That the line of Cain is a line of wickedness as opposed to a faithful line of Seth is a myth. The Angel view is the original, traditional and majority one amongst the earliest Jews and Christians alike. Now, as per the Bible Angels look just like human males so when you say "they do show up in human form at times" that is unsubstantiated: the logical conclusion is that such is how they are ontologically. Angels "don't procreate" and "we don't have Angelic marriage" only if you reject the Angel view of Gen 6. Yet, they were not supposed to do it which is why they "left their first estate" (as per Jude) to do so and are thus, considered fallen. There is a difference between that they are not supposed to get married and do not get married. "What we know about Angels" actually explains why it is only male "sons of God" who have to marry only female "daughters of men."
Thank you I Was getting confused by him it didn't seem right I appreciate you exposing this . He seems to be worldly which would make him a Wolf in sheep's clothing Very misleading thank you
@@mfpeteebirdyepyep5210 No it's not the worldliness or unworldliness . It's what has been taught thru the centuries in almost the whole church world about Seth and Cain , so most people just accept it as fact
@La Chatelaine For some unknown and annoying reason, YT sometimes cuts off comments when we come back to reply so I cannot see who made the "offhand" statement: who was it?
"they left their first estate" & the Book of Job & other Old Testament Books The term "Sons of God" exclusively refers to Angelic beings. Also, read 2nd Peter and Jude.
The problem with the fallen angel idea is this: You must assume that 1. Angels have a libido, and can lust after humans. 2. Angels can marry and take wives for themselves. 3. Angels can manifest themselves physically, and have ontological creative power. 4. This ontological power results in seed producing offspring through sexual intercourse with humans. If you don't find this to be theologically problematic, I would be worried. Thanks Dr. Cooper for a great video!
@@merecatholicity far as I can tell their is a thin line between physical and spiritual. Scientists would call it dimensional. Shamans would call it realms. All through every ancient text. Angel's take physical form... in this dimension. That's all I know😁
From what I get from the bible , Certain angels could manifest a human form for appearances on the earth, as it is certain they still do to this day. All kinds of encounters of mysterious individuals appearing out of nowhere helping people in need and then vanishing into thin air. Plus various appearances of angelic beings in the Bible, as messengers, and those on special missions, such as the two accompanying the Lord ( or Angel of the Lord ) as He visited Abraham and then went down to visit and rescue Lot in Sodom. They ate food with Abraham and everything. Myself I believe it was some of those particular kind of angels that were ' enticed and lured ' by Satan to lust after the women they were in charge of keeping watch over , and desire to have them for themselves. If they could perform as human while in their earthly state then what is to say they could not perform sexually as well. Angels in their ' first estate ' of heaven do not have relation with women but angels that leave it and fall from their faithful position with God have " as many as they choose "
"they left their first estate" Only other time benei ha-elohim is used is in the book of Job, clearly referencing angelic beings. Your interpretation is modern and worldly. "Can't imagine angels having sex therefore it couldn't be"
It says in different Bible interpretations that these sons of God were fallen Angels. If humans and Angels were created in God's likeness then obviously they look human. You think they couldn't have sex organs? This guy doesn't know what he's tlkn about
in Hebrews, it is stated that God has never called an angel His son, which is the reason why Jesus is above the angels. However, you're stating that the "Sons of God" are the angels, making a contradiction. So who is lying? Moses or the author of Hebrews?
@Paul Cummins Nowhere in or around that passage that you're quoting from, that being Jude 1:6 does it even hint that that's referring to angelic beings cohabitating with women, having sex with them and producing offspring. All it is saying is that they left the position, domain, or roll that God had created them for. It's neither in the English nor in the Greek. It looks like you are just inserting your opinion into the text. The word that you have used, estate, is the Greek word ἀρχὴν (archēn) with the root archó which actually means to rule or to begin. ἀρχὴν (archēn): beginning, corners, domain, elementary, first, first preaching, principalities, rule, rulers. I would contest that it's a huge leap to jump right from those definitions into the bed of a human woman in order to procreate and have children. We have a clear passage in Scripture that sets precedent and that is Genisis 1: 11, 12, 21, 24, 25. God put limits upon his created things as to how they would procreate and I can't see humans being an exception. In Genesis 1:26 God created male and female. In the first God then commands Adam and Eve to “be fruitful and increase in number” Genesis 1:28. This was the first command which was also a blessing that God gave people was a command to have children and to procreate. The same command/blessing, “be fruitful and multiply,” is repeated to Noah’s family in Genesis 9:1 and 7. Though it doesn't explicitly say that God put limits and boundaries as to how or who they could procreate with, it only makes sense that he followed the pattern that came before it in Genesis (in kind). In the same way you can't cross breed a cat with a dog, or a rabbit with a deer, or a mouse with a bat, or even a chimpanzee with a human, I believe the standard still remains with human beings as with any other created thing that God had created to procreate. Genesis 6:4, ESV: The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown. So here we find the Giants, the Nephilim, were around in the days that were described in Genesis 6:1- 3, the next verse being the timestamp rather than the cause. It never says that these Giants were the result of the sexual union between the sons of God and the daughters of man. And the Great Men of renowned, described at the end of verse for refers back to the Nephilim, and not the offspring of the union between the sons of God and the daughters of man. This is all of course my opinion and how I interpret the scriptures and I know that I could be wrong and it could be as you say.
@@graylad Excellent, well thought-out comment. And I concur. If there is this underlying “divine council” to which Heiser refers, and which drastically changes how one reads the OT (as many of his devout followers attest), there is scant little evidence to go on. If this is such an earth shattering understanding, it surely is based upon very little. It seems more likely that Moses would have made it far clearer if this is about angels procreating with humans. One has to assume a great deal that contradicts what we know about angelic beings in order to support the Heiser view. I don’t think dogmatism on either side is warranted. But I have quite a few friends who say that the Heiser view has radically impacted their entire view of the Bible. And they are unwavering. Thanks again for your comment.
I don't agree with you Dr. Cooper. What if I told you that spirits still marries human. The spiritual world is real and I fear that you are looking through the Bible with your natural eyes.
that's an interesting conversation in itself... and yet as i read it I feel as though i am not well enough informed to understand you correctly. do you mean to say spirits attach themselves to us? or they are able to take human form?
@@hessian144 yes, the watcher Angel's took human form and took the daughters of men and made children with them. These children were the demigods of old. Hercules, Perseus and the like.
Not sure but I heard that Lucifer turns himself to dragon in anger while revolving against God then it's possible that they could be in physical form too. Just my thoughts 😁
W. A.j. Cain didn't introduce sin into the world. Cain was told to master his sin. The adversary in the garden wasn't told to master his sin nor is he offered grace.
“You’re making a context that isn’t there.” I’ve heard and seen some pretty awful vocabulary in my days, but that one in particular made my eyes shutter.
IDK There's something to it because when i married my wife she was a pagan & i had very strong Chrostian faith. She came ti church with me & i went to her rituals. I left the church & we both practice witchcraft together. Its interesting. I am now a part of a coven. I feel comfortable around them.
While I'm not totally decided on this (not that it matters much), I would not count out the interpretation that the "sons of God" were in fact angels. Jude 6-7 refers to "angels who did not stay within their own positions of authority," followed by "Sodom and Gomorrah...which LIKEWISE indulged in sexual immorality." Additionally, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 at least seemed to believe that it was possible to have sex with the angels who visited Lot. Finally, Deuteronomy 32:8 refers to angels as "sons of God." The nations are said to be divided up according to the number of the sons of God. The verse is a reference to Genesis 10, which lists 70 (Septuagint has 72, by my understanding) nations descended from Noah. 70/72 is the number of angels on God's council, which is also why Israel has 70 elders (Exodus 24. 70 might be an approximation of 72 since 70 doesn't divide evenly by 12) and Jesus has 70/72 apostles in Luke 10. We see this angelic council in Revelation, which has 24 angels on thrones around God (4:4), 4 living creatures with 6 wings each, for a total of 24 wings (4:8), and the dragon (Satan) who sweeps a third of the stars (angels) out of the sky (12:4) - 24 is a third of 72. So there's at least some precedent for saying that the "sons of God" might be angels, given that the term refers to angels elsewhere.
Jude and 2 Peter 2 are very clear in placing the timeline of the fall of Angels as within the Gen 6 time frame. If they are not referring to Gen 6 then, pray tell, to when are they referring, right? Their readers would have no idea what they are talking about since there is only a one time fall of Angels in the Bible and if Gen 6 is not it then well, we do not know anything about it.
"We do see them show up in human form at times"... That's my issue. Angels do take on tangible physical form such that they have meals with both Abraham and Lot in Fen 18 and 19. Further, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah listed after the two angels in Gen 19 and That's what led to their destruction. So there is something there as I see it now but I know you have more videos on this subject so I'll have a look at those and see what more light you have to shed. Thank you Dr Cooper 🙏🏾
Read the story Sodom and Gomorrah again. You'll see that judgment had already been passed. The angels were sent for the very purpose of destroying the cities.
I find this subject very fascinating, it is an enigma of sorts. I used to hold to an angelic view and was corrected by a pastor I saw on youtube. Sometimes when we read the bible and some of its enigmas, things or events that are not clear and have had massive interpretations we need to take a step back and remember one thing. if something occurred in the bible, it is supported elsewhere. Meaning, you can find any scripture (taken out of context) to support any idea you want, and I mean any idea... but you will never find a clear statement that supports it, meaning the bible does not contradict itself. To see this meaning supported, angels don't marry or did they disobey God and do it anyways lets look at God and how he reacts to sin or disobedience. When Adam and Eve sinned and the serpent (the devil), God IMMEDIATELY punished all three of them. When Cain killed Abel, God IMMEDIATELY, meaning the very next scripture after the action, punished Cain. So we can see God has an MO, something that he does always for the acts of sin or disobedience. Lets follow this line of reasoning, if the angels really did (or demons, the fallen angels) commit this atrocious act, why was only man punished? That is not God's MO, when Moses disobeyed God and the Israelites, they were immediately punished to wander the desert for forty years! This punishment wasn't obscured in later books of the bible, it wasn't implied in other books it was the very next scripture when God said this generation shall not see the promised land. So it is clear from how our God in heaven acts when it comes to sin is that it was not angels but man, just read Genesis 6 after the mention of the giants.... only man is mentioned, not once angels. Now you will probably ask, ok what do you believe? My belief in it is complicated but I will try to break it down but first I agree with Dr. Cooper. When Adam and Eve sinned their eyes were immediately opened, plus God had told them that if they ate of the tree they 'would surely die', surely does not mean immediately and it implies that they were no longer immortal. This is even more clear when God kicks them out lest they eat from the other tree. So my theory, mind it is a theory, is that either the act of sinning or eating the fruit corrupted the perfect DNA God made in them. After that we see death, corruption, disease and everyone mentioned before the flood died, even if they died at 960 years old like Methuselah. So my theory is that sin corrupted their DNA and gigantism and acromegaly diseases were not as hard on their bodies. The pre-flood world had more oxygen and was safer, not perfect, but safer for humans, there was disease but less of it. So therefore these two diseases caused giants, which Nephilim means titans or big but not hybrid of gods, that is an outside interpretation from the Alexandrian scripts instead of the Antioch scripts which the KJV is based on the latter. So to conclude, there were giants afterward but slowly these people with the disease gigantism and acromegaly, the disease slowly became more and more debilitating to the giants we see today. Most do not live over the age of 30 and so as our DNA has become more and more corrupted due to many factors, yes the giants of old were much stronger and more capable but we can see a clear degradation of our human DNA. Yes these were men of renown, they were mighty but look up people in the last 100 years that have had acromegaly and gigantism, they played basketball, were said to be strong than most humans but eventually by age 20-30 the disease debilitated them to the point they either died or needed a wheelchair. Sorry for the long explanation but I think it should be very clear that the sons of God were not angels, no where does scripture support that.
The angels involved were punished according to Jude and Peter, and also Hell was prepared for the Devil and his angels. Just my 2 cents on it not being in God's MO to punish bit.
GOD clothed Adam and Eve before they were exiled from the garden. Is that not a physical action if Adam and Eve are physical beings. it would make since Angels would have the same capability.
@@shadowdancer3531 not denying that. But Angels did leave their proper dwelling. Your saying they are not capable of materializing. So who birthed the Giants ?
"For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven …" (KJV1769+ Mat 22:30) "As the angels of God in"... what? In heaven!" Thus, Jesus does not say that the angels cannot cohabitate with women here on earth. They did this in fact, and that's why they are in prison in the region of Tartarus. Otherwise we'll all have to cut Peter and Jude out of our bibles. - Bruce Waltke and many other scholars agree with this rabbinic position. Ps: angels can assume humans' appearance, eg: Hb 13:2. Best regards, this time I disagree with you, nevertheless, carry on doinng good videos.
