The 'sons of God' and Giants

[greatlybeloved]

The 'sons of God' and Giants

Genesis 6:2-4 "That the sons of God saw the daughters ofmen that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose... ¶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".

The sons of God:
There are mainly two interpretations as to who the ' sons of God 'of the above verses are:

1. Godly line of Seth
2. Fallen angels

Godly line of Seth:
Some think the "sons of God" are the male descendants of Seth (Adam's son) and "daughters of men" are female descendants ofCain. This argument has no Scriptural explanation whatsoever.

Fallen angels:
We see some instances in the Old Testament where the angels are called " sons of God" ( Job 1:6, Job 2:1and Job 38:7). But for some it is hard to see how angels can take women (daughtersof men) and beget children, especially in the light of Matthew 22:30 and Mark 12:25, that angels are not given in marriage.

Doesn't matter who they are:
Some others go on to say it doesn't matter who the "sons ofGod" are as long as we take 'morals' out of the story. This is the most dangerous view that we neglect to study God's word in depth thinking it is not necessary. " Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain" (James 4:5)?

I believe studying about the "sons of God " would help us UNDERSTAND THE END TIMES, that had been prophesied umpteen times in the Scriptures.


The term "sons of God" as used in the Scriptures has something to do with DIRECT CREATION or DIRECT BEGETTING by God(as opposed to REPRODUCTION).

1. In the Old Testament, the 'sons of God' were referred to the Angels who were created DIRECTLY BY GOD (they were NOT BORN like us). Read this verse, "Where wast thou when I laid the FOUNDATIONS OF THE EARTH?... When the morning stars sang together, and all the SONS OF GOD shouted for joy?" (Job 38:4,7) . It is pretty obvious that they are the angels. He created ALL OF THEM DIRECTLY (Colossians 1:16).


2. And in the New Testament, "sons of God" are referred to the believers. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" (Romans 8:14). And EVERYONE that is IN CHRIST is a NEW CREATURE (2Co 5:17, Ga 6:15). We are BORN OF THE SPIRIT (John 3:6) DIRECTLY. Do you see my point here? We are NEW CREATURES in Christ and born to Godin Spirit (at our being BORN AGAIN). That is why we believers are also called "sons of God" in New Testament. God does not have any 'grand children' but sons and daughters.


3. Adam was called the "son of God" (notice the small letter, 'son' and not 'Son') in Luke 3:38. If you read from verse 23 till the last verse, we see different people being called the sons of their father. But Adam had no earthly father. He was CREATED DIRECTLY by God, that is why the Scriptures call him "son ofGod" (Note: Not "Son of God" with CAPITAL 'S', that title belongs to the Lord Jesus alone)

This shows how carefully and accurately the Scriptures are written. "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, PURIFIED SEVEN TIMES..." (Psalms 12:6-7)

When it is so consistent in the Scriptures on the way "sons of God" is used, I see no reason why the "sons of God" are actually "sons of Men"!!?? It is simply a denial of what is written plainly in the Scriptures. Now let me now explain why I believe that the "sons of God" are actually the fallen angels.


Before going further, let me clear the objection that the angels cannot reproduce (based on Matt 22:30 and Mark 12:25). No where do we read that the angels cannot reproduce. The text simply says they "neither marry, nor are given in marriage". And by careful reading of the text, we find that they are "ANGELS IN HEAVEN". Because it is UNNATURAL to them to marry, as there are no 'female angels'. That is why they "neither marry, nor given in marriage". But we're talking about "sons of God" ON EARTH. Jude talks about the "angels which KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE, BUT LEFT THEIR OWN HABITATION, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day" (Jude 1:6) .

Infact the very fact that the "sons of God" being differentiated from the "daughters of men" is sufficient proof to say that they are NOT the "sons of men".


Giants:
"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" (Genesis 6:4).

These giants were the result of "sons of God" taking "daughters of men" to wives. This is the first mention of "giants" in the Bible. The Next mention is in Numbers 13:33, "And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers , and so we were in their sight".

