Angels reproducing with humans possible?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

The Hebrew "words" for giant/giants are: Nephilim, Rephaite/Rephaim, gibber, Rapha/Raphah

No...we covered that Nephlim does not MEAN "Giant"

Gibbor means "Mighty"

Let me recap again. Nephilim refers to a race of beings who were all big. The other word means "Giants"

It doesn't say giants. It says, "the giant" as in one.

(18) After this, there was again war with the Philistines at Gob (Gezer). Then Sibbecai the Hushathite slew Saph (Sippai), who was a descendant of the giant. (AMP)

(18) And it came to pass after this, that there was again war with the Philistines at Gob: then Sibbecai the Hushathite slew Saph, who was of the sons of the giant. (ASV)

(18) There was another battle with the Philistines at Gob, where Sibbecai from Hushah killed a descendant of the Rephaim named Saph. (CEV)

(18) And it came to pass after this, that there was again a battle with the Philistines at Gob: then Sibbechai the Hushathite slew Saph, which was of the sons of the giant. (KJV)


I couldn't say because it says - "the giant" and not "giants".

2Sa 21:16 And Ishbi-benob, one of the descendants of the giants, whose spear weighed three hundred shekels of bronze, and who was armed with a new sword, thought to kill David.

NET Bible says
27 tn This name has the definite article and may be intended to refer to a group of people rather than a single individual with this name.

Here are the giants? When it says that "he alone was left of the Rephaim"?

He was the last one of His KIND...a race (plural) of Giants..the very fact it says

"he alone was left of the Rephaim"

Is proof. Also the IM ending us PLURAL

It's almost like, us fo' and no mo'.

2 Samuel 21:22 "These four were descendants of Rapha in Gath, and they fell at the hands of David and his men." (NIV)

Rapha was the name of a Giant
2Sa 21:22 These four were the descendants of Rapha who lived in Gath; they were killed by David and his soldiers.

rāp̱āh: A proper noun designating Rapha:
A. The father of several giants among David's enemies (1Sa_21:16, 1Sa_21:18, 1Sa_21:20, 1Sa_21:22; 1Ch_20:6, 1Ch_20:8). For the King James Version and New American Standard Bible see rāp̱a’ (H7497,III).

Is that THE Giant, The Rapha?

You are confusing a Giant named Rapha with a group of Giants called Rephaim

clearly you can see these words are different.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I was noticing this translation that is ONLY in the NET - taking huge liberties here.



What I've read about the NET.

See the first two words "SO ALSO"?

Literally means from the Greek " Or "in the same way as."

It's not taking liberty. That is what the Grammar implies.

(ALT) Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, in a similar manner to these [angels], having indulged in sexual sin and having gone after different flesh [fig., having engaged in homosexual sex], are exhibited [as] an example of suffering [the] divine justice of eternal fire.

(GNB) Remember Sodom and Gomorrah, and the nearby towns, whose people acted as those angels did and indulged in sexual immorality and perversion: they suffer the punishment of eternal fire as a plain warning to all.

The NET bible translates grammatically, thought for thought and with consideration to idioms and figures of speech

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

See the first two words "SO ALSO"?

Literally means from the Greek " Or "in the same way as."

It's not taking liberty. That is what the Grammar implies.

(ALT) Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, in a similar manner to these [angels], having indulged in sexual sin and having gone after different flesh [fig., having engaged in homosexual sex], are exhibited [as] an example of suffering [the] divine justice of eternal fire.

(GNB) Remember Sodom and Gomorrah, and the nearby towns, whose people acted as those angels did and indulged in sexual immorality and perversion: they suffer the punishment of eternal fire as a plain warning to all.

The NET bible translates grammatically, thought for thought and with consideration to idioms and figures of speech

I read Jude 7 - "Even as" referring to verse 5 concerning the punishment and destruction of those in Egypt who believed not.

As far as the NET Bible - IMO, if a translation doesn't preserve the literary beauty of the Hebrew, which is necessary, it is an inaccurate translation.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I read Jude 7 - "Even as" referring to verse 5 concerning the punishment and destruction of those in Egypt who believed not.

As far as the NET Bible - IMO, if a translation doesn't preserve the literary beauty of the Hebrew, which is necessary, it is an inaccurate translation.

Define "Literary beauty" and how it is necessary.