I like to have it both ways, when I’m feeling rational I go with something similar to Dr.Coopers ideas. When they discover Bigfoot I’m gonna flip flop to the crossbreed theory
You have some great teaching, Pastor Cooper, but you are wrong on this (admittedly minor) issue. Read 1 Corinthians 11:10. Why does Paul say women should cover their heads and be modest "because of the angels?" Remember that the original book of Enoch is even quoted by Jude. I'm not saying it's canon but if you're willing to let the tradition of church fathers help in interpreting scripture correctly than we shouldn't just ignore a clearly historical source the apostles would have been familiar with. I agree most of the extrapolated nephilim and alien stuff you see on youtube is anywhere from an educated guess to complete nonsense, but that doesn't mean that should discount the nephilim being demon-human hybrids, as it is the most well supported interpretation.
@Maximus Alexander Maxim Augustus XVIII Friend, there is no description of Angels' hairdos. And you are quite right that Angles are often called "man"/"men" because they look just like human males.
Angels are male only so Jesus is saying once we are all together in heaven, we will be like the angels in heaven who do not procreate... The fallen ad chosen to leave their abode
Jesus was talking about the institution of marriage which there is no need for in Heaven. Says nothing about angel's fallen or otherwise not having the ability to have intercourse or procreate. That is clearly what happened in Genesis 6 and why a flood was sent in judgement. Thei offspring from these forbidden unions were not normal humans but 'giants', Also, somehow which Scripture doesn't give the cause of, giants appeared again after the flood and were present and prominent amongst the Caananites. Why the children of Israel were commanded to completely exterminate when taking the promised land. This sort of injunction was not given when it came to later battles with the enemies of Israel. Definitely something different genetically about the Canaanites. Strong argument that this was an attempt to corrupt the human gene pool to prevent Messiah from being born.
The ' seed ' permeated the human bloodline of the entire earth except the family of Noah. Noah was the last pure blood in the lineage to the Messiah. God took it down to the last man ( actually Shem ) before destroying the evil seed with the flood. No pure Messiah, no salvation for anyone. A remnant of giants came through in the line of Ham as God still had use for them. They came back but nowhere near as before, enough to occupy the promised land and then to test the Israelites. The Israelites under Joshua then killed them off or sent them to disperse around the world where they died out. There was a plaque or stone with writing that was found in a remote place saying " we are those who ran from Joshua the son of Nun " I forget what else they called Joshua.
There is Enoch, the son of Cain (Genesis 4:17), and there is Enoch, son of Jared (Genesis 5:18). Enoch, son of Jared is the one who “walked with God” (Genesis 5:24, Hebrews 11:5) and is also the ancestor of Noah and by extension of Jesus (Luke 3:37).
Where he failed to explain is, why will the daughter of man will birth men of renounce or at least men that were different from other men? To the contrary the story of Sansom told us by a super powerful jew lost its power by dating an out sider. These son's of God where not gentiles.
I believe that both your exegesis and your hermeneutics are faulty here. (By the way I studied under Dr. Klein at Gordon Conwell.) A simple research of the term “sons of God” will show you that it is always used to refer to the angelic host so a simple reading of the text would indicate that the beings talked about here are part of the heavenly host. You have to read into the text that it is talking about the godly line of Seth. Also, Jesus simply says that the angels do not marry. It is wrong to presuppose that he is saying that they are not sexual. It’s like me saying Catholic priests do not marry. That does not mean that they are not sexual beings. Another consideration is in genesis when God says “let us make man in our image” he is talking to the heavenly host that Job tells us were there at creation singing in Job 38. Later it says he makes Man in that image male and female. It seems to me that you have come to the text with your presuppositions rather than doing careful exegesis. As to who the Nephilim are? Is the text saying that they were there before this happened and continue to be there or does the text show the relationship between the offspring of this unholy union and the Nephilim? Also I think it is wrong for you to pre-suppose that the spies made up what they saw. There is nothing in the Hebrew language in that text that would suggest that a more natural understanding is that, knowing genesis six, what they saw terrified them. I have no desire to exaggerate what genesis six teaches. But I want to be faithful to good hermeneutics and good exegesis in interpreting this passage. I don’t think you’ve done that here.
Has any one ever thought that God's work with His human creation was partially experimental? For instance, in Genesis 6 we find that the thoughts of mankind are continually evil and God wipes them out with the flood and essentially starts over. And there was another time when the Israelites were in the wilderness and disobedient to Yaweh and He said to Moses, I will wipe out these people and fulfill my covenant through you, Moses. And then Moses talks Him down from the ledge. This assumes open theism.
It sounds like doctrinal equivocation of Trent’s anathema of the Lutheran/Calvinist, Protestant gospel doctrinal confessional statements, that Rome hasn’t revised or acknowledged…?!
Funny how some people find it difficult to understand plain English take the text at it's word, as it were. However, a comparative examination of Babylonian & Aramaic texts that address the same issues reveals their accounts also understood there was a 'supernatural' aspect involved. Still, any text is open to interpretation, and so we're back we started each with their own belief of what is meant. Well okay, its still an easy matter to resolve, one common theme found l in scripture, the Septuigint & Babylonian texts are the entities called giants because they were giant......so, if the supernatural interpretation is correct, there must be evidence of entities of abnormally large stature.....and by crikey there is loads....take the US & just from the dates 1800 - 1900, judging by the amount of articles a person couldn't dig a hole without discovering the remains of humanoids that ranged in height from 8ft to 18ft or a skull with double rows of teeth & three times larger than human skull or remains with 6 digits on hands & feet. Not only America as the same phemomena is found worldwide. I could go on all day describing other physical proofs & evidence but i gotta go. I will say this though.....the dominant narrative regarding human origins & history & the history of the world & the how, what, why, how it all came about has less to do with the historical truth & more to do with perception management & the social engineering of society.
As I have stated elsewhere, when I was young and the first time I seriously read Genesis 6 I instantly took it as angelic beings came to earth and had sexual relations with human women creating giant size children. When I then read about them being the ' men of reknown ' I instantly took that as it being where the stories of the Greek gods came from. I have been pursuing the answers to this puzzle ever since.
No one knows how the Angels came to be. Also God said in genesis chapter3 verse22 And the lord God said the man has now become like one of us knowing good and evil.he must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat,and live forever. God says like us. I believe the sons of God the Bible refers to are the fallen angels.
The Nephilim were the bastard sons created when the Igigi left their designated and assigned observation posts which were issued by the Annuaki and then disobediently descended down to Earth and took the daughters of man for wives of their own and breaded with them creating giants. The Nephilim.
Did God say be fruitful and mulitiply? Why would it be wrong for Seths lineage to marry the line of Cain? Why would you apply a new testament verse being unequaly yoked to the ancient people of the time when God told them multiply?
The seed of the serpent turned out to be not an ethnic or natural status but a spiritual one. "You brood of vipers" John the Baptist called the religious leaders of his day. The same ones Jesus spoke to and said "your father, the devil". And they did and still do persecute the church, that part of the body of Christ which still touches the earth. Genesis six does not even say that the Nephilim were the offspring of the "Sons of God" and "the daughters of Adam". It just says they were in the land in those days, and afterward. The heroes of old were the offspring. The church should re-interpret Genesis in the light of Christ, not take the view of the rabbis as authoritative or a starting point IMO.
I find it very hard to believe that two humans beings can birth gaints just because they don't have the same belief. The Bible does not give enough information about what physical attributes angels have or how much similarity are between us. All we know for sure is that the gay population in Sodom found them very attractive to the point of rejecting Lot's daughters for them. I will stick to Enoch stories a book quoted in Bible.
Well friend, before finding it very hard to believe that two humans beings can birth giants we need to define that vague, generic, subjective and un-biblical English term. Best to forget about it and stick to the term Nephilim since we have no reliable physical description of them. Now, the Bible gives us a LOT of information about what physical attributes Angels have: they look just like human males (no wings, no halos). As for the “Enoch stories”: Jude quotes Enoch and you can then say that he quoted form one of the books of Enoch but 1 Enoch aka Ethiopic Enoch also contradicts the Bible.
@@KenAmmi-Shalom I agree , he is wrong the lord would not wipe out the earth over just humans. There were really angels and they were 200 they corrupted all life on earth .in the book of giants it says they mixed their seed with 200 of each species on earth, from the birds in the sky to the fish in the sea. I am sorry but he is wrong very wrong.
@@zaydamoody7183 Do not be sorry ;o) In any case, perhaps they did mixed their seed with each species on Earth, etc. but that is apocryphal folklore. FYI: I just published a book titled “What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim? A Styled Giantology and Nephilology”: www.amazon.com/s?k=nephilology&ref=nb_sb_noss
In Genesis 6 the angels lusted after human women, In Sodom the earth men lusted after angels. When they found there were angelic beings at Lots house, they desperately wanted a piece of that action.
I disagreed until this video. Because both Josephus in Antiquity of the Jews and Enoch reference the angel-humans. But now I think a whole view of what angels are and the line discussion is more reasonable. Point being, people close to Jesus time thought otherwise, but just because it’s old doesn’t mean it’s right, which is also shown in the Bible.
Continued: Just because the Sauducees didn’t believe in the resurrection during Jesus time does not mean they’re right today. As for commenters, you’re free to disagree but consider if you’re arguing because the idea is exciting to you or if it is reasonably true. Aside from Goliath and the 6 fingered giant, we have no other examples. Lastly, it is God who opens and closes the womb to create eternal beings from the human union. To say demons did this independent of God is a bizarre view.
For anyone who thinks the angels mated with humans. Answer this question. Angels are spiritual beings, who do not reproduce. Humans are physical and do reproduce. Neither physiology is able to facilitate reproduction with each other. So how did they mate?
The angels in heaven don't have sex but Jude 1:6 says the angels that left heaven changed their habitation which is their body for a different kind of habitation to have these relationships with humans. The book of Daniel even talks about angels and humans having sex when it says "they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men like iron and clay". Early Christians and Christians for 1800 years explained Nephilim as children of angels and humans. The term Sons of God are used in Job when referring to angels bringing Satan before God. Teaching the sons of God in Genesis 6 are the sons of Seth is a made up teaching from 200 years ago and makes God into a genocidal, cruel, and evil God.
On Daniel it says " they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, BUT as iron does NOT mix with clay they will NOT cleave one to another " That is not for Genesis 6 as apparently in Genesis 6 their seed DID cleave, but Daniel is for the end times ( and another story )
@@ClarkAboudaz the other side of that coin I recently noticed is how that part of Daniel has to do with world government systems over the course of human history. How it lists governments and kingdoms we now recognize but the final kingdom / world government power is yet future and we are not exactly sure. It tells of how the final system will include a ' they ' whose ' seed ' will not ' cleave ' with the seed of men such as iron and clay do not mix. This is not new, but what I recently noticed was that all the pieces of the great statue or image were all METALS that mix together ( as far as I know ) except the part of the final kingdom that is NOT A METAL. All the previous kingdoms can mix, the part of the final kingdom can not mix. The final kingdom will consist of part that can mix and part that is totally foreign, and the foreign part can not genetically cleave to the other part.
There were A), giants in the earth in those days; and *also* AFTER THAT, when B), the sons of God (Adam is a son of God) came in unto the daughters OF MEN, and they bare children to them, A), the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” {Genesis 6:4} "also after that" And there we saw the *giants* the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. {Numbers 13:33} And the coast of Og king of Bashan, which was of the remnant of the *giants* that dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei, {Joshua 12:4} Nephilim are a variation of the Human DNA. Like a great dane and a toy poodle are to the Wolf. Fallen angels have lost their first estate and are no longer sons of God.
How does that theory explain the Giants? Something Supernatural had to produce them. If they could take on the form of humans, why couldn't they take on their reproduction systems as well?
Perhaps he doesn't go into the "giants" thing because it's an easily dismissed assumption. The term "giants" wasn't introduced until the Greek translation of Genesis. In the origional Hebrew, Genesis makes no mention of Nephilim being giants.
@@Johurph86 @Joshua Murphy I think its pretty clear in the Bible about giants. Just not much detail because the Bible's main focus is salvation. This might be the earths third go around as in 2 floods. Been studying genesis and other scripture that back that theory. When Adam was created he was told to REPOPULATE the earth. Why if he was the first man. Moses was told to REPOPULATE the earth after the flood. In Isaiah, it talks about Satan being cast down. How he was in the First garden and how he weakened the nations. Look up "4 worlds of scripture". Its about pre adamite world. Its not about giants, but pretty interesting and ties some things together for me. My point is that there are multitudes of things that happened that we don't know about, but we don't necessarily need to know. It's still interesting and helps understand the scheme of things. Sorry to go off topic, but I think its relevant.
Very peculiar way to interpret the text and, I think, the most unlikely explanation when taking into account textual and cultural interpretation. Why would this hybrid people be the heroes of old or people of importance or giants when simply they were the children of believers and nonbelievers. Also it is not necessary to have sex in order to have children, we can do that today never mind angelic beings.