Og, king of Bashan was a giant, his bed was made of iron and the size was 13 feet tall and 6 feet wide(Deuteronomy 3:11). You can imagine their SIZE. No wonder the children of Israel looked like GRASSHOPPERS before them. This gives us clue that these 'giants' are NOT born to humans. Bible tells that king Og was "remained of the remnant of the giants" (Deuteronomy 3:11, Joshua 13:12). But again we see them in 2 Saumel 21:20-22. David and his servants slew them. No more giants since then!

This phenomena is going to be repeated in the end times. Remember how the Lord Jesus compared the days of Noah and the days of Lot with the end times? The common factor is "giving themselves over to fornication, AND going after STRANGE FLESH" (Jude 1:7). In the days of Noah, the "daughters of men" were given to the "sons of God" and in the days of Lot, people were homosexuals AND they went after the ANGELS, although unknowingly (Genesis 19:1-5). The Lord prophecied, "... as the DAYS OF NOE were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (Mat 24:37). So this going after the "strange flesh" is going to be repeated again. This is not a mere guess, we have a glimpse of it in Daniel.

Daniel 2:40-43 "And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: ..., forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and partof clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, THEY SHALL MINGLE THEMSELVES WITH THE SEEDOF MEN: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay".

We see in this Nebuchadnezzar's dream that "the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron". In verse.43,"THEY shall mingle themselves WITH THE SEED OF MEN" , it is clear that THEY are NOT seed of men but will mingle with the seed of men. And "the seed of men" are compared to CLAY and 'they' are compared to IRON. Who are THEY!!?? You can imagine.

No wonder the little horn (Antichrist) of Daniel 7:20 will be "MORE STOUT than his fellows", he could well be a GIANT.


Bottom line is, no Scripture is given in vain (that we should ignore as 'not necessary') nor is the Scripture is of any private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20). How true it is that "the scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35). "For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; HERE A LITTLE, and THERE A LITTLE" (Isaiah 28:10). That is the Word of God for us!!!

God bless!

 

[Doc]

The 'sons of God' and Giants

Genesis 6:2-4 "That the sons of God saw the daughters ofmen that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose... ¶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".

The sons of God:
There are mainly two interpretations as to who the ' sons of God 'of the above verses are:

1. Godly line of Seth
2. Fallen angels

Godly line of Seth:
Some think the "sons of God" are the male descendants of Seth (Adam's son) and "daughters of men" are female descendants ofCain. This argument has no Scriptural explanation whatsoever.

Fallen angels:
We see some instances in the Old Testament where the angels are called " sons of God" ( Job 1:6, Job 2:1and Job 38:7). But for some it is hard to see how angels can take women (daughtersof men) and beget children, especially in the light of Matthew 22:30 and Mark 12:25, that angels are not given in marriage.

Doesn't matter who they are:
Some others go on to say it doesn't matter who the "sons ofGod" are as long as we take 'morals' out of the story. This is the most dangerous view that we neglect to study God's word in depth thinking it is not necessary. " Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain" (James 4:5)?

I believe studying about the "sons of God " would help us UNDERSTAND THE END TIMES, that had been prophesied umpteen times in the Scriptures.


The term "sons of God" as used in the Scriptures has something to do with DIRECT CREATION or DIRECT BEGETTING by God(as opposed to REPRODUCTION).

1. In the Old Testament, the 'sons of God' were referred to the Angels who were created DIRECTLY BY GOD (they were NOT BORN like us). Read this verse, "Where wast thou when I laid the FOUNDATIONS OF THE EARTH?... When the morning stars sang together, and all the SONS OF GOD shouted for joy?" (Job 38:4,7) . It is pretty obvious that they are the angels. He created ALL OF THEM DIRECTLY (Colossians 1:16).


2. And in the New Testament, "sons of God" are referred to the believers. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" (Romans 8:14). And EVERYONE that is IN CHRIST is a NEW CREATURE (2Co 5:17, Ga 6:15). We are BORN OF THE SPIRIT (John 3:6) DIRECTLY. Do you see my point here? We are NEW CREATURES in Christ and born to Godin Spirit (at our being BORN AGAIN). That is why we believers are also called "sons of God" in New Testament. God does not have any 'grand children' but sons and daughters.


