The Old Testament tells us Humans and Demons had children Nephilim ? (Any thoughts)

[GiftofMercy]

The Holy Spirit is not a Son of God, the Holy Spirit is God.

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

St Ephraim the Syrian has a good commentary on this matter in his Commentary on Genesis. One of the earliest Christian sources to reject the “fallen angel” theory was Julius Africanus:

When men multiplied on the earth, the angels of heaven came together with the daughters of men. In some copies I found “the sons of God.” What is meant by the Spirit, in my opinion, is that the descendants of Seth are called the sons of God on account of the righteous men and patriarchs who have sprung from him, even down to the Saviour Himself ; but that the descendants of Cain are named the seed of men, as having nothing divine in them, on account of the wickedness of their race and the inequality of their nature, being a mixed people, and having stirred the indignation of God. But if it is thought that these refer to angels, we must take them to be those who deal with magic and jugglery, who taught the women the motions of the stars and the knowledge of things celestial, by whose power they conceived the giants as their children, by whom wickedness came to its height on the earth, until God decreed that the whole race of the living should perish in their impiety by the deluge.–Fragment 2, Extant Works of Julius Africanus

 

[RaisedCatholic]

There are different interpretations of this passage. One popular one is that the “sons of God” were fallen angels, which is how they are referred to in the Torah & other places in the OT (like Job). The “daughters of men” refers to human females. The Bible gives numerous examples of angels (both holy & demonic) taking human form & performing human functions, like eating. While Jesus said holy angels in Heaven, don’t marry or are given to marriage, this still leaves the door open for fallen angels to reject their natural state & disobey God to marry & have sexual relations. This seems to be what 2 Peter & Jude are referring to when they reference the pre-Flood events in Genesis 6. Also, 1 Enoch & the book of Jubilees also state fallen angels & human females having sexual relations, which seem to be referencing Genesis 6. Don’t think it goes on now, since God banished them “in chains” in Tartarus (2 Peter). The offspring of this unholy union would be the “mighty men of renown, heroes of old,” who lived at the same time as the “Nephilim” - meaning they were not the same group of beings.

Again, that is just one interpretation.

 

[RaisedCatholic]

This is the first I heard of this. Can you provide chapter and verse references?

Genesis Ch.6

 

[EloyCraft]

says that the Nephilim were already there when the Sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful.

I think the first Nephilim was Lamech seventh generator of Cain’s line. He personifies ever increasing sin. He threatens other’s with unsurpassing vengence.

 

[SetInMotion]

“sons of God” were fallen angels, which is how they are referred to in the Torah & other places in the OT (like Job).

Another reason to consider why the term “ sons of God" in Genesis 6 cannot be referring to the rebellious angels is because the text would then have more likely read "the devils (apostate angels) … took them wives" , but the text obviously does not read in this manner, and even further is that 2 of the 3 texts, which also read "sons of God" , in the Book of Job [which many incorrectly compare Genesis 6 to], are already referring to Lucifer at so early a point as "Satan" [the Adversary/Accuser], which is in stark contrast to the "sons of God" (of the unfallen worlds) . Even further we may already see in Genesis 3:1,2,4,13-14, he is already referred to as the "serpent" :

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them .

Job 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan , Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it .

Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.

Job 2:2 And the LORD said unto Satan , From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it .

This meeting (like as 1 Kings 22:19; 2 Chronicles 18:18), took place in Heaven, since it was "before the LORD" , and satan had left the earth to come to it, and to come "among them" . These "sons of God" in Job 1 & 2, are the rulers of the unfallen worlds.

None of these Job texts , in regards the “ sons of God” , are dealing with the timing or context of the Genesis 6-9 account.

Job 1:6, 2:1 deals with the timeframe in a period well after the flood, in Heaven (3rd) , and Job 38:4-7 deals with the timeframe long before the flood, in Heaven (3rd) , when the earth was created, when there was no man-kind as Adam yet.

The only texts in Job which are dealing directly with the timeframe of the flood , are Job 22:15,16,17, 26:5, and please notice it speaks of “men” (mankind, not angelic beings).

Job 22:15 Hast thou marked the old way which wicked men have trodden?

Job 22:16 Which were cut down out of time, whose foundation was overflown with a flood :

Job 22:17 Which said unto God, Depart from us: and what can the Almighty do for them?

Job 26:5 Dead things are formed from under the waters, and the inhabitants thereof.

 

[Stannis]

If you are seriously interested in answering this question I would recommend reading Malleus Maleficarumemphasized text** by Fr. Heinrich Kramer (1486). He dedicates an entire chapter to the question of whether demons can reproduce humans. A little warning: this book is not light reading and its contents have been the subject of criticism. It was used during the Inquisition to prosecute witches. Definitely not easy reading.

I recommend troubling yourself with more productive religious matters.

