallen angels in Genesis 6:2, 4, because as you seen they take 6:4 to mean something it does not contextually say and by that they twist the rest of the context of the Scriptures in question. It's been two weeks or more since I've made this challenge and well keep doing it. To show that these that teach this have not contextual evidence to their teaching.
 
Johnny_B said:
Brother I do not believe these are angels fallen or other wise. The idea that fallen angels had sex with women if the perverted thinking of the natural mind. The reason I keep making this challenge is because if you can not exegete the context of these Scriptures, you will pervert others as well. Everyone that holds and regurgitates this non-sense have an attitude that they have this special understanding of the Bible by reading books outside of the Bible and twisting other verses to fit their teaching. I am not talking commentaries, I'm talking about books that people what to hold in the same esteem as the Bible.

They make immature comments, but they will not do an contextual exegete of the Scriptures in question to prove their point of fallen angels in Genesis 6:2, 4, because as you seen they take 6:4 to mean something it does not contextually say and by that they twist the rest of the context of the Scriptures in question. It's been two weeks or more since I've made this challenge and well keep doing it. To show that these that teach this have not contextual evidence to their teaching.
Click to expand...

Well Son...You do have the right to disbeliever anything your tiny little heart desires I told you what I read in your funny little challenge...You can take it or leave it. You're all grown up now..
 
jaybird88 said:
i made the mistake of mouthing off to DC with the blah blah blah, he slapped me in the face, made me drop and give him twenty. he is so strict!
Click to expand...

It is all good bro.....hahaha 12 weeks of Marine Boot camp folllwed by 6 weeks of ITS will build about 40 pounds of muscle hahahhaha
 
It's been two weeks or more since I've made this challenge and well keep doing it. To show that these that teach this have not contextual evidence to their teaching.
Click to expand...


I have proven this over and over to be angels, but the problem is that you and others don't have understanding nor will you admit to it.

"When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. "

"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.."

In both scriptures above, there is a grammatical distinction made between "man" and "the sons of God," which you refuse to acknowledge. Ergo, the sons of God that take wives from the daughters of mankind are not humans. I have also proven to you that "the sons of God" who appear with Satan in Job are also angels, but you don't comprehend that either. So far you have proven nothing regarding this issue!

"Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. the LORD said to Satan, “From where have you come?” Satan answered the LORD and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it." - Job 1:6

"Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them to present himself before the LORD. And the LORD said to Satan, “From where have you come?” Satan answered the LORD and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it.” - Job 2:1-2

In the two scriptures above, the sons of God are shown to be angels, utilizing the same designation as in Gen.6:1,4. These sons of God who are appearing before the Lord are not men as some have attempted to claim. That Satan appears with them demonstrates that the sons of God are angels. Ergo the sons of God and Satan are of the same genre, i.e. angelic beings.

Furthermore, God asks Satan where he has come from and Satan says "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it," which would demonstrate that where Satan and the sons of God are appearing before God is in the heavenly realms and not on earth, which would also disprove the idea of the sons of God as referring to men.

Then there is Enoch's detailed account of this entire event regarding the angels, the sons of heaven, of whom Jude quoted from. Now since Jude quotes from Enoch, then the prophesies of Enoch should be considered valid, that and the fact that the prophesies of Enoch was apart of the scriptures up until the 3rd century. You can't recognize that Jude quoted from Enoch and then throw out the rest of the information that is contained within Enoch's prophesies regarding the angels who took wives from the progeny of men.


 
Last edited:
Johnny_B said:
The idea that fallen angels had sex with women if the perverted thinking of the natural mind.
Click to expand...

are the words of Jude the perverted thinking of the natural mind?

Jude 1:7
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

the word for strange is eteras meaning of uncertain origin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back