யார் இந்த இராட்சதர்கள்? Who is this Giants / Nephilim = Father/Dad Genesis 6:4 ஆதியாகமம் 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days அந்நாட்களில் இராட்சதர் பூமியிலே இருந்தார்கள். பின்பு தேவகுமாரர் மனுஷகுமாரத்திகளோடே கூடுகிறதினால், தேவ குமாரர்கள் மனுஷகுமாரத்திகளுக்கு "பிள்ளைகளைப் பெற்றபோது", and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they (Son of God) bare children to them (Daughter of Men), தேவ குமாரர்களும் பூர்வத்தில் பேர்பெற்ற மனுஷராகிய பலவான்களானார்கள். the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. So, தேவ குமாரர்கள் தங்களுக்கு பிள்ளைகளை பெற்றபோதுதான் பூர்வத்தில் பேர்பெற்ற மனுஷராகிய பலவான்களாக / இராட்சதர்களாக ஆனார்கள். ஒரு ஆண் தனக்கு பிள்ளை பிறக்கும்போதுதான் தகப்பன் / அப்பா / DAD / Father என்று ஆகிறான். உங்களுக்கு சந்தேகம் இருந்தால், உங்களுக்கு மிகவும் நெருங்கிய தமிழ் இலக்கணம் தெரிந்த நபரிடம் கேட்டு விளக்கம் பெறுங்கள். தயவசெய்து நரகத்திற்கு மக்களை வழிநடத்தாதிருங்கள். Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. மத்தேயு 23:9 பூமியிலே ஒருவனையும் உங்கள் பிதா என்று சொல்லாதிருங்கள், பரலோகத்திலிருக்கிற ஒருவரே உங்களுக்குப் பிதாவாயிருக்கிறார். Malachi 1:6 A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name? மல்கியா 1:6 குமாரன் தன் பிதாவையும், ஊழியக்காரன் தன் எஜமானையும் கனம்பண்ணுகிறார்களே; நான் பிதாவானால் என் கனம் எங்கே? நான் எஜமானானால் எனக்குப் பயப்படும் பயம் எங்கே என்று சேனைகளின் கர்த்தர் தமது நாமத்தை அசட்டைபண்ணுகிற ஆசாரியர்களாகிய உங்களைக் கேட்கிறார்; அதற்கு நீங்கள் உமது நாமத்தை எதினாலே அசட்டைபண்ணினோம் என்கிறீர்கள். Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was "the mother of all living". ஆதியாகமம் 3:20 ஆதாம் தன் மனைவிக்கு ஏவாள் என்று பேரிட்டான். ஏனெனில், அவள் "ஜீவனுள்ளோருக்கெல்லாம் தாயானவள்". Mail ID jobplus@live.com WhatsApp No +91 99 4140 8454 Facebook அம்பி, Ambi
Notwithstanding whether you agree or disagree with Dr. Cooper, I fail to see why anyone would hit dislike on his videos, as his videos are of excellent quality and very informative.
If Adam was a son of God after he sinned God said in Gen 3:15 that he will preserve a seed in a lineage of Adam and there would also be a seed of the devil, then we see that lineage in the seed of Seth, whose lineage worshiped God. For you to worship God, you must be led by his Spirit and anyone led by God's Spirit is a son of God Gen 4: "26 And to SETH, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name ENOS: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord." . . . Rom 8: "14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." . . . 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." There is a reason Gen 6 never mentioned angels once, it is because the sons of God are not angels, they are men in the godly lineage of Seth who were led by the Spirit. As the earth became populated, these men looked upon the beautiful daughters of ungodly men and took them as wives. We see God speaking about the flesh of man which points of his desire of the flesh and He says that His Spirit shall not always dwell with man. This is because these women were turning the hearts of these men away from God so much so that they would not be led by His Spirit in time. Gen 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. 3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years." They corrupted themselves and their lineage so much so that Noah and his family was found as the only godly ones preserved from the lineage of Seth in his generation. Gen 6:4 tells us that there were giants existing before the interrelation took place, and even after these men married these women, giants were among some of their offspring as well. No such thing as angels marrying women, that's a fairy-tale story for the gullible. Even if angels could have such relations, they can't die naturally, neither could they have died by the flood. They don't have sex organs and thus they don't produce sperms to procreate. There are giants even today in our world, so are you going to tell them that their father is a fallen angel??
No... the bible says the Nephilim were already on the earth in those days... when the sons of god took the daughters of men for wives... it says ‘the Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and after’ - so clearly, the offspring of the sons of god and daughters of men and the Nephilim are not one and the same! Also... if the bible states that they were on the earth in those days and after, it suggests they were no longer on the earth at the time of writing etc... the sons of god were the original Christian (Jewish sect) prophets, that’s correct - the dead sea scrolls confirmed that emphatically! Cheers
LOOK FOR ALL YOU UNEDUCATED CRITICS WHO DONT EVEN KNOW WHERE YOU LINEAGE EVEN GOES BACK TO PLEASE DONT COME OUT AND PUBLCLY DISPLAY ACTS OF IGNORANCE WHEN IM AN HEBREW ISRAELITE FROM THE HEAD TRIBE OF JUDAH THE LAW GIVERS AND HEAD OF ALL GOVERNMENT THAT EVER EXISTED PLEASE MOVE AROUND FOR YOUR OWN HUMILITY SAKE
Jordan....the term "sons of God" in the Old Testament is always referring to angels. Only in the New Testament does the phrase refer to regenerated humanity. Granted, this is a great mystery. However, your initial premise that the terminology doesn't mean angels is scholastically a rookie error and not a mistake that someone like yourself should have made. Additionally, although the sons of Seth do represent the line in which Noah 'finds grace', nowhere does the terminology "sons of God" applied to any human being at this point. Not even Adam. Cross referencing this passage in Genesis 6 with both Jude and 2 Peter seals the deal. No question.
The belief that aliens, known as the ‘sons of God’, came down to the earth and had babies with women is at best a fantasy. It is based on a catastrophic misunderstanding of Genesis 6:4. May I point out the following: 1. Fallen angels are known as devils and demons. To call a demon a son of God is to put him at par with Jesus Christ the true Son of God. This is outright blasphemy. 2. Righteous angels are not sons of God either: For unto which of the angels said he AT ANY TIME, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? (Hebrew 1:5). If righteous angels have never at any time been referred to as ‘sons of God’, how much less devils? 3. Contrary to the popular belief, it is not the union between the sons of God and the daughters of men that introduced the giants into the world. When the sons of God took the daughters of men to wife, the Bible clearly states, There were giants in the earth in those days (already) (Genesis 6:4). 4. Fallen angels still exist, and women are still there. Then why are they not having giants anymore? 5. Who then are the sons of God mentioned in Genesis 6:2,4? Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas … and Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ (Matthew 1:2,15,16). Luke picks up this genealogy from where Matthew stops and works backwards. He does not stop at Abraham where Matthew began but continues until, Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, WHICH WAS THE SON OF GOD (Luke 3:37-38). If we apply the word ‘begat’ to the genealogy in Luke, this is how it would read: God begat Adam; and Adam begat Seth; and Seth begat Enos; and Enos begat Cainan; and Cainan begat Maleleel; and Maleleel begat Jared; and Jared begat Enoch; and Enoch begat Mathusala… This clearly brings out the fact that Adam and his descendants were the sons of God mentioned in Genesis chapter six. Note that the Scripture does not call Adam a son of God but THE son of God. There are only two people in the Bible designated THE son of God: Adam and Jesus. This is because neither of them had a human father or a human mother (Mary was no blood relation of Jesus, else He would have had a sinful nature). God Himself was their parent. Also contrary to the general perception, Jesus was not the first Son of God. The first and the original son of God was Adam. Jesus is called the Last Adam (last does not come before first). True, Jesus existed before Adam, but not as Son of God, rather as God Himself. 6. What then was the origin of the giants? Many people debate what the mark of Cain was, but it ought to be straightforward. God turned Cain into a giant so that no person of ordinary build would dare to confront him. Cain clearly feared reprisal for him having murdered Abel. That reprisal would have to come, not from his own descendants but from Abel’s true brothers. The hatred between Cain and Abel did not just happen. God told the serpent, And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed (Genesis 3:15). There was to be hatred between the son of the serpent and the son of the woman. When Eve gave herself to Adam, she conceived Abel and, in this respect, Abel was the natural seed of the woman, thus prefiguring Jesus the spiritual Seed of the woman. Cain was the son of the serpent. His female descendants were later called the daughters of men whom Satan used for tempting the sons of God, thus marring the original pure DNA of the sons of God. 7. The post flood giants such as Goliath, Anak and the king Og had human fathers as clearly shown in scripture. They were not the sons of aliens. For example, Goliath was a Philistine. The Philistines were descended from Casluhim, the grandson of Ham (I Chronicles 1:12) If you want a comprehensive study of this subject, check out the book, The Nemesis Apple, by Einer Nuh K’Beit.
Christ had to have been blood relation to Mary, elsewise he'd have been human race, but not OUR human race. So the sinful nature must be passed on through the father.
You need to research this subject a lot more. I Enoch is NOT 2nd Temple, Jewish literature.....it was found in cave #4 at Qumran in the Dead Sea Scrolls...a hand written copy that was from 300 B.C. I know that the Holy Fathers of the Council of Laodicia (?) believed that it was a 1st or 2nd Century , Jewish document and that is why it wasn't canonized.
HI Then why did the Ethiopian Bible ALWAYS canonise it right from the beginning? And of course Moses, Jude and Peter quoted verbatim from it which would never happen unless it was canon. Shalom to us only in Christ Yeshua.
@@toosiyabrandt8676 Monophysites (Oriental Orthodox, Coptics..etc) are not part of the Church. Their heresy was condemned in the 4th Ecumenical Synod. They have also "canonized" II & III Enoch which are nothing more than Kabbalistic fable. What they have "canonized" is not canonical scripture. You should read my comment more carefully....and where did Moses quote I Enoch? Just because I Enoch isn't canonized doesn't mean that it is forbidden or banned by the Orthodox Church or that it isn't edifying.
please refer to Daniel 3:25- Job 1:6- & Job 2:1- Job 38:6&7- these few verses give you an insight on who were the sons of God- they were fallen angels. the offsprings were the nephelim, these were not from the line of seth and cain like many people believe. Noah line was perfect in his generation ( meaning it was unblemished, clean, without defect. in other words his seed as we know it nowadays his DNA was pure without a defect. God destroyed the old world because we had something bigger than just sin or people being unfaithful. there was a genetic seed problem with the humans in those days. here's another thought if seth line or cain line was so pure why did they perished in the flood? why did God command Joshua to wiped out every woman men and child in the land of canan, amelikites through David amoung other tribes? because those were the descendants of the anak race of giants. I can go on other things , but your theory is wrong.
This is an ESOTERIC WRITING )Nelphilims are children born between Human suns of God ( male) and Human suns of God (female),(SUNS) not spelled wrong. I study with a priest.
You'd think these learned ppl can at least now the section of the Bible they are talking about though I may have missed it if they did. Genesis 6:1-7. That's the account of "the sons of the true God saw that the sons of men were good-looking and materialized into human form and matted w them. The account brings out that these ppl were wicked. That lead Good to bring about the Flood of Noah's day bc the"thoughts of men were wicked all the time."
Good explanation. I’m still seeking more in this area only because it would be good to see how the Nephilim relates to the destruction of creation. I don’t necessarily hold to a particular view regarding the “sons of God” other than “elohim” being referred to as judges articulating the things of “Elohim” or YHWH when Jesus is speaking to the religious leaders and brings up Psalms 82. I don’t see how that correlates with the Nephilim specifically, but I think I’m wanting to see how this study of the Nephilim portrays to the Imago Dei. The sons of God came into the daughters of men. What does this mean? Was the image of God distorted? Certainly, it was for “all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth” and “every intention of the thoughts of his heart were evil continually.” We see a de-creation happening with the flood that was out of order in God’s intent of his creation.
Thank you but as far as I can tesearch Augustine was the first to come up with the two seed mixing interpretation of this holy Scripture. The people prior, the Jews, never had this understanding even suggested so Moses' "lesson" was totally missed. There is no private interpretation of Scripture so how can Augustine be the first one to understand this ancient text correctly? This interpretation leaves me with more questions than the old interpretation of fallen angels interbreeding with human women, which is the old and commonly held interpretation. The angels were fallen not normal angels and that can reasonably account for their unnatural behavior. Reply? God's peace be with you.
Right you are, the Angel view is the original, traditional and majority one amongst the earliest Jews and Christians alike as I prove in my book "On the Genesis 6 Affair's Sons of God: Angels or Not?" subtitled, "A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim": www.truefreethinker.com/articles/new-book-genesis-6-affairs-sons-god-angels-or-not
Jesus said that the Angels IN HEAVEN aren't given in marriage... guess what these fallen angels left their abode and came to earth to procreate, hence they begot giants. Not to mention that theirs a connection with Gen 6 and Jude. Do angels eat? Yup, the three strangers that visited Abraham. Don't understand estimate the powers and abilities of angels.