3. Adam was called the "son of God" (notice the small letter, 'son' and not 'Son') in Luke 3:38. If you read from verse 23 till the last verse, we see different people being called the sons of their father. But Adam had no earthly father. He was CREATED DIRECTLY by God, that is why the Scriptures call him "son ofGod" (Note: Not "Son of God" with CAPITAL 'S', that title belongs to the Lord Jesus alone)

This shows how carefully and accurately the Scriptures are written. "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, PURIFIED SEVEN TIMES..." (Psalms 12:6-7)

When it is so consistent in the Scriptures on the way "sons of God" is used, I see no reason why the "sons of God" are actually "sons of Men"!!?? It is simply a denial of what is written plainly in the Scriptures. Now let me now explain why I believe that the "sons of God" are actually the fallen angels.


Before going further, let me clear the objection that the angels cannot reproduce (based on Matt 22:30 and Mark 12:25). No where do we read that the angels cannot reproduce. The text simply says they "neither marry, nor are given in marriage". And by careful reading of the text, we find that they are "ANGELS IN HEAVEN". Because it is UNNATURAL to them to marry, as there are no 'female angels'. That is why they "neither marry, nor given in marriage". But we're talking about "sons of God" ON EARTH. Jude talks about the "angels which KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE, BUT LEFT THEIR OWN HABITATION, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day" (Jude 1:6) .

Infact the very fact that the "sons of God" being differentiated from the "daughters of men" is sufficient proof to say that they are NOT the "sons of men".


Giants:
"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" (Genesis 6:4).

These giants were the result of "sons of God" taking "daughters of men" to wives. This is the first mention of "giants" in the Bible. The Next mention is in Numbers 13:33, "And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers , and so we were in their sight".

Og, king of Bashan was a giant, his bed was made of iron and the size was 13 feet tall and 6 feet wide(Deuteronomy 3:11). You can imagine their SIZE. No wonder the children of Israel looked like GRASSHOPPERS before them. This gives us clue that these 'giants' are NOT born to humans. Bible tells that king Og was "remained of the remnant of the giants" (Deuteronomy 3:11, Joshua 13:12). But again we see them in 2 Saumel 21:20-22. David and his servants slew them. No more giants since then!

This phenomena is going to be repeated in the end times. Remember how the Lord Jesus compared the days of Noah and the days of Lot with the end times? The common factor is "giving themselves over to fornication, AND going after STRANGE FLESH" (Jude 1:7). In the days of Noah, the "daughters of men" were given to the "sons of God" and in the days of Lot, people were homosexuals AND they went after the ANGELS, although unknowingly (Genesis 19:1-5). The Lord prophecied, "... as the DAYS OF NOE were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (Mat 24:37). So this going after the "strange flesh" is going to be repeated again. This is not a mere guess, we have a glimpse of it in Daniel.

Daniel 2:40-43 "And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: ..., forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and partof clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, THEY SHALL MINGLE THEMSELVES WITH THE SEEDOF MEN: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay".

We see in this Nebuchadnezzar's dream that "the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron". In verse.43,"THEY shall mingle themselves WITH THE SEED OF MEN" , it is clear that THEY are NOT seed of men but will mingle with the seed of men. And "the seed of men" are compared to CLAY and 'they' are compared to IRON. Who are THEY!!?? You can imagine.

No wonder the little horn (Antichrist) of Daniel 7:20 will be "MORE STOUT than his fellows", he could well be a GIANT.


Bottom line is, no Scripture is given in vain (that we should ignore as 'not necessary') nor is the Scripture is of any private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20). How true it is that "the scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35). "For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; HERE A LITTLE, and THERE A LITTLE" (Isaiah 28:10). That is the Word of God for us!!!

God bless!

greatlybeloved: I want to commend you on this post. You have approached a subject few today have really researched scripturally. Unfortunately, many are persuaded by notes in some of the study Bibles and they just take for granted these notes are in line with Scripture. But that isn't always the case.

And not that you need affirmation, but I just want to concur with your findings. As a professor of biblical languages in a Theological Seminary a number of years of ago, I just want to confirm that the original languages of Scripture absolutely validate your conclusions. BLESSINGS. Doc

 

[Bridget Yorke]

modern day demons and Aliens

I really appreciated your article, do you think that the modern day Men of iron mixing with clay will be passed off as aliens? How can giants reproduce with human women the babies would be to big for them to carry?