As far as I am concerned the NET translates the OT probably better than most others do.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I read Jude 7 - "Even as" referring to verse 5 concerning the punishment and destruction of those in Egypt who believed not.

That makes the grammar incoherent imo

(7) This verse begins with hos (ὁς), an adverb of comparison having the meanings of “in the same manner as, after the fashion of, as, just as.” Here it introduces a comparison showing a likeness between the angels of verse 6 and the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha of this verse. But the likeness between them lies deeper than the fact that both were guilty of committing sin. It extends to the fact that both were guilty of the same identical sin. The punctuation of the A.V. is misleading, as an examination of Greek text discloses.

The A.V. punctuation gives the reader the impression that Sodom and Gomorrha committed fornication and that the cities about them committed fornication in like manner to the two cities named. The phrase “in like manner” is according to the punctuation construed with the words “the cities about them.” A rule of Greek grammar comes into play here. The word “cities” is in the nominative case. The words “in like manner” are in the accusative case and are classified as an adverbial accusative by Dana and Mantey in their Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (pp. 91, 93).

This latter construction is related syntactically, not with a word in the nominative case but with the verbal form in the sentence. All of which means that the words “in like manner” are related to the verbal forms, “giving themselves over to fornication” and “going after strange flesh.” In addition to all this, the Greek text has toutois (τουτοις), “to these.” Thus, the translation should read, “just as Sodom and Gomorrha and the cities about them, in like manner to these, having given themselves over to fornication and having gone after strange flesh.”

The sense of the entire passage (vv. 6, 7) is that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha and the cities about them, in like manner to these (the angels), have given themselves over to fornication and have gone after strange flesh. That means that the sin of the fallen angels was fornication. This sin on the part of the angels is described in the words, “going after strange flesh.” The word “strange” is heteros (ἑτερος), “another of a different kind.” That is, these angels transgressed the limits of their own natures to invade a realm of created beings of a different nature.

This invasion took the form of fornication, a cohabitation with beings of a different nature from theirs. This takes us back to Genesis 6:1–4 where we have the account of the sons of God (here, fallen angels), cohabiting with women of the human race. For a discussion of this subject, the reader is referred to the author’s volumes, First Peter in the Greek New Testament (pp. 97–107), and The Practical use of the Greek New Testament (pp.31–35).

The words describing both the sin of the angels and of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha, “giving themselves over to fornication” are the translation of ekporneuō (ἐκπορνευω). The prefixed preposition ek (ἐκ) indicates in the usage of the word a lust that gluts itself, satisfies itself completely. The force of ek (ἐκ) which itself means “out,” is “out and out.” It signifies a giving of one’s self utterly.

The words “strange flesh,” that is, flesh of a different and in this case an opposite (diametrically opposed) nature, speak of the angels’ intercourse with women, the latter being forbidden flesh. The sin of the angels was against nature. In the case of the cities mentioned, it was the sin which Paul mentions in Romans 1:27, a departure from the natural use and against nature.

Just as the incarceration of the fallen angels is an example of God’s judgment upon sin, so the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha, “are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” “Are set forth” is prokeimai (προκειμαι). The verb means “to lie exposed,” and is used in classical writings of food on the table ready for the guests, and of a corpse laid out for burial. The word “example” is deigma (δειγμα), from the verb deiknumi, “to display or exhibit.” The noun therefore refers to something which is held up to view as a warning


Wuest, K. S. (1997). Wuest's word studies from the Greek New Testament: For the English reader (Jud 6–7). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

[Praxeas]

7 in a similar manner to these: As the angels had committed sexual immorality with humans, so the citizens of Sodom and Gomorrah had pursued all kinds of sexual perversion (here strange flesh refers to homosexual acts; see Gen. 19:5). They were also judged by God with fire from heaven (see Gen. 19:24).
Radmacher, E. D., Allen, R. B., & House, H. W. (1997). The Nelson Study Bible: New King James Version (Jud 7). Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers.

© “same way” This is an ACCUSATIVE which relates grammatically to the angels (cf. v. 6), not “the neighboring towns.” It has been speculated that Jude used these OT illustrations because as angels took women in Gen. 6, so here men tried to take angels (cf. Gen. 18:22; 19:1). If so, this would be another example of the attempt to mix the orders of creation. However, to me it seems that the inhabitants of Sodom did not know these were angels and thought them to be men (cf. Gen. 18:22).
Utley, R. J. D. (2000). Vol. Volume 11: Jesus' Half-Brothers Speak: James and Jude. Study Guide Commentary Series (94). Marshall, TX: Bible Lessons International.

