Angels reproducing with humans possible?

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

This makes more sense to me.

(2Pe 2:4.)
kept not their first estate — Vulgate translates, “their own principality,” which the fact of angels being elsewhere called “principalities,” favors: “their own” implies that, instead of being content with the dignity once for all assigned to them under the Son of God, they aspired higher. Alford thinks the narrative in Gen 6:2 is alluded to, not the fall of the devil and his angels, as he thinks “giving themselves over to fornication” (Jud 1:7) proves; compare Greek, “in like manner to these,” namely, to the angels (Jud 1:6). It seems to me more natural to take “sons of God” (Gen 6:2) of the Sethites, than of angels, who, as “spirits,” do not seem capable of carnal connection.

The parallel, 2Pe 2:4, plainly refers to the fall of the apostate angels. And “in like manner to these,” Jud 1:7, refers to the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, “the cities about them” sinning “in like manner” as “they” did [Estius and Calvin]. Even if Greek “these,” Jud 1:7, refer to the angels, the sense of “in like manner as these” will be, not that the angels carnally fornicated with the daughters of men, but that their ambition, whereby their affections went away from God and they fell, is in God’s view a sin of like kind spiritually as Sodom’s going away from God’s order of nature after strange flesh; the sin of the apostate angels after their kind is analogous to that of the human Sodomites after their kind. Compare the somewhat similar spiritual connection of whoremongers and covetousness. - JFB

Then why are these angels different than the demons which possessed people and were free to roam upon the earth, instead of being reserved in chains.?

6And 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.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Then why are these angels different than the demons which possessed people and were free to roam upon the earth, instead of being reserved in chains.?

6And 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

5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

6 And 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.

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner,

I am just reading the context and how it comes across for me.

The writer is saying, in effect:

"You already knew this, but I am going to bring it to your remembrance how God once delivered Israel and brought them out of Egypt, but after that, there were people who did not continue to believe and so He destroyed them. This is the same thing He is doing with the angels who kept not their first estate. He is reserving them for judgment. Just like what happened and how the people acted in Sodom and Gomorrha, and all the cities around them that acted the same way, they will also suffer the vengeance of eternal fire."

It is the same effect, IMO, as Galatians 1:8 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

IOW, if in heaven or earth you reject me, you will be reserved for judgment in eternal fire.

I am going to have to stop typing today. I am making too many typos. lol

[Sean]

It is physically impossible for an angelic being to mate with a differing kind of species,(as a matter of fact, Jesus said they dont mate at all) the fact is, these beings were old, large human beings that lived hundreds of years. Everything was big in those days, man, animals, cockroaches, plants, you name it......Matt 22:30..For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.


(that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose) Angels marrying humans is against the very words of Jesus

The descendants of Seth were called the “sons of God” while the children of Cain were the “sons of men.” Adam is called “the son of God” in Luke 3:38: “Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

As the “sons of God” (the children of righteous Seth) mingled with the “sons of men” (the children of Cain), they became corrupted through the association. And by intermingling and intermarriage with the daughters of Cain (as Genesis 6:2 states), the sons of Seth (the “sons of God”) lost their peculiar, holy character, forgot who God was, and united with their wives in their idolatry

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

This is the same thing He is doing with the angels who kept not their first estate. He is reserving them for judgment. Just like what happened and how the people acted in Sodom and Gomorrha, and all the cities around them that acted the same way, they will also suffer the vengeance of eternal fire."

What about the phrase "reserved in everlasting chains"
6And 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.

How could these angels be reserved in everlasting chains and yet still be free to roam the earth?

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Then why are these angels different than the demons which possessed people and were free to roam upon the earth, instead of being reserved in chains.?

6And 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.

The "chains," if you'll but carefully note, are referred to as "darkness," which implies "spiritual blindness," or the inability to distinguish between truth and error.

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Sean

It is physically impossible for an angelic being to mate with a differing kind of species,(as a matter of fact, Jesus said they dont mate at all) the fact is, these beings were old, large human beings that lived hundreds of years. Everything was big in those days, man, animals, cockroaches, plants, you name it......Matt 22:30..For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

The Angels of God in heaven, it does not necessarily include the fallen angels.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

What about the phrase "reserved in everlasting chains"
6And 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.

How could these angels be reserved in everlasting chains and yet still be free to roam the earth?

I would think in the same manner that our adversary, the devil, walks about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Sean

It is physically impossible for an angelic being to mate with a differing kind of species,(as a matter of fact, Jesus said they dont mate at all) the fact is, these beings were old, large human beings that lived hundreds of years. Everything was big in those days, man, animals, cockroaches, plants, you name it......Matt 22:30..For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.


(that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose) Angels marrying humans is against the very words of Jesus

The descendants of Seth were called the “sons of God” while the children of Cain were the “sons of men.” Adam is called “the son of God” in Luke 3:38: “Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

As the “sons of God” (the children of righteous Seth) mingled with the “sons of men” (the children of Cain), they became corrupted through the association. And by intermingling and intermarriage with the daughters of Cain (as Genesis 6:2 states), the sons of Seth (the “sons of God”) lost their peculiar, holy character, forgot who God was, and united with their wives in their idolatry

.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Sean

It is physically impossible for an angelic being to mate with a differing kind of species,(as a matter of fact, Jesus said they dont mate at all) the fact is, these beings were old, large human beings that lived hundreds of years. Everything was big in those days, man, animals, cockroaches, plants, you name it......Matt 22:30..For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.


(that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose) Angels marrying humans is against the very words of Jesus

The descendants of Seth were called the “sons of God” while the children of Cain were the “sons of men.” Adam is called “the son of God” in Luke 3:38: “Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

As the “sons of God” (the children of righteous Seth) mingled with the “sons of men” (the children of Cain), they became corrupted through the association. And by intermingling and intermarriage with the daughters of Cain (as Genesis 6:2 states), the sons of Seth (the “sons of God”) lost their peculiar, holy character, forgot who God was, and united with their wives in their idolatry

Sean you believe this?

Well your right.

Jesus said angels can't procreate

Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

When asked by the Pharisees whose wife would the women who was married to seven brothers be at the resurrection, Jesus said non of them.
These men were talking about the law of preserving seed of the first brother Deuteronomy 25:5. Now marriage to the Judean was to "procreate" especially the one being discussed in Matthew 22:30. Hence angels are spirit beings and the only Spirit which is able to procreate is God's Spirit when it overshadowed Mary.

The book of Enoch was mentioned?

The book of Enoch today isn't the book of Enoch quoted in the New Testament.

[Luke]

These are the only times that the phrase sons of God is used in the old testament:

Genesis 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Genesis 6:4 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.
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 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 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?


Can you show me one other time in the old testament that the phrase sons of God reffers to humans except the one time that you do not like?

Also it does not say in luke that the angels cannot marry or be given in marriage but that they don't.