Did you hear that Lady Di supposedly had a clone of the saint Suaire implanted in her and that this may be the abomination of desolation a clone of Christ inhabited by Satan, Prince William who conforms to the discription of the bear feet leopards body lions face a unicorn little horn with a human eye and the red dragon, this is his fathers coat of arms, but I think it says in the bible that there will be many antichrists, they will probably be paving the way,

The collective psyché has definitely been prepared by hollywood with X men and Super Heroes, Alien films starwars etc, ready to gob anything at this stage.....

 

[Boanerges]

I have seen a good dozen theories on this subject., some of them are way out there.:shock:

 

[stephen]

"That there was a fall of angels is certain from Jude 6. The nature of their fall is clearly stated in the same verse. They left of their own oiketerion. This word occurs only in 2 Cor. 6: 2 and Jude 6. where it is used of the spiritual (or resurrection) body.

"The nature of their sin is said to be 'in like manner' to that of the subsequent sins of Sodom and Gomorrha, Jude 7. The time of their fall is given as having taken place 'in the days of Noah' 1 Peter 3:20
2 Peter 2:5 though there may have been a prior fall which caused the end of 'the world that then was' Gen 1: 1, 2. 2 Peter 3:6. For this sin they are 'reserved unto judgment'. 2 Peter 2:4 and are in prison
1 Peter 3: 19.

"There progeny, called Nephilim translated 'giants' were monsters of iniquity, and being superhuman in size and character had to be destroyed. This was the one and only object of the flood.

Dr. E.W.Bullinger's Companion Bible

 

[Doc]

I have seen a good dozen theories on this subject., some of them are way out there.:shock:

Yes sir, my friend, there are theories galore on just about everything involving Biblical matters. That's why I diligently make every effort to stay away from opinion and personal preferences. As interesting as the thoughts of others may be, I hold the line at Scriptural authority alone. Bottom line is, THE BOOK is all that matters. BLESSINGS. Doc

 

[Lion_of_Judah]

"There progeny, called Nephilim translated 'giants' were monsters of iniquity, and being superhuman in size and character had to be destroyed. This was the one and only object of the flood.

Dr. E.W.Bullinger's Companion Bible

Fascinating..



My interest is peaked by your post greatlybeloved.



I'll come back to this.

 

[Boanerges]

Yes sir, my friend, there are theories galore on just about everything involving Biblical matters. That's why I diligently make every effort to stay away from opinion and personal preferences. As interesting as the thoughts of others may be, I hold the line at Scriptural authority alone. Bottom line is, THE BOOK is all that matters. BLESSINGS. Doc

Agreed. But like studies in Revelations they also put together scriptures to support their theories. Some even purporting that Eve had sex with the devil- LOL!
Anyway I promised myself I would not get drawn into another of these threads but by all means enjoy yourself.
Many blessings in His Wonderful Name,
brother Larry.

 

[Doc]

Agreed. But like studies in Revelations they also put together scriptures to support their theories. Some even purporting that Eve had sex with the devil- LOL!
Anyway I promised myself I would not get drawn into another of these threads but by all means enjoy yourself.
Many blessings in His Wonderful Name,
brother Larry.

Bro. Larry, I'm with you on this one. One of the reasons we have so many "interesting" ideas floating around is because folks come up with an idea - and then go to the Scriptures with a “cut & paste” mentality to try and support it. Carl Marx did this with the idea of Communism. And the truth is, you can do it with just about any idea by misapplying Scripture. Entire denominations and cults have been started doing just that.

I have seen a number of folks invest an extravagant amount of time trying to formulate a theory that can never be proved anyway. I know I'm a simple-minded person, but for me, if I can't prove it with Scripture, I try not to waste my time with it.

However, having said that, there is much more truth revealed in Scripture than most people discover through just casual reading. But I will not allow myself - by the grace of God - to get hung up debating things that cannot be proven. I believe 2Timothy 2:23 speaks to this. I do appreciate you Larry and always enjoy your feedback. BLESSINGS. Doc

 

[Deep_MindQuest]

"The first, amd oldest belief, is the sons of God were fallen angels who consorted with human women, producing giant offspring called nephilim. This view was widely held in the world of the 1st century BE, and was supported by Flavius Josephus, Philo, Eusebius, amd many of the Ante-Nicean Fathers including Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Athenagoras and Commodianus"