37 tn “Angels” is not in the Greek text; but the masculine demonstrative pronoun most likely refers back to the angels of v. 6.
Biblical Studies Press. (2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Jud 7). Biblical Studies Press.


C. Sodom and Gomorrah (v. 7).
The phrase “in like manner” suggests that the sins of these cities parallel the fornication of the angels of v. 6. Second Peter 2:6–8 discusses these wicked cities. Jude says that the judgment of these cities is an illustration of hell.
Wiersbe, W. W. (1992). Wiersbe’s expository outlines on the New Testament (785). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

[Praxeas]

Ver. 7. ὡς Σόδομα καὶ Γόμορρα καὶ αἱ περὶ αὐτὰς πόλεις. The 3rd example of Divine judgment differs from the two others, as it tells only of the punishment, not of the fall from grace. Hence the difference of connexion ἀγγέλους τε.… ὡς Σόδομα. Cf. 2 Pet. 2:6, πόλεις Σοδόμων καὶ Γομόρρας καταστροφῇ κατέκρινεν. The destruction was not limited to these two cities, but extended to all the neighbouring country (Gen. 19:25, called Πεντάπολις in Wisd. 10:6), including the towns of Admah and Zeboim (Deut. 29:23, Hos. 11:8). Zoar was spared at the request of Lot.

τὸν ὅμοιον τρόπον τούτοις ἑκπορνεύσασαι. For the adverbial acc., cf. Matt, 23:37, ὃν τρόπον ἐπισυνάγει ὄρνις τὰ νοσσία, 2 Macc. 15:39, ὃν τρόπον οἶνος … ἀποτελεῖ, οὕτω καὶ, Luc. Catapl. 6 τεθνᾶσι τὸν ὅμοιον τρόπον. “Like them.” i.e. the fallen angels. The two judgments are similarly joined in Test. Nepht. 3, μὴ γένησθε ὡς Σόδομα ἥτις ἐνήλλαξε τάξιν φύσεως αὐτῆς. Ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ οἱ Ἐγρήγορες ἐνήλλαξαν τάξιν φύσεως αὐτῶν, οὕς κατηράσατο Κύριος. Others understand τούτοις of the libertines who are subsequently referred to as οὖτοι (vv. 8, 10, 12, 16, 19); but the beginning of ver. 8 (μέντοι καὶ οὗτοι) seems to distinguish between them and the preceding. The verb ἐκπ. occurs in Gen. 38:24 of Tamar, Exod. 34:15, 16, (μή ποτε) ἐκπορνεύσωσιν ὀπίσω τῶν θεῶν αὐτῶν, Lev. 17:7, Hos. 4:12, Ezek. 16:26, 28, 33.

ἀπελθοῦσαι ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας. In the case of the angels the forbidden flesh (lit. “other than that appointed by God”) refers to the intercourse with women; in the case of Sodom to the departure from the natural use (Rom. 1:27), what Philo calls ἀνόμους καὶ ἑκθέσμους μίξεις (de Gig. M i. p. 267), cf. Exod. 30:9. οὐκ ἀνοίσεις θυμίαμα ἕτερον. For the post-classical phrase cf. 2 Pet. 2:10, τοὺς ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἐν ἐπιθυμίᾳ μιασμοῦ πορευομένους, Deut. 4:3, ἐπορεύθη ὀπίσω Βεελφεγώρ Jer. 2:2, 3.

