Angels reproducing with humans possible?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

It seems to me to be saying the children were men of renown, not giants. That's how I always read it.

i can't imagine why, especially with the other supporting verses that suggest the men of renown were giants.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

i can't imagine why, especially with the other supporting verses that suggest the men of renown were giants.

I see no supporting verses.

As I showed, scholars agree with my point, though I knew it not till I researched to see.

GILL:
Genesis 6:4
There were giants in the earth in those days,.... That is, in the days before the sons of God took the daughters of men for wives, in such a general manner as before declared, or before the declension and apostasy became so universal;

BARNES:
Gen_6:4
Two classes of men, with strong hand and strong will, are here described. “The giants,” the well-known men of great stature, physical force, and violent will, who were enabled by these qualities to claim and secure the supremacy over their fellow-men. “Had been in the land in those days.” In the days when those intermarriages were beginning to take place, the warriors were asserting the claim of might. Violence and rapine were becoming rampant in the land. “And after that.” The progeny of the mixed marriages were the second and subsequent class of leading men. “The sons of God” are here contradistinguished from the “nephilim, or giants,” who appear therefore to have belonged to the Cainites.

Keil and Delitzsch:
To an unprejudiced mind, the words, as they stand, represent the Nephilim, who were on the earth in those days, as existing before the sons of God began to marry the daughters of men, and clearly distinguish them from the fruits of these marriages. הָיוּ can no more be rendered “they became, or arose,” in this connection, than הָיָה in Gen_1:2. וַיִּהְיוּ would have been the proper word.

[mfblume]

I think it's merely a case of misreading.

[Aquila]

Did the ancient Hebrew people interpret "giants" as "giants" or "men of renown"?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Did the ancient Hebrew people interpret "giants" as "giants" or "men of renown"?

They were distinct.

[Aquila]

The "sons of God" may have been human kings that claimed divinity (like the Pharaohs, Caesars, and others). Their children might have been permitted to freely pillage and plunder the people, making them figurative "giants" or "men of renown".

I believe this bodes better than the theory that the "sons of God" were descendants of Seth. The term in the ancient language denotes pagan deities. If these were human men, to bear this title would indicate that they laid claim to divinity.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

The "sons of God" may have been human kings that claimed divinity (like the Pharaohs, Caesars, and others). Their children might have been permitted to freely pillage and plunder the people, making them figurative "giants" or "men of renown".

Again, though, the context divides giants from men of renown.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

i can't imagine why, especially with the other supporting verses that suggest the men of renown were giants.

There are giants among us today: or, what are coup d'etats, juntas, etc.?

"There were giants (self-willed, selfish men) in the earth in those days; and also AFTER THAT,
when the sons of God (believers) saw the daughters of men (unbelievers) ...". At this juncture,
we must understand that those who "...called upon the NAME of the Lord...", were not as
those who DID NOT call upon the Lord's NAME! That is where we can see the difference between
the "...sons of God...", and the "...daughters of men...".

"...when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them,
the same became mighty men..." (strong) "...which were of old, men of renown
(made names for themselves: became famous)." We can see the faith and spiritual power of
the sons of God diminishing.

"when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?"

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Again, though, the context divides giants from men of renown.

Hmmm... this is what I see...

Gen 6:4 KJV
There were giants in the earth in those days (just before the flood); and also after that (immediately after the flood), when the sons of God (presently being debated) came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same (their children) became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

[Aquila]

Could atheistic world leaders with a "god complex" be the "sons of God" among us today???

Pharaohs and Caesars always claimed to be divine. I believe the Caesars (and Persian Emperors) were even called "Son of God" on ceremonial occasions.