In the OT it was created beings that were designated "Sons of God" including Adam. Luke 3:38. In the NT when the Christian is made a new creation by the work of the Holy Spirit, He receives the great honor and privilege to be called a "Son of God" 1 John 3:1
The late RC Sproul had a wonderfully blessed career and he was certainly a champion for Christ in many ways, but this video is a great example of a theologian doing terrible linguistic work. Theology can never be used to run the definitions of terms, theology can only be inductively arrived from good linguistic work.
Bless you RC Sproul - The 1st place you go to explain the text is what else is said in the same book! You study closely the passages right below and right after the text in question. Genesis is talking about the sons of Seth and the sons of Cain. You don't go to understand what Paul is saying about faith and works in Romans by going to faith and works in Galatians. Much of the fallen angel stuff comes from the non-biblical book of Enoch where the fallen angels are even given names.Enoch Chapter 6-7 And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: ‘Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.’ …And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, … And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells:
Elohim is the word for God. Bene Ha Elohim is used for angels. The fallen ones. Cast down. The mighty ones. So this I believe is a big part of the confusion, the word Elohim!
I love R.C., but respectfully disagree. The text draws a clear distinction between the sex of those involved, as well as their nature, and it draws particular attention to the unique characteristics of their offspring. Also, Jude 1:6-7 seems to confirm that the angels desired "strange", or "different", flesh (in the Greek)- and for this reason they are kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness. This should indicate that, at the very least, angels possessed men in order to cohabit with women, which is the view expressed by John MacArthur in his ESV Study Bible. Although personally, I believe there's a little more to it than that.
Jude & 2 Peter supports angel/human unions? Let's break down Jude: ~ Jude 1:5; "Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that the Lord, after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, subsequently destroyed those who did not believe." ~ Jude 1:6; "And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day," ~ Jude 1:7; "just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." ~ NOTE: Jude 8 is a summary of the preceding verses in reverse order... (parenthesis are my notes). ~ Jude 1:8; "Likewise also these filthy dreamers 'DEFILE THE FLESH' (Verse 7 SODOM & GOMMORAH), 'DESPISE DOMINION' (Verse 6 ANGELS WANTING TO BE LIKE GOD), and 'SPEAK EVIL OF DIGNITIES'' (Verse 5 EGYPT REFUGEES LIKE 'KORAH' THAT REBELLED AGAINST MOSES & GOD)." The following explains Jude 6 when Satan & 1/3 of the angels ' did not keep their own domain and abandoned their proper abode': ~ Isaiah 14:12-14; "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High." ~ This has nothing to do with angels making demigod hybrids by marrying women. I hope this helps... God Bless
Could be too.. through the man's entertainment of strange flesh.. hence a possession then transference onto the woman. Whichever way, eww.. yucks to imagine. No wonder there was only 1 summary verse about that in the bible
The phrase “sons of God” is a biblical expression that has different meanings depending on the context It can refer to angels who were created by God to serve and worship Him in heaven or to Israel as the chosen people of God. It can also be a metaphorical representation of righteous individuals or divine messengers The phrase signifies the profound relationship between God and His creation ..I guess only God knows...
RC’s explanation and exegesis of this text or scripture makes more sense than actually believing that angelic beings (which should not have the propensity to sin) could somehow come down to earth with uncontrollable lust and rape women. That theory does not make any logical or rational sense. The “sons of God” being the Godly heritage of Seth and the “daughters of men” being the wicked heritage of Cain, seems to be the more reasonable and sound doctrinal conclusion.
But angelic beings do have the propensity to sin and defy God, if they didn't Satan and fallen angels would not exist. Its just they don't have the element of forgiveness that we have because they are directly in God's presence and aware of his power.
@@JohnDoe-jg7giThe problem is Satan convinced the angels that God was unjust and there was a rebellion against God's authority and God's Son. That was the only (supernatural) fall despite what Heiser taught about Revelation 12. The loyal angels remained loyal throughout the ages of Earth's history. Beautiful women aren't going to cause them to fall. The birth of Jesus isn't going to cause them to fall. No assignment from God is going to cause them to fall. After seeing the condition of their fellow angels and the condition of fallen man, there is absolutely no thing that would entice them to be disloyal. They aren't battling a sinful nature like we are. If angels cannot control their urges, then heaven cannot be a safe place for humans.
@@JohnDoe-jg7gibeing able to sin doesn’t mean they can put on flesh, have bones and blood, dna and sperm to be able to procreate with an entire different species of creation.
R C great common sense Biblical presentation of this pagan myth that seems to be the rage these days. ~2 Timothy 4:3-4; "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths." ~ Titus 1: 13-14; "For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith, not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth."
@@drivebyquipper No, I will not be silenced when people interject pagan myths from godless cultures as scripture. I will defend the plain truth of the Bible. Gen 1 all creation reproduces after their own kind. Angels are immortal spirit beings, and mankind is mortal flesh, vastly different.