πρόκεινται δεῖγμα πυρὸς αἰωνίου δίκην ὑπέχουσαι. Cf. Enoch lxvii. 12, “this judgment wherewith the angels are judged is a testimony for the kings and the mighty,” 2 Pet. 2:6, ὑπόδειγμα μελλόντων ἀσεβέσιν τεθεικώς, 1 Cor. 10:6, 11 τύποι ἐγένοντο, Heb. 4:11 ἵνα μὴ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ τις ὑποδείγματι πέσῃ τῆς ἀπειθείας. The present aspect of the Lacus Asphaltites was a conspicuous image of the lake of fire and brimstone prepared for Satan and his followers, Apoc. 19:20, 20:10, 21:8. It is questioned whether πυρός is governed by δεῖγμα or δίκην. If by δίκην, then the burning of Sodom is itself spoken of as still going on (eternal), and this is in accordance with Jewish belief as recorded in Wisd. 10:7 (πῦρ Πενταπόλεως) ἦς ἔτι μαρτύριον τῆς πονηρίας καπνιζομένη καθέστηκε χέρσος, Philo (De Abr. M. ii. xxi.), μέχρι νῦν καίεται. τὸ γὰρ κεραύνιον πῦρ ἥκιστα σβεννύμενον ἢ νέμεται ἢ ἐντύφεται. πίστις δὲ σαφεστάτη τὰ δρώμενα, τοῦ γὰρ συμβεβηκότος πάθους σημεῖόν ἐστιν ὅ τε ἀναδιδόμενος ἀεὶ καπνὸς καὶ ὃ μεταλλεύουσι θεῖον, ib. V. Moys. M. ii. p. 143. Some disallow this sense of αἰώνιος and think that it can only be used of hell-fire, as in 4 Macc. 12:12 (the words of the martyr contrasting the fires of present torture with the eternal flames awaiting the persecutor), ταμιεύεταί σε ἡ θεία δίκη πυκνοτέρῳ καὶ αἰωνίῳ πυρί, καὶ βάσανοι εἰς ὅλον τὸν αἰῶνα οὐκ ἀνήσουσί σε. For an examination of the word see Jukes, Restitution of all Things, p. 67 n. and cf. Jer.23:39, 40, Ezek. 16:53, 55 (on the restoration of Sodom), 47:1–12 (a prophecy of the removal of the curse of the Dead Sea and its borders), Enoch, x. 5 and 12, where the εἰς αἰῶνα of the former verse is equivalent to seventy generations in the latter, also ver. 10 where ζωὴ αἰώνιος is reckoned at 500 years. As the meaning of δεῖγμα is made clear by the following participial clause, it seems unnecessary to take it with πυρός in the sense of “an example or type of eternal fire,” which would escape the difficulty connected with αἰωνίου, but leaves δίκην ὑπέχουσαι (for which cf. Xen. Mem. ii. 1, 8, 2 Macc. 4:48) a somewhat otiose appendage. In the book of Enoch (lxvii. 4 foll.) the angels who sinned are said to be imprisoned in a burning valley (Hinnom, ch. 27) in which there was a great swelling of waters, accompanied by a smell of sulphur; and “that valley of the angels burned continually under the earth”. Charles notes on this that “the Gehenna valley here includes the adjacent country down to the Dead Sea. A subterranean fire was believed to exist under the Gehenna valley.”


Mayor, J. The General Epistle of Jude. In The Expositor's Greek Testament, Volume V: Commentary (260–261). New York: George H. Doran Company.

[Praxeas]

The word grammatically is connected to the previous verse, which is the function it serves anyways. Thats what conjunctions do

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Define "Literary beauty" and how it is necessary.

As far as I am concerned the NET translates the OT probably better than most others do.

It's like the beauty of the Spanish language. We say, "You are welcome". In Spanish it is "de nada, meaning "It is nothing". I don't want to lose that. Some translations, like the NET, are just flat. It doesn't appeal to me.

When I read and teach John 14:15, I don't want to see "If you love me you will OBEY what I command."

I want to read and teach - "If you love me, KEEP my commandments."

The word has more expression as KEEP is defined as "to guard by keeping an eye on. To hold fast." There is a beauty in that expression.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The word grammatically is connected to the previous verse, which is the function it serves anyways. Thats what conjunctions do

You can't say that verse 6 and 7 are not pointing back to verse 5 in way of "remembrance". The angels did their thing, which isn't explained. Sodom and Gomorrah did their thing. Both relate to the unbelief and punishment of Egypt. So trying to tie in fornication to both 6 and 7 is not provable in my estimation.

So, I am done with this conversation. None of the theologians I have read agree on the points - angels or giants. It's looking like a 50/50 view either way.

I was reading an article on CARM, yesterday, writing on the "sons of God", and the author states - "Another important matter to consider is that Nephilim are mentioned again in Numbers 13:33 although it could also be that the spies lied when they reported there were giants."

Even if you disagree, the thought is still there - the spies lied when they reported there were giants.

Anyhoo, I'm out. I haven't gained anything other than I don't believe the angels copulated with man nor dinosaurs - big stuff, tall stuff! No point in dragging out the argument.