Who is the son of god? Was Jesus marry? Was Buddha marry? Both were son of god, but they did not get marry. Not an angel, but son of god married with human woman. Nepheline survived the flood and had lived in the land of U.S A back on 76000bc and 1975 the Nepheline had came to U S A again. Now about 300000 Nepheline live in USA. So who are the Nepheline?
Nephilim genes: "In total Professor Reich's team located 100,000 genes that originally belonged to the Neanderthal genomes but penetrated the human genome, thanks to our frisky ancestors". - See more at: www.dailytech.com/NeanderthalHuman+Breeding+Was+Hard+But+Yielded+Benefits/article34236.htm#sthash.RCkAUAb6.dpuf
The Hebrew Bible actually warns against the belief that that nephilim were the product of angels cohabiting with humans. Before explaining why the nephilim were not of divine nature, the context of which the original translation is used needs observation. Genesis 6:2-4(NASB) reads as follows: “that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were 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.” In order to fully comprehend this passage, we need to establish what “sons of God” refers to. This phrase has long since been debated among the church and from it derive three main interpretations. One view is that “sons of God” refers to the bloodline of Seth, who was born of Adam and Eve after Cain killed Abel in order to carry on the Godly faith. The second interpretation is the “sons of God” refers to angelic beings. The third view is “sons of God” refers to great heroes of the mythical past which include mighty warriors and tyrant leaders. Gilgamesh, who was depicted as being part god and part human, is one of the archetypes we know of who bracket with this idea. It is important to note that the exact expression “sons of God” only occurs five times within the Hebrew Bible. The other four occurrences of this term reside in the following verses: Job 1:6, Job 2:1, Job 38:7, and Daniel 3:25. All of these instances of the term “sons of God” or “son of God” are clear and lucid references to angelic beings. Although the exact expression is only presented five times in the entire Bible, there are other places in scripture which that indicate the relationship between God and humans is to be seen as a filial communion, such as the covenant God made with David which was a father-son relationship. Regardless, they are not referred to as a “son of God”. Therefore, it is safe to assume that the expression “sons of God” refers to angels. Someone might attempt to use Matthew 22:30 in which Jesus states that the angels who dwell in heaven neither marry nor are given in marriage to confute the idea that Genesis 6:1-4 refers to angels. Jesus included the angels who are in HEAVEN do not marry, not the ones who left their proper dwelling place. Thus, there is no contradiction. So who are the nephilim? There are two major sentences in Genesis 6:4 which guide our understanding in who they were, the first one being “the nephilim were on the earth in those days and also afterwards.” There are two possible interpretations of the expression “in those days and also afterwards.” Some people conclude that the nephilim were the offspring that resulted from angels marrying the women. This view appeals to texts of the 3rd century BC and 2nd century BC, such as the Enochian traditions, which suggest that the nephilim were giants. There is another interpretation to “in those days and also afterwards,” which concludes that the nephilim existed before the angels cohabited with the humans and after. This could be in theory saying that the nephilim no relation to to the angels marrying the humans. There are two reasons why this is the correct interpretation. First of all, whenever the expression “and also afterwards” is used, it is in the same context which makes this interpretation true. The second reason why this is the correct interpretation lies within the portion of the verse which says “They were the heroes who were from the ancient past, the men of renown.” It is important to note that this sentence does not begin with “and”. Almost every sentence in the Hebrew Bible begins with “and” and when it does not, it’s for one of two reasons; it’s either the beginning of a new section, or it’s acting as a footnote to the previous sentence. In this case, it is acting as a footnote. Basically, the verse is saying something along the lines of “the nephilim existed before the angels cohabited with humans and afterwards too,” then making a brief comment that they were the ancient heroes. In essence, what Moses is doing is demythologizing the nephilim. The reason that the text doesn’t tell us directly who they were is due to the fact that they were well known to the first readers. They didn’t need an explanation of who they were. Moses is predominately warning against the belief that the nephilim were offspring of angels and humans.
Your narartive is false. You have to Iook at the He brew text not the mazeretic interpretations. Now to call these so called son's of God angels, I think this is wrong also. As you stated angels have no free will. These were some other creations of YAH perhaps even Djinn. The book of Jude quotes the book of Enoch.
Nephlim were giants of our origin.Minions just like us serving the gods that made way for us to exist on this earth. we are not living on our original world ! this world is of Animal etc nature!
So thank you for the question why would they have the ability to procreate with humans? Well that’s interesting because God did not make humans so that he could procreate with us either!!! But since the angels are spirits it looks like they have the ability to do the same thing that the Holy Spirit was able to do Because we look at the anointed book of Enoch which Jesus spoke about in Jude also confirmed that they the lead in this book And this book is full of the story of the Nephilim and the angels were punished because they mated with the same women who they saw as too much temptation For whatever reason they were planting in the earth seeds of demons
The Bible interprets itself, and it clearly says that the angels, or sons of God, had sex with the humans, creating something different. Every other use of the phrase "sons of God" is clearly about angels. There is physical evidence of giants, plus stories from every culture. Why would two humans produce something that isn't fully human? THAT is more of a stretch than fully believing the Bible even it says that angels had sex with woman and that that created something that should never have been created. You're misleading people. Maybe innocently... But you should do a deep dive into this subject before teaching it. Do your own research. Don't listen to any man's research. All of the information is at your very own fingertips.
He’s literally quoting the Bible. Like what else do you want... oh let me guess, it doesn’t fit with your interpretation so you choose to straight up ignore his interpretation and call it wrong because reasons.
+Jordan B. Cooper -- You should have entitled this video *_"Who were the Sons of God?"_* or perhaps *_"Who were the angels in the O.T. & N.T.?"_* since only a small portion of it was taken up discussing the Nephilim! Anyway, I finally get around to listening once again to this video after having done so roughly two days ago in the wee hours of the morning. I was quite sleepy and went to bed soon afterward but not without pitching in my $0.02 in a reply post to some hokey *_"Reformed Christian"_* about this video elsewhere in the comment section. I deleted it earlier for reasons I will keep to myself. ;-) I hate to say it -- especially in light of all the other wonderful videos I and others have witnessed from you throughout the years -- but this one was a let-down. The mere fact that you brought up Meredith G. Kline early on tipped me off as to what was ahead as the video progressed. My hunch was indeed correct. It's probably not important, and the following is merely rhetorical, but it would be nice to know what your sources were and/or consulted in the making of this video. Yes, there are a number of interpretations on Genesis 6:1-4; but the one you chose to go with is yesterday's news. In short, whether you care to acknowledge it or not it seems you engaged in demythologizing that passage irrespective of Mosaic authorship. The latter was beside the point, and the same applies to anyone holding to some form of the Documentary hypothesis. No need to go off on a bunch of paragraphs detailing the exegetical in's & out's of that text. I will merely cite a few links and let you (and others) pick up the slack and necessary leg work. Speaking of leg work, good to see someone in the comment section bring up Dr. Michael S. Heiser since he's dealt with the Nephilim and other stuff relating to that enigmatic passage in Genesis, and how it ties in with other parts of the O.T., Second Temple Jewish Literature, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the N.T. (Not terribly important but worth mentioning that the very last link is a dissertation that I happily came across sometime in 2017 while poking around the 'net for more journal articles to add to my collection of scholarly material on Genesis 6:1-4 that has been amassing throughout the years. I forget the name of the evangelical monograph series it was to be published in, but found out a few months ago that it will most probably be this year through *Oudtestamentische Studiën* from BRILL.) *_"Divine Kingship and Genesis 6:1-4.”_* by *Meredith G. Kline* [Westminster Theological Journal; Vol. 24, No. 2; (1962); pp. 187-204] www.meredithkline.com/files/articles/Divine-Kingship-and-Genesis-6_1-4.pdf *_"The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4: (An Example of Evangelical Demythologization?)"_* by *Willem A. Van Gemeren* [Westminster Theological Journal; Vol. 43, No. 2; (1981); pp. 320-348. www.dougvandorn.com/Van%20Gemeren%20%20The%20Sons%20of%20God%20in%20Gen%206.1-4-Evangelical%20Demythologization.pdf *_Who (or What) Were the Nephilim?_* and *_Where Do Demons Come From_* by *Michael S. Heiser* _courtesy of _*_LogosTalk_* blog.logos.com/2017/11/who-or-what-were-the-nephilim/ blog.logos.com/2015/10/where-do-demons-come-from/ *_"The Sons of God and Genesis 6:1-4"_* (2013) [Diss.] by *Jacob Johannes Theodoor Doedens* [Once out in book form will probably be the *_Go-To_* book for years to come] theoluniv.ub.rug.nl/32/7/2013Doedens%20Dissertation.pdf Neither here nor there but I will toss it in because I liked his presentation, and I presume many others coming across this post of mine will enjoy it too. *_Why The Villain of Eden was a Serpent_* by *Ben S* th-cam.com/video/BO13BSSjsYU/w-d-xo.html
To your list, you can add my book "On the Genesis 6 Affair's Sons of God: Angels or Not?" subtitled, "A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim": www.truefreethinker.com/articles/new-book-genesis-6-affairs-sons-god-angels-or-not
The kenites are a race.And if you meet one they will tell you they are better than you.I know Jesus can save them too.Its not easy.Father put us here to get our siblings home.
**SON'S OF GOD** = ADAM AND SETH, ON.. PRE~ FLOOD ~*MEN OF RENOWN = LUKE 3 38 ----- DAUGHTERS OF MEN of the men created before Adam and Eve. ------ Cains wife is from the same daughter's of men created before Adam and Eve. ------ HERDSMAN III OLD III
That the line of Cain is a line of wickedness as opposed to a faithful line of Seth is a myth.
The Angel view is the original, traditional and majority one amongst the earliest Jews and Christians alike.
Now, as per the Bible Angels look just like human males so when you say "they do show up in human form at times" that is unsubstantiated: the logical conclusion is that such is how they are ontologically. Angels "don't procreate" and "we don't have Angelic marriage" only if you reject the Angel view of Gen 6. Yet, they were not supposed to do it which is why they "left their first estate" (as per Jude) to do so and are thus, considered fallen. There is a difference between that they are not supposed to get married and do not get married.
"What we know about Angels" actually explains why it is only male "sons of God" who have to marry only female "daughters of men."
Thank you I Was getting confused by him it didn't seem right I appreciate you exposing this . He seems to be worldly which would make him a Wolf in sheep's clothing Very misleading thank you
@@mfpeteebirdyepyep5210 No it's not the worldliness or unworldliness . It's what has been taught thru the centuries in almost the whole church world about Seth and Cain , so most people just accept it as fact
@La Chatelaine For some unknown and annoying reason, YT sometimes cuts off comments when we come back to reply so I cannot see who made the "offhand" statement: who was it?
"they left their first estate" & the Book of Job & other Old Testament Books The term "Sons of God" exclusively refers to Angelic beings. Also, read 2nd Peter and Jude.
The problem with the fallen angel idea is this:
You must assume that
1. Angels have a libido, and can lust after humans.
2. Angels can marry and take wives for themselves.
3. Angels can manifest themselves physically, and have ontological creative power.
4. This ontological power results in seed producing offspring through sexual intercourse with humans.
If you don't find this to be theologically problematic, I would be worried.
Thanks Dr. Cooper for a great video!
Angels can do 1,2,3 and 4. . Why would you think they couldn't?
@@j.b.8379 So the resurrection of Christ could have just been a demonic physical appearance to deceive?
@@merecatholicity 🤔 what would you say? Know this by results. Fruits are sweet.
@@merecatholicity far as I can tell their is a thin line between physical and spiritual. Scientists would call it dimensional. Shamans would call it realms. All through every ancient text. Angel's take physical form... in this dimension. That's all I know😁
From what I get from the bible ,
Certain angels could manifest a human form for appearances on the earth, as it is certain they still do to this day.
All kinds of encounters of mysterious individuals appearing out of nowhere helping people in need and then vanishing into thin air.
Plus various appearances of angelic beings in the Bible, as messengers, and those on special missions, such as the two accompanying the Lord ( or Angel of the Lord ) as He visited Abraham and then went down to visit and rescue Lot in Sodom. They ate food with Abraham and everything.
Myself I believe it was some of those particular kind of angels that were
' enticed and lured ' by Satan to lust after the women they were in charge of keeping watch over , and desire to have them for themselves.
If they could perform as human while in their earthly state then what is to say they could not perform sexually as well.
Angels in their ' first estate ' of heaven do not have relation with women but angels that leave it and fall from their faithful position with God have " as many as they choose "
"they left their first estate"
Only other time benei ha-elohim is used is in the book of Job, clearly referencing angelic beings.
Your interpretation is modern and worldly. "Can't imagine angels having sex therefore it couldn't be"
Bruh, I think even angels have their own feelings thus Lucifer revolted against God by his own will.