@@larrymoore2571 hi Larry ! We’ve discussed on other sites, your a pleasant poster. What are the myths specifically? The OT is filled with visions and encounters with heavenly beings. We don’t exactly know what all of them look like. Some look like men others have wings. CS Lewis was able to take what would look like mythical creatures and use them in an allegorical way. He understood the grandness of God that we miss in our own Bible. Now, I think he could have used the actual description of actual creatures in the heavenly realm but one could argue even that would look more “ mythical “ than the actual mythology. God Bless!
This is what happens sometimes in seminaries that refuse to really look at the true context of this biblical passages. The majority of scholars today agree that the term here as “Ben Elohim” refers to supernatural beings that have taken upon themselves to intervene in the natural or physical world. There is much evidence to support this. One of the leading scholars on this subject is the late Dr. Michael Heiser who wrote extensively on his book Reversing Hermon and the Unseen Realm. Dr. Sproul is great scholar but on this subject he is not accurate.
Why did Jesus say in like 24:39 that spirits don’t have flesh or bones? Also, the context in Genesis 4-7 is talking about Godly people and ungodly people and how that mixture lead to wickedness and people falling away from God. Genesis 6:5 says “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” So where do fallen angels having sex with human women come into play?
We have ONE example of a birth by a woman and the father was NOT human...JESUS! It took the "power of God" to do so. NO angels can claim that power-equal to God Himsel. Absolutely impossible.
Out of respect to RC Sproul I believe he was a good teacher and saved. The following is not too disrespect him, since he’s passed. It’s just an argument to the video. RC Sproul has to twist and turn the narrative and use vague associations to try prove his point. Calvinism has a very real problem seeing the spiritual side of the scripture. Yet the scripture is full of angels, spirits and creatures. Seriously it’s like half the Bible. There is war going on in Heaven and on earth, Paul even warns us that this is our main enemy. The spirit world not flesh. (Eph 6:12 ) But I guess that’s mythology? The Bible explains itself. The Sons of God in Genesis are not humans. We know this because they were there before man was created. Job 38:7. and Job 1:6 the Sons of God met with God in heaven. Now the term in the old testament “Sons of God” seems to not be used after a certain point until the New Testament. What happened to them? There are times in the Old Testament that God calls, Israel, children of God or Gods sons and daughters, but no point they are called Sons of God. The created things, in Job and Genesis are specifically called Sons of God (bein Elohim. ) There is no getting around it. It’s simple proof that doesn’t need a lot of “well this is what this means. This is what that means. “ RC doesn’t see the grandeur of God. it’s almost like he saying it’s impossible for God to have a different world before us and that eternity before us, God was alone? That doesn’t make sense. The Bible doesn’t teach that. Paul wants us to know there is an active spiritual world out there and there are created things that HAVE authority. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”. These beings are not flesh and blood and they are not just demons. Some are Rulers some are principals some are wicked spirits in HIGH places. Paul doesn’t call them all angels because they are not. They are fallen creatures. We know they are fallen because we are at war with them!! They are not on our side. Dan 12:1 “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise” Here is an angel who is a Chief Prince to Israel And Dan 10:13 “However, the prince of the kingdom of Persia opposed me for twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia. Why did the Angel talking to Daniel need help fighting an earthly prince of Persia? It’s because he wasn’t a human. So now we have Michael, as the prince of Israel And Someone else who is a prince of Persia. It’s all spiritual but it affects humans on earth too. Sounds like mythology if you agree with RC Sproul. So the biblical truth is the Sons of God were spiritual creatures. There is a heaven full of them, spiritual creatures, So if God is sovereign why is that so hard to believe. It’s literally in the Bible. It’s what the Bible says, in its plain and simple form.
While I have listened and respected RCSpoul, in this sermon, I believe he gets off track with the Sethite argument for this scripture. It should not be something, and for isn't, that would cause divisiveness or negative response. My comment is simply one of brother to brother type critical disagreement.
100% agree with Dr Sproul’s teaching on this passage of the Bible. Angels having intercourse with earthly women, is the most ridiculous explanation of this text I’ve ever heard. Anyone who doesn’t agree with Dr Sprouls teaching on this subject and believes the contrary doesn’t know or understand the scriptures.