 

[SetInMotion]

This seems to be what 2 Peter & Jude are referring to when they reference the pre-Flood events in Genesis 6.

Let us read Jude 1:5-8 notice the chiasm:

Jude 1:5 [A.] - speaks of Men and rebellion, “the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt” , but yet there were those who “believed not” [faithless, and so they continued in sin] - these “ungodly” were destroyed

Jude 1:6 [B.] - speaks of Angels and rebellion, those who left their “first estate” [like Lucifer/Satan, the one-time “anointed cherub that coverth” [Ezekiel 28:14] at the Throne of God] - these who “kept not their first estate” and “left their habitation” [these rebellious Angels willfully, by the iniquitous “traffick” [Ezekiel 28:18] of Lucifer/Satan, refused the good position God had originally and lovingly given them and left it and their responsibility, they left the place which would have forever filled their joy and happiness] are reserved in “chains of darkness” unto “the judgment of the great day”

Jude 1:7 [C.] - speaks of Men and rebellion at “Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them” , in all manner of abominations “giving themselves over to fornication” and “going after strange flesh” - these were set forth for an example for all “ungodly” who will be destroyed by fire in the final meting out of judgment in that final day

Each a separate event in time Jude 1:5 - Egypt, Jude 1:6 - Heaven, Jude 1:7 - Sodom and Gomorrah, etc, none mentioning Noah or the Flood.

Jude 1:8 actually seals this Chiasm in its singular verse by covering again those events in reverse order. Notice of Jude 1:8 :

“dreamers defile the flesh” Jude 1:8 [C1] - compare to Jude 1:7 [C.] [as those in Sodom/Gomorrah]

“despise dominion” Jude 1:8 [B1.] - compare to Jude 1:6 [B.] [as the Angels despised God and their God-given place]

“speak evil of dignities” Jude 1:8 [A1.] - compare to Jude 1:5 [A.] [as they did to Moses]

The chiasm reveals “defile the flesh” [ vs 8 C1] has nothing to do with and are not applied to the Angel passage and those who “kept not their first estate” and having “left their habitation” [ vs 6 B. ] , but rather refers directly to the passage dealing with Men of “Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them” who “gave themselves over to fornication” and “going after strange flesh” [ vs 7 C.] .

The text of Jude even speaks of hetero-sarx (differing flesh; vs 7), not homo-sarx (same flesh). For angelic hosts have celestial bodies/flesh and are a differing “kind” of creature than the terrestrial body/flesh of man-“kind”. Kind can only bring forth after kind according to the law of “kind” in Genesis.

Jude and Peter are directly comparable, upon request, or consider the following link which is useful I find, having seen nothing close to it in detail - Link

There is no record in either Jude or Peter’s epistle, in which angels and men actually copulate (being foreign to all of scripture from Genesis to Revelation).

 

[SetInMotion]

This seems to be what 2 Peter & Jude are referring to when they reference the pre-Flood events in Genesis 6.

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. - Jude 1:7

ὡς Σόδομα καὶ Γόμορρα καὶ αἱ περὶ αὐτὰς πόλεις τὸν ὅμοιον τούτοις τρόπον ἐκπορνεύσασαι καὶ ἀπελθοῦσαι ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας πρόκεινται δεῖγμα, πυρὸς αἰωνίου δίκην ὑπέχουσαι. - Jude 1:7 Greek

The two words/phrases are not the same and do not meant the same thing.

“Fornication” is one thing, and the “going after” [but not obtaining] another. There is no record of men anywhere in Scripture “fornicating” with angelic hosts [it is the figment of the carnal imagination], and especially not in this verse, since it is a direct reference to Genesis 17-19 , wherein the corrupt men of the city of Sodom, never laid a finger on any of the angelic host, though they “went after” them, they believing them to have been human men, because the angels had veiled their glory as a test to Lot and to the City itself.

Angels having another kind of “flesh” than human flesh, it is hetero-sarx. The very Chiasm of the text removes any possibility of angel-fornication or procreation, and further-more, ‘fornication’ [as you hold to among devils/humans] in no way states anything about procreation or giving of offspring, for differing “kinds” cannot bring offspring, as it is written in Genesis 1 , for “kind” may only bring forth after “kind” . The two [procreation, fornication] are not equal terms either. Additionally, in Genesis 6 , wherein the “sons of God”, not ‘devils’ "took them wives " . Since when is marriage [as Christ Jesus stated about the days of Noah] to “wives” , fornication, since it is written:

Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. - Hebrews 13:4

Man-kind “of this world” has “seed” . Where in any text, do angels [which are not of this world], ever have “seed”? Please produce that text as soon as you are able.

Lastly, out of all of Scripture, nowhere, in any text, in the lists of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, is ever given as devil-human fornication.