It says in different Bible interpretations that these sons of God were fallen Angels. If humans and Angels were created in God's likeness then obviously they look human. You think they couldn't have sex organs? This guy doesn't know what he's tlkn about
b Angel's are perfect, and I couldn't see why or how they would want to have sx that just doesn't make sense...
Even I dont want to have sx and I'm human because I follow God
in Hebrews, it is stated that God has never called an angel His son, which is the reason why Jesus is above the angels. However, you're stating that the "Sons of God" are the angels, making a contradiction. So who is lying? Moses or the author of Hebrews?
They are angels 'who left their first estate' as mentioned in Jude. The genetic pool was corrupted and had to be destroyed by the flood.
Cain is a nephilim. The first murderer and the first religionist. John 8:44.
@@danielxu9 no.
Bingo!
@Paul Cummins
Nowhere in or around that passage that you're quoting from, that being Jude 1:6 does it even hint that that's referring to angelic beings cohabitating with women, having sex with them and producing offspring. All it is saying is that they left the position, domain, or roll that God had created them for. It's neither in the English nor in the Greek. It looks like you are just inserting your opinion into the text.
The word that you have used, estate, is the Greek word ἀρχὴν (archēn) with the root archó which actually means to rule or to begin.
ἀρχὴν (archēn):
beginning, corners, domain, elementary, first, first preaching, principalities, rule, rulers.
I would contest that it's a huge leap to jump right from those definitions into the bed of a human woman in order to procreate and have children. We have a clear passage in Scripture that sets precedent and that is Genisis 1: 11, 12, 21, 24, 25.
God put limits upon his created things as to how they would procreate and I can't see humans being an exception.
In Genesis 1:26 God created male and female. In the first God then commands Adam and Eve to “be fruitful and increase in number” Genesis 1:28. This was the first command which was also a blessing that God gave people was a command to have children and to procreate. The same command/blessing, “be fruitful and multiply,” is repeated to Noah’s family in Genesis 9:1 and 7. Though it doesn't explicitly say that God put limits and boundaries as to how or who they could procreate with, it only makes sense that he followed the pattern that came before it in Genesis (in kind). In the same way you can't cross breed a cat with a dog, or a rabbit with a deer, or a mouse with a bat, or even a chimpanzee with a human, I believe the standard still remains with human beings as with any other created thing that God had created to procreate.
Genesis 6:4, ESV: The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.
So here we find the Giants, the Nephilim, were around in the days that were described in Genesis 6:1- 3, the next verse being the timestamp rather than the cause. It never says that these Giants were the result of the sexual union between the sons of God and the daughters of man. And the Great Men of renowned, described at the end of verse for refers back to the Nephilim, and not the offspring of the union between the sons of God and the daughters of man.
This is all of course my opinion and how I interpret the scriptures and I know that I could be wrong and it could be as you say.
@@graylad Excellent, well thought-out comment. And I concur. If there is this underlying “divine council” to which Heiser refers, and which drastically changes how one reads the OT (as many of his devout followers attest), there is scant little evidence to go on. If this is such an earth shattering understanding, it surely is based upon very little. It seems more likely that Moses would have made it far clearer if this is about angels procreating with humans. One has to assume a great deal that contradicts what we know about angelic beings in order to support the Heiser view. I don’t think dogmatism on either side is warranted. But I have quite a few friends who say that the Heiser view has radically impacted their entire view of the Bible. And they are unwavering. Thanks again for your comment.
I don't agree with you Dr. Cooper. What if I told you that spirits still marries human. The spiritual world is real and I fear that you are looking through the Bible with your natural eyes.
that's an interesting conversation in itself... and yet as i read it I feel as though i am not well enough informed to understand you correctly. do you mean to say spirits attach themselves to us? or they are able to take human form?
@@hessian144 yes, the watcher Angel's took human form and took the daughters of men and made children with them.
These children were the demigods of old.
Hercules, Perseus and the like.
God does not allow his heavenly spirit children to take human form after the flood. They can only appear like white fog like.
Not sure but I heard that Lucifer turns himself to dragon in anger while revolving against God then it's possible that they could be in physical form too. Just my thoughts 😁
My guess is that they used the seed of other men as their own. At least that was Aquinas' theory.
I need further explanation regarding number chapter 13 and also where the Giant people came from . People like Og king of basin ????
Where do you get the connection of the serpent with Cain? You’re making a context that isn’t there.
W. A.j. Cain didn't introduce sin into the world. Cain was told to master his sin. The adversary in the garden wasn't told to master his sin nor is he offered grace.
“You’re making a context that isn’t there.” I’ve heard and seen some pretty awful vocabulary in my days, but that one in particular made my eyes shutter.
Sam Poster don't complain because you don't understand
IDK There's something to it because when i married my wife she was a pagan & i had very strong Chrostian faith. She came ti church with me & i went to her rituals. I left the church & we both practice witchcraft together. Its interesting. I am now a part of a coven. I feel comfortable around them.
Bailey hill so in other words your wife pulled you away from Christianity. You fell the way Adam did.
While I'm not totally decided on this (not that it matters much), I would not count out the interpretation that the "sons of God" were in fact angels. Jude 6-7 refers to "angels who did not stay within their own positions of authority," followed by "Sodom and Gomorrah...which LIKEWISE indulged in sexual immorality." Additionally, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 at least seemed to believe that it was possible to have sex with the angels who visited Lot.
Finally, Deuteronomy 32:8 refers to angels as "sons of God." The nations are said to be divided up according to the number of the sons of God. The verse is a reference to Genesis 10, which lists 70 (Septuagint has 72, by my understanding) nations descended from Noah. 70/72 is the number of angels on God's council, which is also why Israel has 70 elders (Exodus 24. 70 might be an approximation of 72 since 70 doesn't divide evenly by 12) and Jesus has 70/72 apostles in Luke 10. We see this angelic council in Revelation, which has 24 angels on thrones around God (4:4), 4 living creatures with 6 wings each, for a total of 24 wings (4:8), and the dragon (Satan) who sweeps a third of the stars (angels) out of the sky (12:4) - 24 is a third of 72. So there's at least some precedent for saying that the "sons of God" might be angels, given that the term refers to angels elsewhere.
Jude and 2 Peter 2 are very clear in placing the timeline of the fall of Angels as within the Gen 6 time frame. If they are not referring to Gen 6 then, pray tell, to when are they referring, right? Their readers would have no idea what they are talking about since there is only a one time fall of Angels in the Bible and if Gen 6 is not it then well, we do not know anything about it.
Psalm 82 & 89 might be of note for you
The angles that came to Abraham and Sarah sat and ate food
Not fallen angels. Angels can only do the will of God. They have no power of their own.
"We do see them show up in human form at times"... That's my issue. Angels do take on tangible physical form such that they have meals with both Abraham and Lot in Fen 18 and 19. Further, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah listed after the two angels in Gen 19 and That's what led to their destruction.
So there is something there as I see it now but I know you have more videos on this subject so I'll have a look at those and see what more light you have to shed.
Thank you Dr Cooper 🙏🏾
Read the story Sodom and Gomorrah again. You'll see that judgment had already been passed. The angels were sent for the very purpose of destroying the cities.
I find this subject very fascinating, it is an enigma of sorts. I used to hold to an angelic view and was corrected by a pastor I saw on youtube. Sometimes when we read the bible and some of its enigmas, things or events that are not clear and have had massive interpretations we need to take a step back and remember one thing. if something occurred in the bible, it is supported elsewhere. Meaning, you can find any scripture (taken out of context) to support any idea you want, and I mean any idea... but you will never find a clear statement that supports it, meaning the bible does not contradict itself.
To see this meaning supported, angels don't marry or did they disobey God and do it anyways lets look at God and how he reacts to sin or disobedience. When Adam and Eve sinned and the serpent (the devil), God IMMEDIATELY punished all three of them. When Cain killed Abel, God IMMEDIATELY, meaning the very next scripture after the action, punished Cain. So we can see God has an MO, something that he does always for the acts of sin or disobedience.
Lets follow this line of reasoning, if the angels really did (or demons, the fallen angels) commit this atrocious act, why was only man punished? That is not God's MO, when Moses disobeyed God and the Israelites, they were immediately punished to wander the desert for forty years! This punishment wasn't obscured in later books of the bible, it wasn't implied in other books it was the very next scripture when God said this generation shall not see the promised land. So it is clear from how our God in heaven acts when it comes to sin is that it was not angels but man, just read Genesis 6 after the mention of the giants.... only man is mentioned, not once angels.
Now you will probably ask, ok what do you believe? My belief in it is complicated but I will try to break it down but first I agree with Dr. Cooper.
When Adam and Eve sinned their eyes were immediately opened, plus God had told them that if they ate of the tree they 'would surely die', surely does not mean immediately and it implies that they were no longer immortal. This is even more clear when God kicks them out lest they eat from the other tree. So my theory, mind it is a theory, is that either the act of sinning or eating the fruit corrupted the perfect DNA God made in them. After that we see death, corruption, disease and everyone mentioned before the flood died, even if they died at 960 years old like Methuselah. So my theory is that sin corrupted their DNA and gigantism and acromegaly diseases were not as hard on their bodies. The pre-flood world had more oxygen and was safer, not perfect, but safer for humans, there was disease but less of it. So therefore these two diseases caused giants, which Nephilim means titans or big but not hybrid of gods, that is an outside interpretation from the Alexandrian scripts instead of the Antioch scripts which the KJV is based on the latter. So to conclude, there were giants afterward but slowly these people with the disease gigantism and acromegaly, the disease slowly became more and more debilitating to the giants we see today. Most do not live over the age of 30 and so as our DNA has become more and more corrupted due to many factors, yes the giants of old were much stronger and more capable but we can see a clear degradation of our human DNA. Yes these were men of renown, they were mighty but look up people in the last 100 years that have had acromegaly and gigantism, they played basketball, were said to be strong than most humans but eventually by age 20-30 the disease debilitated them to the point they either died or needed a wheelchair.
Sorry for the long explanation but I think it should be very clear that the sons of God were not angels, no where does scripture support that.
The angels involved were punished according to Jude and Peter, and also Hell was prepared for the Devil and his angels. Just my 2 cents on it not being in God's MO to punish bit.
GOD clothed Adam and Eve before they were exiled from the garden. Is that not a physical action if Adam and Eve are physical beings. it would make since Angels would have the same capability.
@@luisgomez9542 did Jesus not say angels are spirit? Think you need to read
@@shadowdancer3531 not denying that. But Angels did leave their proper dwelling. Your saying they are not capable of materializing. So who birthed the Giants ?
@@shadowdancer3531 you need to reevaluate.
Is there any reading material you reccomend on this subject? Your view makes way more sense.
Doesn’t matter what view he has. That’s the view of man. We use the Bible to prove scripture even if it doesn’t jive with our personal beliefs
th-cam.com/video/2dPLgT1Y7Nc/w-d-xo.html
"For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven …"
(KJV1769+ Mat 22:30)
"As the angels of God in"... what? In heaven!" Thus, Jesus does not say that the angels cannot cohabitate with women here on earth. They did this in fact, and that's why they are in prison in the region of Tartarus. Otherwise we'll all have to cut Peter and Jude out of our bibles. - Bruce Waltke and many other scholars agree with this rabbinic position.
Ps: angels can assume humans' appearance, eg: Hb 13:2.
Best regards, this time I disagree with you, nevertheless, carry on doinng good videos.
Nephilim = In the beginning. It is explained, in the Albanian language. Albanian turns out to be the language of ancient Olympia
That is definitely the FIRST question to answer, and most people get it wrong; thus, their interpretations are very bizarre.
Yes I hold to all of this. Great video!
But you didn't say who the Nephilim were
Thank you for your 2 cents
Which angels were Jude referring to then, who left their original abode?
I like to have it both ways, when I’m feeling rational I go with something similar to Dr.Coopers ideas. When they discover Bigfoot I’m gonna flip flop to the crossbreed theory
You have some great teaching, Pastor Cooper, but you are wrong on this (admittedly minor) issue. Read 1 Corinthians 11:10. Why does Paul say women should cover their heads and be modest "because of the angels?" Remember that the original book of Enoch is even quoted by Jude. I'm not saying it's canon but if you're willing to let the tradition of church fathers help in interpreting scripture correctly than we shouldn't just ignore a clearly historical source the apostles would have been familiar with. I agree most of the extrapolated nephilim and alien stuff you see on youtube is anywhere from an educated guess to complete nonsense, but that doesn't mean that should discount the nephilim being demon-human hybrids, as it is the most well supported interpretation.
@Maximus Alexander Maxim Augustus XVIII Friend, there is no description of Angels' hairdos. And you are quite right that Angles are often called "man"/"men" because they look just like human males.
I believe that they are attempting to account for "older, local gods".
Angels are male only so Jesus is saying once we are all together in heaven, we will be like the angels in heaven who do not procreate...
