Angels reproducing with humans possible?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Jesus did not say they are incapable. He said they don't marry. Being incapable and abstaining are not the same things

And yes Jesus does say "In heaven"...to be differentiated from those not "in heaven"

Like I said, creating angels with ability and then forbidding them is not logical.

Anyway, no one's going to change their ideas, it seems. Still amazed.

[shazeep]

Well, God Himself has stated that "there is nothing that they will not do," of humans, at least; the point being that we have clear evidence that beings are created with abilities that can be misused.

And if you could show how the sons of God could possibly be something other than the men in 'daughters of men,' i'm open...the only way i can see would be to count the daughters of men as being from Cain; but Adam's line is clearly through Seth. Might Cain's descendants still be referred to as "ha Adam?" Is this possible? While it could be, it doesn't seem likely.

[Sean]

People 450-Feet Tall?

Are you really gullible enough to believe that fallen angels had physical intimacy with earthly women that produced offspring 450-feet tall? I don't think so! We read in chapter 7:12-15 of the Book of Enoch...

7:12 Whose stature was each three hundred cubits. These devoured all which the labor of men produced; until it became impossible to feed them;
7:13 When they turned themselves against men, in order to devour them;
7:14 And began to injure birds, beasts, reptiles, and fishes, to eat their flesh one after another, and to drink their blood.
7:15 Then the earth reproved the unrighteous.

A "cubit" is 1.5 feet. The ark which Noah built was 300 cubits long (Genesis 6:15). Do you mean to tell me that some women had children who were as tall as the ark was long? You've got to be joking! Such foolish conjecture is a violation of the simplest teachings of the Bible. In Genesis 6: we read, "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." I think Pastor J. Vernon McGee interprets this Scripture exactly right...

It says, “There were giants in the earth in those days,” but it does not say they are the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men. It does say this about the offspring: “the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” These were not monstrosities; they were men. The record here makes it very clear that the giants were in the earth before this took place, and it simply means that these offspring were outstanding individuals.....


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...lskjW-trCI70uA

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Well, God Himself has stated that "there is nothing that they will not do," of humans, at least; the point being that we have clear evidence that beings are created with abilities that can be misused.

But sin having entered the fray causing restrictions in things sin influences in abilities we're created with is not the same as being created to do something without the issue of sin and restricted from doing it. WHy would God create angels in heaven to procreate and disallow them from doing it? If unfallen angels have the ability, then God is disallowing it after having created them to do it. Seriously?

Really, no offence intended, but I cannot believe people argue for that idea. It truly blows my mind.

And if you could show how the sons of God could possibly be something other than the men in 'daughters of men,' i'm open...the only way i can see would be to count the daughters of men as being from Cain; but Adam's line is clearly through Seth. Might Cain's descendants still be referred to as "ha Adam?" Is this possible? While it could be, it doesn't seem likely.

I already showed how. Men called themselves by the name of God when Seth was born. Cain's line did not. But THAT issue concerns you and raises more questions than angels procreating with humans??????

[Sean]

A third meaning refers to mankind in general, because all men are sons of God by creation: "I said, 'You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High. But you shall die like men . . .'" (Psalm 82:6-7). Although the King James and New King James versions have "children of the Most High," many other translations have "sons of the Most High." Additional verses use similar terminology to refer to humans:

» Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? Why do we deal treacherously with one another by profaning the covenant of the fathers? (Malachi 2:10)

» . . . the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. (Luke 3:38)

Through Adam, then, every human being is a child of God.

Since these "sons of God"—those who are the subjects of our difficult scripture—were obviously not regenerated Christians, and could not have been angels, it is evident that they were simply human members of mankind in general: Men who had forsaken God and were intermarrying in defiance of His law.

Other Giants

We should note one final point. Genesis 6:4 reads, "There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown."

This verse shows that giants and extraordinarily mighty men existed after the sons of God married the daughters of men and implies that they existed beforehand as well. It does not state that such huge and powerful men were the result only of these marriages. Giants have existed throughout recorded history, before and after the Flood and down to modern times.....


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...3gi3QVB3U-IPJw

[shazeep]

ya, the wording is funny there, huh?

Originally Posted by mfblume

But sin having entered the fray causing restrictions in things sin influences in abilities we're created with is not the same as being created to do something without the issue of sin and restricted from doing it. WHy would God create angels in heaven to procreate and disallow them from doing it? If unfallen angels have the ability, then God is disallowing it after having created them to do it. Seriously?

well, you have me guessing here; but what stands out about that is that when angels were created, there were no humans to procreate with; so the frame is surely inadequate. Also, we are naturally assuming physical procreation here, when i see that perhaps "manipulating the woman's egg" might be more to the point. "Saw that the daughters of men were desirable" translates to us as "hot," when it more likely means "pliable," possibly "genetically manipulable."

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Men called themselves by the name of God when Seth was born. Cain's line did not.

hey, i'm just reading where "daughters of men" is "ha Adam," and therefore must needs be "from Seth," as even Sean is pointing out.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Like I said, creating angels with ability and then forbidding them is not logical.

Anyway, no one's going to change their ideas, it seems. Still amazed.

God created man with the ability to eat from the Tree of life and then forbid them.......

Still Amazed...

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

.God created man with the ability to eat from the Tree of life and then forbid them.......
Still Amazed...

God's will was for man to eat of the tree of life.

"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'Of every tree of the garden
thou may freely eat...' " The tree of life was there to give ETERNAL life. There is only
one tree whose fruit was forbidden and that would cause death. We need to pray to the
Lord to give us understanding, instead of trying to reason everything out for ourselves!
After man had eaten of the forbidden tree, God protected him by taking him out of the
garden thus keeping him from eating of the tree of life: for then would man have lived
forever.....but in sin!

"...lean not unto your own understanding..."

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

hey, i'm just reading where "daughters of men" is "ha Adam," and therefore must needs be "from Seth," as even Sean is pointing out.

Didn't Cain's line from from Adam, though? Maybe I missed something someone already wrote.