Nowhere in Jude, Genesis 17-19, did any man actually perpetrate any sexual contact with the “two angels”, but scripture elsewhere proclaims more specifically the “abominations” which actually took place there in those cities [homosexual acts amongst men and amongst women, both laying with beasts, incest [as even Lot’s daughters still managed to retain the idea of from such wicked cities, Genesis 19:31-38], all manner of fornication, lasciviousness, etc.].

 

[SetInMotion]

Also, 1 Enoch &… also state fallen angels & human females having sexual relations, which seem to be referencing Genesis 6.

So-called 1 Enoch is apocryphal and pseudopigraphical at best.

Some have said that the quote, “Enoch also, the seventh from Adam” (it actually comes from Genesis and Deuteronomy, of which Jude and 1 Enoch are citing) still comes from the ‘pseudepigraphal 1st book of Enoch chapter 60 [LX] verse 8’, being a part of what the scholars say is the ‘psuedepigraphal book of Noah’ a non-extant text which the ‘1st book of Enoch quotes/sources’ .

The absolute fascinating thing is that though the ‘1st book of Enoch’ attributes this portion [ chapter 60 [LX] ] to ‘Enoch’ , it is impossible to be so, by the very first line in the text, which reads,

“1. In the year five hundred , in the seventh month, on the fourteenth day of the month in the life of †Enoch† . In that Parable I saw how a mighty quaking made the heaven of heavens to quake, and the host of the Most High, and the angels, a thousand thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand, were disquieted with a great disquiet.” [quoted from source, ‘1st book of Enoch chapter 60 [LX]
verse 1’ , but actually is quoted and changed from the source the ‘book of Noah’ ] - http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe063.htm http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe063.htm

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Noah http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Noah

How do we know? Well, what does the Scripture actually say regarding Enoch?

“And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years :” [Genesis 5:23]

“And Enoch walked with God: and he [was] not; for God took him .” [Genesis 5:24]

Go back and re-read that 'source ’ again, as it says, “in the year five hundred , in the seventh month, on the fourteenth day of the month, in the life of +Enoch+ …” . Enoch never lived to reach the age of 500 while on earth. The name was changed when it was ‘incorporated’ into the ‘source’ ‘1st book of Enoch’ .

The actual “Enoch” only lived on earth 365 years [Genesis 5:18-24] and was long gone before Noah began preaching about the 120 years [Genesis 6:3] before the Flood came. Noah was 600 years old when he and his family got into the Ark [Genesis 7:6,11] .

Secondarily, the portion in Jude, that is supposed (without evidence) to be citing from 1 Enoch (rather than actually Genesis and Deuteronomy), never once cites from the portion of chapters 6 or 7, which he (Jude) would have had to do, to validate anything therein in so-called 1 Enoch. It is merely assumed into the text eisegetically and without scriptural foundation to do so.

 

[englands123]

There seems to be many who believe the “Sons of God” were not human. At 1st I thought the same they were not humans.

Setin, your earlier post on this thread made me change my mind.

Is it possible to prove either way ?

 

[TheHolyTrinity]

My understanding through reading was that the Nephilim is a broader term, used to describe a larger people or race of people who caused others to fall. That physically they averaged between 9 feet and 13 feet tall.

The Nephilim are never presented positively in Scripture or Tradition and were opponents of the Israelite’s. A partition in nations so to speak. I understand through reading that the Sons of God (Nephilim) of Genesis 6 are nothing other than fallen angelic beings, known in tradition as the Watchers (Daniel 4). That illicit sexual unions occurred with human women. These illicit unions were presumably part of Satan’s plan for making war on the seed of the woman.

God punishes mankind by sending a Flood to wipe out the wicked, corrupted race of men. Unfortunately ongoing sexual relations occur after the Flood and the nations begin to adore the Nephilim / Watchers as gods in exchange for their knowledge. God punishes these nations by handing them over to the Nephilim/Watchers, who become the gods of the nations.

Tertullian (155 – 240 AD) was an African Christian theologian from the Roman province of Carthage. He was a prolific writer and his works are the foundation of Christian thought in the language of Latin. Outside of the Bible itself, he is the earliest believer on record to write about the concept of the trinity. On the Genesis 6 incursion he wrote:

“We are instructed, moreover, by our sacred books how from certain angels, who fell of their own free-will, there sprang a more wicked demon-brood, condemned of God along with the authors of their race, and that chief we have referred to. It will for the present be enough, however, that some account is given of their work. Their great business is the ruin of mankind. So, from the very first, spiritual wickedness sought our destruction. They inflict, accordingly, upon our bodies diseases and other grievous calamities, while by violent assaults they hurry the soul into sudden and extraordinary excesses.” – Apology, Ch. XXII.

 

[englands123]

This was my understanding also. Not human until reading some posts. But now I’m very confused who sons of God are.