The fallen ad chosen to leave their abode
Jesus was talking about the institution of marriage which there is no need for in Heaven. Says nothing about angel's fallen or otherwise not having the ability to have intercourse or procreate. That is clearly what happened in Genesis 6 and why a flood was sent in judgement. Thei offspring from these forbidden unions were not normal humans but 'giants', Also, somehow which Scripture doesn't give the cause of, giants appeared again after the flood and were present and prominent amongst the Caananites. Why the children of Israel were commanded to completely exterminate when taking the promised land. This sort of injunction was not given when it came to later battles with the enemies of Israel. Definitely something different genetically about the Canaanites. Strong argument that this was an attempt to corrupt the human gene pool to prevent Messiah from being born.
The ' seed ' permeated the human bloodline of the entire earth except the family of Noah.
Noah was the last pure blood in the lineage to the Messiah.
God took it down to the last man ( actually Shem ) before destroying the evil seed with the flood.
No pure Messiah, no salvation for anyone.
A remnant of giants came through in the line of Ham as God still had use for them.
They came back but nowhere near as before, enough to occupy the promised land and then to test the Israelites.
The Israelites under Joshua then killed them off or sent them to disperse around the world where they died out.
There was a plaque or stone with writing that was found in a remote place saying
" we are those who ran from Joshua the son of Nun "
I forget what else they called Joshua.
I still wonder if Cain is the line of wickedness then why did God took ENOCH ALIVE 🤔
There are two Enochs mentioned in Genesis
@@felixcharles9773 so which one is the one who is taken to above alive, m not expert so I need to clear my misunderstanding
There is Enoch, the son of Cain (Genesis 4:17), and there is Enoch, son of Jared (Genesis 5:18). Enoch, son of Jared is the one who “walked with God” (Genesis 5:24, Hebrews 11:5) and is also the ancestor of Noah and by extension of Jesus (Luke 3:37).
Thank you so much for sharing it help me to understand it clearly
I understand the other views but the Angelic view of Genesis 6 will always be mine.
Don't agree, the Bible describes the sons of God in this context as the wicked ones. So they can't be the descendents of Seth
WHAT IS THE FLOOD?
This is just the beginning. Do you feel more or less flooded today than when you posted the reply? Rhetorically speaking. .
Where in the bible does it say there's no marriage in heaven. The church is the bride of Christ
Where he failed to explain is, why will the daughter of man will birth men of renounce or at least men that were different from other men? To the contrary the story of Sansom told us by a super powerful jew lost its power by dating an out sider. These son's of God where not gentiles.
I believe that both your exegesis and your hermeneutics are faulty here. (By the way I studied under Dr. Klein at Gordon Conwell.)
A simple research of the term “sons of God” will show you that it is always used to refer to the angelic host so a simple reading of the text would indicate that the beings talked about here are part of the heavenly host. You have to read into the text that it is talking about the godly line of Seth.
Also, Jesus simply says that the angels do not marry. It is wrong to presuppose that he is saying that they are not sexual. It’s like me saying Catholic priests do not marry. That does not mean that they are not sexual beings.
Another consideration is in genesis when God says “let us make man in our image” he is talking to the heavenly host that Job tells us were there at creation singing in Job 38. Later it says he makes Man in that image male and female.
It seems to me that you have come to the text with your presuppositions rather than doing careful exegesis.
As to who the Nephilim are? Is the text saying that they were there before this happened and continue to be there or does the text show the relationship between the offspring of this unholy union and the Nephilim?
Also I think it is wrong for you to pre-suppose that the spies made up what they saw. There is nothing in the Hebrew language in that text that would suggest that a more natural understanding is that, knowing genesis six, what they saw terrified them.
I have no desire to exaggerate what genesis six teaches. But I want to be faithful to good hermeneutics and good exegesis in interpreting this passage. I don’t think you’ve done that here.
.....Michael Heiser has entered the chat
Has any one ever thought that God's work with His human creation was partially experimental? For instance, in Genesis 6 we find that the thoughts of mankind are continually evil and God wipes them out with the flood and essentially starts over. And there was another time when the Israelites were in the wilderness and disobedient to Yaweh and He said to Moses, I will wipe out these people and fulfill my covenant through you, Moses. And then Moses talks Him down from the ledge. This assumes open theism.
The Sons of God left their first estate. I believe you are confused and may unknowingly be spreading false doctrine.
It sounds like doctrinal equivocation of Trent’s anathema of the Lutheran/Calvinist, Protestant gospel doctrinal confessional statements, that Rome hasn’t revised or acknowledged…?!
Funny how some people find it difficult to understand plain English take the text at it's word, as it were.
However, a comparative examination of Babylonian & Aramaic texts that address the same issues reveals their accounts also understood there was a 'supernatural' aspect involved.
Still, any text is open to interpretation, and so we're back we started each with their own belief of what is meant.
Well okay, its still an easy matter to resolve, one common theme found l in scripture, the Septuigint & Babylonian texts are the entities called giants because they were giant......so, if the supernatural interpretation is correct, there must be evidence of entities of abnormally large stature.....and by crikey there is loads....take the US & just from the dates 1800 - 1900, judging by the amount of articles a person couldn't dig a hole without discovering the remains of humanoids that ranged in height from 8ft to 18ft or a skull with double rows of teeth & three times larger than human skull or remains with 6 digits on hands & feet.
Not only America as the same phemomena is found worldwide.
I could go on all day describing other physical proofs & evidence but i gotta go.
I will say this though.....the dominant narrative regarding human origins & history & the history of the world & the how, what, why, how it all came about has less to do with the historical truth & more to do with perception management & the social engineering of society.
As I have stated elsewhere, when I was young and the first time I seriously read Genesis 6 I instantly took it as angelic beings came to earth and had sexual relations with human women creating giant size children.
When I then read about them being the ' men of reknown ' I instantly took that as it being where the stories of the Greek gods came from.
I have been pursuing the answers to this puzzle ever since.
No one knows how the Angels came to be.
Also God said in genesis chapter3 verse22
And the lord God said the man has now become like one of us knowing good and evil.he must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat,and live forever.
God says like us.
I believe the sons of God the Bible refers to are the fallen angels.
The Nephilim were the bastard sons created when the Igigi left their
designated and assigned observation posts which were issued by the
Annuaki and then disobediently descended down to Earth and took the
daughters of man for wives of their own and breaded with them creating
giants. The Nephilim.
Pretty accurate. Bastards. With faith, all things work together for his glory. Beyond our own understanding.
They ancient cannibal giants
I saw a picture of a "sons of god" once having a woody in one of the accts on IG!! now, that explains the nephilim!! lol
What?
I think that explains nympho
How do you explain verses like Jude 1:6, 2 peter 2:4, 1 peter 3:20?
Did God say be fruitful and mulitiply? Why would it be wrong for Seths lineage to marry the line of Cain? Why would you apply a new testament verse being unequaly yoked to the ancient people of the time when God told them multiply?
The seed of the serpent turned out to be not an ethnic or natural status but a spiritual one. "You brood of vipers" John the Baptist called the religious leaders of his day. The same ones Jesus spoke to and said "your father, the devil". And they did and still do persecute the church, that part of the body of Christ which still touches the earth.
Genesis six does not even say that the Nephilim were the offspring of the "Sons of God" and "the daughters of Adam". It just says they were in the land in those days, and afterward. The heroes of old were the offspring. The church should re-interpret Genesis in the light of Christ, not take the view of the rabbis as authoritative or a starting point IMO.
Looking very dapper Pr cooper. from Lex
You’re looking quite dapper.
I find it very hard to believe that two humans beings can birth gaints just because they don't have the same belief. The Bible does not give enough information about what physical attributes angels have or how much similarity are between us. All we know for sure is that the gay population in Sodom found them very attractive to the point of rejecting Lot's daughters for them. I will stick to Enoch stories a book quoted in Bible.
Well friend, before finding it very hard to believe that two humans beings can birth giants we need to define that vague, generic, subjective and un-biblical English term. Best to forget about it and stick to the term Nephilim since we have no reliable physical description of them. Now, the Bible gives us a LOT of information about what physical attributes Angels have: they look just like human males (no wings, no halos). As for the “Enoch stories”: Jude quotes Enoch and you can then say that he quoted form one of the books of Enoch but 1 Enoch aka Ethiopic Enoch also contradicts the Bible.
@@KenAmmi-Shalom I agree , he is wrong the lord would not wipe out the earth over just humans. There were really angels and they were 200 they corrupted all life on earth .in the book of giants it says they mixed their seed with 200 of each species on earth, from the birds in the sky to the fish in the sea. I am sorry but he is wrong very wrong.
@@zaydamoody7183 Do not be sorry ;o) In any case, perhaps they did mixed their seed with each species on Earth, etc. but that is apocryphal folklore.
FYI: I just published a book titled “What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim? A Styled Giantology and Nephilology”: www.amazon.com/s?k=nephilology&ref=nb_sb_noss
In Genesis 6 the angels lusted after human women,
In Sodom the earth men lusted after angels.
When they found there were angelic beings at Lots house, they desperately wanted a piece of that action.
I disagreed until this video. Because both Josephus in Antiquity of the Jews and Enoch reference the angel-humans. But now I think a whole view of what angels are and the line discussion is more reasonable. Point being, people close to Jesus time thought otherwise, but just because it’s old doesn’t mean it’s right, which is also shown in the Bible.
Continued: Just because the Sauducees didn’t believe in the resurrection during Jesus time does not mean they’re right today. As for commenters, you’re free to disagree but consider if you’re arguing because the idea is exciting to you or if it is reasonably true. Aside from Goliath and the 6 fingered giant, we have no other examples. Lastly, it is God who opens and closes the womb to create eternal beings from the human union. To say demons did this independent of God is a bizarre view.
I agree that sons of god are lineage of seth however the nephilim has to come about somewhere cause Adam and eve where fully humans....
For anyone who thinks the angels mated with humans. Answer this question. Angels are spiritual beings, who do not reproduce. Humans are physical and do reproduce. Neither physiology is able to facilitate reproduction with each other. So how did they mate?
The angels in heaven don't have sex but Jude 1:6 says the angels that left heaven changed their habitation which is their body for a different kind of habitation to have these relationships with humans. The book of Daniel even talks about angels and humans having sex when it says "they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men like iron and clay". Early Christians and Christians for 1800 years explained Nephilim as children of angels and humans. The term Sons of God are used in Job when referring to angels bringing Satan before God. Teaching the sons of God in Genesis 6 are the sons of Seth is a made up teaching from 200 years ago and makes God into a genocidal, cruel, and evil God.
On Daniel it says " they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men,
BUT as iron does NOT mix with clay they will NOT cleave one to another "
That is not for Genesis 6 as apparently in Genesis 6 their seed DID cleave, but Daniel is for the end times ( and another story )
@@michaelszczys8316 the combination is weak but it’s still combined as it says the toes were of iron and clay. They are still together
@@ClarkAboudaz the other side of that coin I recently noticed is how that part of Daniel has to do with world government systems over the course of human history. How it lists governments and kingdoms we now recognize but the final kingdom / world government power is yet future and we are not exactly sure.
It tells of how the final system will include a ' they ' whose ' seed ' will not
' cleave ' with the seed of men such as
iron and clay do not mix.
This is not new, but what I recently noticed was that all the pieces of the great statue or image were all METALS that mix together ( as far as I know ) except the part of the final kingdom that is NOT A METAL.
All the previous kingdoms can mix, the part of the final kingdom can not mix.
The final kingdom will consist of part that can mix and part that is totally foreign, and the foreign part can not genetically cleave to the other part.
There were A), giants in the earth in those days; and *also* AFTER THAT, when B), the sons of God (Adam is a son of God) came in unto the daughters OF MEN, and they bare children to them, A), the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”
{Genesis 6:4}
"also after that"
And there we saw the *giants* the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.
{Numbers 13:33}
And the coast of Og king of Bashan, which was of the remnant of the *giants* that dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei,
{Joshua 12:4}
Nephilim are a variation of the Human DNA. Like a great dane and a toy poodle are to the Wolf.
Fallen angels have lost their first estate and are no longer sons of God.
In Genesis, the origional Hebrew does not say "giants." It simply says "nephilim." The term "giants" first appears in the Greek translation.
@@Johurph86
It's the translation.
Well the word of God say that they left their first estate + the word said they went into them and had children!!!!! Good enough for me!!!!
Wow you're way off man.
How does that theory explain the Giants? Something Supernatural had to produce them. If they could take on the form of humans, why couldn't they take on their reproduction systems as well?
Ralph
Dr Cooper forgot to explain the giants !
Perhaps he doesn't go into the "giants" thing because it's an easily dismissed assumption. The term "giants" wasn't introduced until the Greek translation of Genesis. In the origional Hebrew, Genesis makes no mention of Nephilim being giants.
@@Johurph86 @Joshua Murphy I think its pretty clear in the Bible about giants. Just not much detail because the Bible's main focus is salvation. This might be the earths third go around as in 2 floods. Been studying genesis and other scripture that back that theory. When Adam was created he was told to REPOPULATE the earth. Why if he was the first man. Moses was told to REPOPULATE the earth after the flood. In Isaiah, it talks about Satan being cast down. How he was in the First garden and how he weakened the nations. Look up "4 worlds of scripture". Its about pre adamite world. Its not about giants, but pretty interesting and ties some things together for me. My point is that there are multitudes of things that happened that we don't know about, but we don't necessarily need to know. It's still interesting and helps understand the scheme of things. Sorry to go off topic, but I think its relevant.
That dont explain the Giant’s
You don't know..
Very peculiar way to interpret the text and, I think, the most unlikely explanation when taking into account textual and cultural interpretation. Why would this hybrid people be the heroes of old or people of importance or giants when simply they were the children of believers and nonbelievers. Also it is not necessary to have sex in order to have children, we can do that today never mind angelic beings.
யார் இந்த இராட்சதர்கள்?
Who is this Giants / Nephilim = Father/Dad
Genesis 6:4
ஆதியாகமம் 6:4
There were giants in the earth in those days
அந்நாட்களில் இராட்சதர் பூமியிலே இருந்தார்கள்.
பின்பு தேவகுமாரர் மனுஷகுமாரத்திகளோடே கூடுகிறதினால், தேவ குமாரர்கள் மனுஷகுமாரத்திகளுக்கு "பிள்ளைகளைப் பெற்றபோது",
and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they (Son of God) bare children to them (Daughter of Men),
தேவ குமாரர்களும் பூர்வத்தில் பேர்பெற்ற மனுஷராகிய பலவான்களானார்கள்.
the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
So,
தேவ குமாரர்கள் தங்களுக்கு பிள்ளைகளை பெற்றபோதுதான் பூர்வத்தில் பேர்பெற்ற மனுஷராகிய பலவான்களாக / இராட்சதர்களாக ஆனார்கள்.
ஒரு ஆண் தனக்கு பிள்ளை பிறக்கும்போதுதான் தகப்பன் / அப்பா / DAD / Father என்று ஆகிறான்.
உங்களுக்கு சந்தேகம் இருந்தால், உங்களுக்கு மிகவும் நெருங்கிய தமிழ் இலக்கணம் தெரிந்த நபரிடம் கேட்டு விளக்கம் பெறுங்கள்.
தயவசெய்து நரகத்திற்கு மக்களை வழிநடத்தாதிருங்கள்.
Matthew 23:9
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
மத்தேயு 23:9
பூமியிலே ஒருவனையும் உங்கள் பிதா என்று சொல்லாதிருங்கள், பரலோகத்திலிருக்கிற ஒருவரே உங்களுக்குப் பிதாவாயிருக்கிறார்.
Malachi 1:6
A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?
மல்கியா 1:6
குமாரன் தன் பிதாவையும், ஊழியக்காரன் தன் எஜமானையும் கனம்பண்ணுகிறார்களே; நான் பிதாவானால் என் கனம் எங்கே? நான் எஜமானானால் எனக்குப் பயப்படும் பயம் எங்கே என்று சேனைகளின் கர்த்தர் தமது நாமத்தை அசட்டைபண்ணுகிற ஆசாரியர்களாகிய உங்களைக் கேட்கிறார்; அதற்கு நீங்கள் உமது நாமத்தை எதினாலே அசட்டைபண்ணினோம் என்கிறீர்கள்.
Genesis 3:20
And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was "the mother of all living".
ஆதியாகமம் 3:20
ஆதாம் தன் மனைவிக்கு ஏவாள் என்று பேரிட்டான். ஏனெனில், அவள் "ஜீவனுள்ளோருக்கெல்லாம் தாயானவள்".
Mail ID jobplus@live.com
WhatsApp No +91 99 4140 8454
Facebook அம்பி, Ambi
Notwithstanding whether you agree or disagree with Dr. Cooper, I fail to see why anyone would hit dislike on his videos, as his videos are of excellent quality and very informative.
Because he is leading people down the wrong road!
I feel like the Mormons decided to show up in the comment section. This is a joke before anyone comes after me.
If Adam was a son of God after he sinned God said in Gen 3:15 that he will preserve a seed in a lineage of Adam and there would also be a seed of the devil, then we see that lineage in the seed of Seth, whose lineage worshiped God. For you to worship God, you must be led by his Spirit and anyone led by God's Spirit is a son of God
Gen 4:
"26 And to SETH, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name ENOS: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord."
.
.
.
Rom 8:
"14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God."
.
.
.
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."
There is a reason Gen 6 never mentioned angels once, it is because the sons of God are not angels, they are men in the godly lineage of Seth who were led by the Spirit. As the earth became populated, these men looked upon the beautiful daughters of ungodly men and took them as wives. We see God speaking about the flesh of man which points of his desire of the flesh and He says that His Spirit shall not always dwell with man. This is because these women were turning the hearts of these men away from God so much so that they would not be led by His Spirit in time.
Gen 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.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."
They corrupted themselves and their lineage so much so that Noah and his family was found as the only godly ones preserved from the lineage of Seth in his generation. Gen 6:4 tells us that there were giants existing before the interrelation took place, and even after these men married these women, giants were among some of their offspring as well. No such thing as angels marrying women, that's a fairy-tale story for the gullible. Even if angels could have such relations, they can't die naturally, neither could they have died by the flood. They don't have sex organs and thus they don't produce sperms to procreate. There are giants even today in our world, so are you going to tell them that their father is a fallen angel??
The son's of God where the Holy prophet's and when they went in on the Daughters of men the nephilim where created
No... the bible says the Nephilim were already on the earth in those days... when the sons of god took the daughters of men for wives... it says ‘the Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and after’ - so clearly, the offspring of the sons of god and daughters of men and the Nephilim are not one and the same! Also... if the bible states that they were on the earth in those days and after, it suggests they were no longer on the earth at the time of writing etc... the sons of god were the original Christian (Jewish sect) prophets, that’s correct - the dead sea scrolls confirmed that emphatically! Cheers
LOOK FOR ALL YOU UNEDUCATED CRITICS WHO DONT EVEN KNOW WHERE YOU LINEAGE EVEN GOES BACK TO PLEASE DONT COME OUT AND PUBLCLY DISPLAY ACTS OF IGNORANCE WHEN IM AN HEBREW ISRAELITE FROM THE HEAD TRIBE OF JUDAH THE LAW GIVERS AND HEAD OF ALL GOVERNMENT THAT EVER EXISTED PLEASE MOVE AROUND FOR YOUR OWN HUMILITY SAKE
@@dannyboywhaa3146 finally someone with reason in all these comments, good reply.
shadowdancer3531 thanks - think I may have stumbled across a bit of a loonie lol... best wishes
Jordan....the term "sons of God" in the Old Testament is always referring to angels. Only in the New Testament does the phrase refer to regenerated humanity. Granted, this is a great mystery. However, your initial premise that the terminology doesn't mean angels is scholastically a rookie error and not a mistake that someone like yourself should have made. Additionally, although the sons of Seth do represent the line in which Noah 'finds grace', nowhere does the terminology "sons of God" applied to any human being at this point. Not even Adam. Cross referencing this passage in Genesis 6 with both Jude and 2 Peter seals the deal. No question.
The belief that aliens, known as the ‘sons of God’, came down to the earth and had babies with women is at best a fantasy. It is based on a catastrophic misunderstanding of Genesis 6:4. May I point out the following:
1. Fallen angels are known as devils and demons. To call a demon a son of God is to put him at par with Jesus Christ the true Son of God. This is outright blasphemy.
2. Righteous angels are not sons of God either: For unto which of the angels said he AT ANY TIME, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? (Hebrew 1:5). If righteous angels have never at any time been referred to as ‘sons of God’, how much less devils?
3. Contrary to the popular belief, it is not the union between the sons of God and the daughters of men that introduced the giants into the world. When the sons of God took the daughters of men to wife, the Bible clearly states, There were giants in the earth in those days (already) (Genesis 6:4).
4. Fallen angels still exist, and women are still there. Then why are they not having giants anymore?
5. Who then are the sons of God mentioned in Genesis 6:2,4? Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas … and Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ (Matthew 1:2,15,16). Luke picks up this genealogy from where Matthew stops and works backwards. He does not stop at Abraham where Matthew began but continues until, Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, WHICH WAS THE SON OF GOD (Luke 3:37-38). If we apply the word ‘begat’ to the genealogy in Luke, this is how it would read: God begat Adam; and Adam begat Seth; and Seth begat Enos; and Enos begat Cainan; and Cainan begat Maleleel; and Maleleel begat Jared; and Jared begat Enoch; and Enoch begat Mathusala… This clearly brings out the fact that Adam and his descendants were the sons of God mentioned in Genesis chapter six. Note that the Scripture does not call Adam a son of God but THE son of God. There are only two people in the Bible designated THE son of God: Adam and Jesus. This is because neither of them had a human father or a human mother (Mary was no blood relation of Jesus, else He would have had a sinful nature). God Himself was their parent. Also contrary to the general perception, Jesus was not the first Son of God. The first and the original son of God was Adam. Jesus is called the Last Adam (last does not come before first). True, Jesus existed before Adam, but not as Son of God, rather as God Himself.
6. What then was the origin of the giants? Many people debate what the mark of Cain was, but it ought to be straightforward. God turned Cain into a giant so that no person of ordinary build would dare to confront him. Cain clearly feared reprisal for him having murdered Abel. That reprisal would have to come, not from his own descendants but from Abel’s true brothers. The hatred between Cain and Abel did not just happen. God told the serpent, And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed (Genesis 3:15). There was to be hatred between the son of the serpent and the son of the woman. When Eve gave herself to Adam, she conceived Abel and, in this respect, Abel was the natural seed of the woman, thus prefiguring Jesus the spiritual Seed of the woman. Cain was the son of the serpent. His female descendants were later called the daughters of men whom Satan used for tempting the sons of God, thus marring the original pure DNA of the sons of God.
7. The post flood giants such as Goliath, Anak and the king Og had human fathers as clearly shown in scripture. They were not the sons of aliens. For example, Goliath was a Philistine. The Philistines were descended from Casluhim, the grandson of Ham (I Chronicles 1:12)
If you want a comprehensive study of this subject, check out the book, The Nemesis Apple, by Einer Nuh K’Beit.
Christ had to have been blood relation to Mary, elsewise he'd have been human race, but not OUR human race. So the sinful nature must be passed on through the father.
I also recommend the book "The Judgment of the Nephilim" by Ryan Pitterson
Jordan was shown the truth by a very advanced time traveler
You need to research this subject a lot more. I Enoch is NOT 2nd Temple, Jewish literature.....it was found in cave #4 at Qumran in the Dead Sea Scrolls...a hand written copy that was from 300 B.C. I know that the Holy Fathers of the Council of Laodicia (?) believed that it was a 1st or 2nd Century , Jewish document and that is why it wasn't canonized.
HI
Then why did the Ethiopian Bible ALWAYS canonise it right from the beginning? And of course Moses, Jude and Peter quoted verbatim from it which would never happen unless it was canon. Shalom to us only in Christ Yeshua.
@@toosiyabrandt8676 Monophysites (Oriental Orthodox, Coptics..etc) are not part of the Church. Their heresy was condemned in the 4th Ecumenical Synod. They have also "canonized" II & III Enoch which are nothing more than Kabbalistic fable. What they have "canonized" is not canonical scripture. You should read my comment more carefully....and where did Moses quote I Enoch? Just because I Enoch isn't canonized doesn't mean that it is forbidden or banned by the Orthodox Church or that it isn't edifying.
But demons do not have body parts. They need a human host. Angels do not either so the nephalim must be beings from another planet.
please refer to Daniel 3:25- Job 1:6- & Job 2:1- Job 38:6&7- these few verses give you an insight on who were the sons of God- they were fallen angels. the offsprings were the nephelim, these were not from the line of seth and cain like many people believe. Noah line was perfect in his generation ( meaning it was unblemished, clean, without defect. in other words his seed as we know it nowadays his DNA was pure without a defect. God destroyed the old world because we had something bigger than just sin or people being unfaithful. there was a genetic seed problem with the humans in those days. here's another thought if seth line or cain line was so pure why did they perished in the flood? why did God command Joshua to wiped out every woman men and child in the land of canan, amelikites through David amoung other tribes? because those were the descendants of the anak race of giants. I can go on other things , but your theory is wrong.
What I don't understand is what happens to the original men? Do they just take the women? There is a word for that and it is not legal
This is an ESOTERIC WRITING )Nelphilims are children born between Human suns of God ( male) and Human suns of God (female),(SUNS) not spelled wrong.
I study with a priest.
Rubbish!
You'd think these learned ppl can at least now the section of the Bible they are talking about though I may have missed it if they did. Genesis 6:1-7. That's the account of "the sons of the true God saw that the sons of men were good-looking and materialized into human form and matted w them. The account brings out that these ppl were wicked. That lead Good to bring about the Flood of Noah's day bc the"thoughts of men were wicked all the time."
Dr michael Heiser has a much more plaisable interpretation. I would encourage you to enquire. The divine council
Holy men of renown
Good explanation. I’m still seeking more in this area only because it would be good to see how the Nephilim relates to the destruction of creation. I don’t necessarily hold to a particular view regarding the “sons of God” other than “elohim” being referred to as judges articulating the things of “Elohim” or YHWH when Jesus is speaking to the religious leaders and brings up Psalms 82. I don’t see how that correlates with the Nephilim specifically, but I think I’m wanting to see how this study of the Nephilim portrays to the Imago Dei. The sons of God came into the daughters of men. What does this mean? Was the image of God distorted? Certainly, it was for “all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth” and “every intention of the thoughts of his heart were evil continually.” We see a de-creation happening with the flood that was out of order in God’s intent of his creation.
Thank you but as far as I can tesearch Augustine was the first to come up with the two seed mixing interpretation of this holy Scripture. The people prior, the Jews, never had this understanding even suggested so Moses' "lesson" was totally missed. There is no private interpretation of Scripture so how can Augustine be the first one to understand this ancient text correctly? This interpretation leaves me with more questions than the old interpretation of fallen angels interbreeding with human women, which is the old and commonly held interpretation. The angels were fallen not normal angels and that can reasonably account for their unnatural behavior. Reply?
God's peace be with you.
Right you are, the Angel view is the original, traditional and majority one amongst the earliest Jews and Christians alike as I prove in my book "On the Genesis 6 Affair's Sons of God: Angels or Not?" subtitled, "A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim": www.truefreethinker.com/articles/new-book-genesis-6-affairs-sons-god-angels-or-not
Race of giants. Born of angels and human women.
Rubbish!
Jesus said that the Angels IN HEAVEN aren't given in marriage... guess what these fallen angels left their abode and came to earth to procreate, hence they begot giants. Not to mention that theirs a connection with Gen 6 and Jude.
Do angels eat? Yup, the three strangers that visited Abraham. Don't understand estimate the powers and abilities of angels.
Who is the son of god? Was Jesus marry? Was Buddha marry? Both were son of god, but they did not get marry. Not an angel, but son of god married with human woman. Nepheline survived the flood and had lived in the land of U.S A back on 76000bc and 1975 the Nepheline had came to U S A again. Now about 300000 Nepheline live in USA. So who are the Nepheline?
All humans have Neanderthal DNA but no Nepheline DNA.
Ford.
Demons never took on human form. Angels did, with God's permission.
Nephilim genes:
"In total Professor Reich's team located 100,000 genes that originally belonged to the Neanderthal genomes but penetrated the human genome, thanks to our frisky ancestors". - See more at: www.dailytech.com/NeanderthalHuman+Breeding+Was+Hard+But+Yielded+Benefits/article34236.htm#sthash.RCkAUAb6.dpuf
Angels created neanderthal they were called Nephilim and they mated with homo sapiens the pure humans
Stop being racist & lying
sorry read the bible th-cam.com/video/bBaeZZcxMiw/w-d-xo.html
The Hebrew Bible actually warns against the belief that that nephilim were the product of angels cohabiting with humans. Before explaining why the nephilim were not of divine nature, the context of which the original translation is used needs observation. Genesis 6:2-4(NASB) reads as follows: “that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were 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.” In order to fully comprehend this passage, we need to establish what “sons of God” refers to. This phrase has long since been debated among the church and from it derive three main interpretations. One view is that “sons of God” refers to the bloodline of Seth, who was born of Adam and Eve after Cain killed Abel in order to carry on the Godly faith. The second interpretation is the “sons of God” refers to angelic beings. The third view is “sons of God” refers to great heroes of the mythical past which include mighty warriors and tyrant leaders. Gilgamesh, who was depicted as being part god and part human, is one of the archetypes we know of who bracket with this idea. It is important to note that the exact expression “sons of God” only occurs five times within the Hebrew Bible. The other four occurrences of this term reside in the following verses: Job 1:6, Job 2:1, Job 38:7, and Daniel 3:25. All of these instances of the term “sons of God” or “son of God” are clear and lucid references to angelic beings. Although the exact expression is only presented five times in the entire Bible, there are other places in scripture which that indicate the relationship between God and humans is to be seen as a filial communion, such as the covenant God made with David which was a father-son relationship. Regardless, they are not referred to as a “son of God”. Therefore, it is safe to assume that the expression “sons of God” refers to angels. Someone might attempt to use Matthew 22:30 in which Jesus states that the angels who dwell in heaven neither marry nor are given in marriage to confute the idea that Genesis 6:1-4 refers to angels. Jesus included the angels who are in HEAVEN do not marry, not the ones who left their proper dwelling place. Thus, there is no contradiction. So who are the nephilim? There are two major sentences in Genesis 6:4 which guide our understanding in who they were, the first one being “the nephilim were on the earth in those days and also afterwards.” There are two possible interpretations of the expression “in those days and also afterwards.” Some people conclude that the nephilim were the offspring that resulted from angels marrying the women. This view appeals to texts of the 3rd century BC and 2nd century BC, such as the Enochian traditions, which suggest that the nephilim were giants. There is another interpretation to “in those days and also afterwards,” which concludes that the nephilim existed before the angels cohabited with the humans and after. This could be in theory saying that the nephilim no relation to to the angels marrying the humans. There are two reasons why this is the correct interpretation. First of all, whenever the expression “and also afterwards” is used, it is in the same context which makes this interpretation true. The second reason why this is the correct interpretation lies within the portion of the verse which says “They were the heroes who were from the ancient past, the men of renown.” It is important to note that this sentence does not begin with “and”. Almost every sentence in the Hebrew Bible begins with “and” and when it does not, it’s for one of two reasons; it’s either the beginning of a new section, or it’s acting as a footnote to the previous sentence. In this case, it is acting as a footnote. Basically, the verse is saying something along the lines of “the nephilim existed before the angels cohabited with humans and afterwards too,” then making a brief comment that they were the ancient heroes. In essence, what Moses is doing is demythologizing the nephilim. The reason that the text doesn’t tell us directly who they were is due to the fact that they were well known to the first readers. They didn’t need an explanation of who they were. Moses is predominately warning against the belief that the nephilim were offspring of angels and humans.
You really need to read your bible with spiritual eyes. If it sounds if it sounds weird to us. Then we believe it can’t be true.
Your narartive is false. You have to Iook at the He brew text not the mazeretic interpretations. Now to call these so called son's of God angels, I think this is wrong also. As you stated angels have no free will. These were some other creations of YAH perhaps even Djinn. The book of Jude quotes the book of Enoch.
Nephlim were giants of our origin.Minions just like us serving the gods that made way for us to exist on this earth. we are not living on our original world ! this world is of Animal etc nature!
So thank you for the question why would they have the ability to procreate with humans?
Well that’s interesting because God did not make humans so that he could procreate with us either!!!
But since the angels are spirits it looks like they have the ability to do the same thing that the Holy Spirit was able to do
Because we look at the anointed book of Enoch which Jesus spoke about in Jude also confirmed that they the lead in this book
And this book is full of the story of the Nephilim and the angels were punished because they mated with the same women who they saw as too much temptation For whatever reason they were planting in the earth seeds of demons
The Bible interprets itself, and it clearly says that the angels, or sons of God, had sex with the humans, creating something different. Every other use of the phrase "sons of God" is clearly about angels. There is physical evidence of giants, plus stories from every culture. Why would two humans produce something that isn't fully human? THAT is more of a stretch than fully believing the Bible even it says that angels had sex with woman and that that created something that should never have been created. You're misleading people. Maybe innocently... But you should do a deep dive into this subject before teaching it. Do your own research. Don't listen to any man's research. All of the information is at your very own fingertips.
Wow...tx u
Your interpretation is not what the Bible says! Stop playing God read what it says & believe!😎
He’s literally quoting the Bible. Like what else do you want... oh let me guess, it doesn’t fit with your interpretation so you choose to straight up ignore his interpretation and call it wrong because reasons.
@@Gamer-hs6ph No he's not? Not my King James.
The Bible says giants came from angles who
took women 4 wifes. ✋
Go back & read. Come 2
me when you do.😂
So the KJV says "evil' lol
What a terrible take. You have to ignore tons of scriptures to come to that conclusion.
+Jordan B. Cooper -- You should have entitled this video *_"Who were the Sons of God?"_* or perhaps *_"Who were the angels in the O.T. & N.T.?"_* since only a small portion of it was taken up discussing the Nephilim! Anyway, I finally get around to listening once again to this video after having done so roughly two days ago in the wee hours of the morning. I was quite sleepy and went to bed soon afterward but not without pitching in my $0.02 in a reply post to some hokey *_"Reformed Christian"_* about this video elsewhere in the comment section. I deleted it earlier for reasons I will keep to myself. ;-)
I hate to say it -- especially in light of all the other wonderful videos I and others have witnessed from you throughout the years -- but this one was a let-down. The mere fact that you brought up Meredith G. Kline early on tipped me off as to what was ahead as the video progressed. My hunch was indeed correct. It's probably not important, and the following is merely rhetorical, but it would be nice to know what your sources were and/or consulted in the making of this video. Yes, there are a number of interpretations on Genesis 6:1-4; but the one you chose to go with is yesterday's news. In short, whether you care to acknowledge it or not it seems you engaged in demythologizing that passage irrespective of Mosaic authorship. The latter was beside the point, and the same applies to anyone holding to some form of the Documentary hypothesis.
No need to go off on a bunch of paragraphs detailing the exegetical in's & out's of that text. I will merely cite a few links and let you (and others) pick up the slack and necessary leg work. Speaking of leg work, good to see someone in the comment section bring up Dr. Michael S. Heiser since he's dealt with the Nephilim and other stuff relating to that enigmatic passage in Genesis, and how it ties in with other parts of the O.T., Second Temple Jewish Literature, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the N.T.
(Not terribly important but worth mentioning that the very last link is a dissertation that I happily came across sometime in 2017 while poking around the 'net for more journal articles to add to my collection of scholarly material on Genesis 6:1-4 that has been amassing throughout the years. I forget the name of the evangelical monograph series it was to be published in, but found out a few months ago that it will most probably be this year through *Oudtestamentische Studiën* from BRILL.)
*_"Divine Kingship and Genesis 6:1-4.”_* by *Meredith G. Kline* [Westminster Theological
Journal; Vol. 24, No. 2; (1962); pp. 187-204]
www.meredithkline.com/files/articles/Divine-Kingship-and-Genesis-6_1-4.pdf
*_"The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4: (An Example of Evangelical Demythologization?)"_* by *Willem A. Van Gemeren* [Westminster Theological Journal; Vol. 43, No. 2; (1981); pp. 320-348. www.dougvandorn.com/Van%20Gemeren%20%20The%20Sons%20of%20God%20in%20Gen%206.1-4-Evangelical%20Demythologization.pdf
*_Who (or What) Were the Nephilim?_* and *_Where Do Demons Come From_* by *Michael S. Heiser* _courtesy of _*_LogosTalk_*
blog.logos.com/2017/11/who-or-what-were-the-nephilim/
blog.logos.com/2015/10/where-do-demons-come-from/
*_"The Sons of God and Genesis 6:1-4"_* (2013) [Diss.] by *Jacob Johannes Theodoor Doedens* [Once out in book form will probably be the *_Go-To_* book for years to come]
theoluniv.ub.rug.nl/32/7/2013Doedens%20Dissertation.pdf
Neither here nor there but I will toss it in because I liked his presentation, and I presume many others coming across this post of mine will enjoy it too.
*_Why The Villain of Eden was a Serpent_* by *Ben S*
th-cam.com/video/BO13BSSjsYU/w-d-xo.html
To your list, you can add my book "On the Genesis 6 Affair's Sons of God: Angels or Not?" subtitled, "A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim": www.truefreethinker.com/articles/new-book-genesis-6-affairs-sons-god-angels-or-not
The kenites are a race.And if you meet one they will tell you they are better than you.I know Jesus can save them too.Its not easy.Father put us here to get our siblings home.
Patriarchal view of keeping the bloodline pure by ensuring the men are not ‘taking’Canaanite wives/women.
**SON'S OF GOD** = ADAM AND SETH, ON.. PRE~ FLOOD ~*MEN OF RENOWN = LUKE 3 38
-----
DAUGHTERS OF MEN of the men created before Adam and Eve.
------
Cains wife is from the same daughter's of men created before Adam and Eve.
------
HERDSMAN III OLD III
this video makes so many assumptions... its truly abnoxious
No marriage is not the same as having sex😊
Angels are obedient.
Nephelim = the fallen
As in,
those of high stature have fallen, or morally declined.
They were described by Sumerians thousands of years before the Bible. The Bible is just a remake of Sumerian texts.
B.s.!
Yours is a very worldly interpretation