Not just intercourse, they apparently had officiated wedding ceremonies. I wonder what their family home dynamics looked like? Did they argue over financial issues and him working too long of hours? Enquiring minds want to know 😂 Let's hear some of their dirty laundry 😁😆
@@Atomic568 The question is who are the sons of God and where did the Nephilim come from. The Sethite view explains neither. Moses wrote Genisis so he knew what he meant by sons of God. Nowhere does he say Sons of God were from the line of Seth. It’s not there. It’s not even hinted at. What makes maters worse with that view is the daughters of men. It says daughters of men. Both Cain and Seth were men. They both had daughters. Once again the text doesn’t say daughters of Cain. It’s just not there. Then one has Sons of God. It’s doesn’t say Sons of Seth’s line were sons of God. Once again, not in scripture. The oldest book in the Bible is the Book of Job. Moses probably knew of this Book because it was probably written during the time of the patriarchs. When using exigencies this would be a good place to look for answers because it pre dates Moses. In Job 38 it says that the Sons of God shouted with joy when God laid the foundation of the earth and in Job 1 the sons of God met with God in heaven. The next problem is the Nephilim. Moses had to fight these guys, they were giants. The book of Numbers says so. With the Seth view Seth’s line having sex with Cain’s line made giants? That makes zero sense, plus it says when the sons of God came into the daughters of men and bore children. It says the daughters of men. All men. The distinction is not between Cain and Seth( it’s not anywhere in scripture) but between men and sons of God which according to Job the sons of God were there before creation and in heaven. There are many other scripture verses to prove the heavenly being having sex with humans is the proper interpretation. This infection into mankind is why God destroyed the earth and why God told Moses to completely eliminate the clans that had giants in their linage. It’s easy to check out and it harmonizes difficult passages. One more thing Moses never calls sons of God angels. That is what Jude and Petter called them. The term angel means messenger. It’s not a thing but an occupation It could be any heavenly being God chooses. Jude and Petter wrote in a time when the term angel became a generic term for any heavenly being so when they write about angels being “put into chains in dark places” during the time of the flood. Tthey knew their readers knew about Genesis 6 and the flood, Heavenly beings having sex with man kind is the best explanation for Gen 6. I didn’t write out all the verses, I assume since you claimed this view is ridiculous that you had already read these verses and you know what I’m saying.
@@donajohanna ~ Psalm 78: 24-25; "He rained down manna upon them to eat and gave them food from heaven. Man did eat the bread of angels. He sent them food in abundance." The Bible never says that angels are ONLY allowed to eat manna. I'm sure they can eat other food as well.
Definitely. They were given the TRUTH as sons inherit through wills and testaments. Daughters of men were the line of Cain. God said 8 souls were on the Ark...so how did these nephilim survive to be around after? I refuse to perpetrate a lie and hear those words...depart from me, I never knew you. The fallen angels went straight to hell. 2 Peter 2:4 [4]For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; Plus they have no genitalia. Celestial and terrestrial are 2 different beings.
@@KiwiKhristianat the end of Genesis 4 in verses 26 it says Seth had a son named Enos and when Enos was born “men began to call upon the name of the Lord”. Fast forward to when God said the Sons of God came into the daughters of men and after that in Genesis 6:5 “5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” It’s clear from the passages that once the people of God intermingled and was unequaled yoked with unbelieving women, wickedness was prevalent in those days. Nothing in the context of Genesis 4-7 implies anything about angelic beings procreating with human women. How would that be even possible.
@AtreyuKhalil yes. Jehovah said to each seed its own. Celestial and terrestrial are 2 different seeds. When we are glorified the Bible says we'll be like the angels...neither marrying or given in marriage..meaning no sex as angels do not procreate.
Right. The sons of God refers to the godly lineage of Seth not angels and the daughters of men refers to the lineage of Cain. It is because if they were angels why then were they not able to escape the flood. We read that all were drowned in the flood except Noah and his family.
Enoch contradicts the Bible in numerous ways, why are you tying that book in with actual scripted? Have you actually read Jasher? It’s just a bunch of made up “fill in the gaps” stories of stories from the Old Testament. You can’t be serious
This is what I have thought all along, but was told I was wrong. Why would the Bible refer to angels that came and raped women as "Sons of God"? Wouldn't they be demons? Sons of God are those who followed God. Women of me were pagan women. They inner married, which God had told them not to.
Maybe but you should research the term 'sons of god' first before concluding on the matter. When used that early in genesis.. from creation.. See Job 38. Valid point?
The Sethite view uses the equivocation fallacy. They take each man in verses 1 and 2 to be two different genealogies, where the context makes no such distinction. The assumption is that everyone in this line of decedents were all godly people and that everyone in Cain’s line were ungodly.
If you follow that line of reasoning according to the Calvinist teaching we are ALL unregenerate. We don’t seek God. So how then could the line of Cain be any different than the line of Seth. They are both humans. Another problem where did Cain get his wife then. If the two lines were separated. One more thing. Where are the daughters of God, they must have existed if they came from the line of Seth. So then if the daughters of God mated with the sons of Cain would they still produce giants or fallen ones. See the problem with RC Sproul’s interpretation. It has a problem.
@@robertbatista50why would God lay out cains line and Seth’s line and tell us when Seth’s son Enos was born that men began to call upon the name of the Lord then tell us after the Sons of God raped human women that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually?? What does that have to do with being unable to stop powerful angels from raping human women? That makes no sense
@@bobthomas1536Genesis 4:26 “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.” This is clear that there were Godly men at the time. Why would God tell us men began to call on the name of the Lord then tell us in Genesis 6 that These same men married ungodly women then God pronounces a Judgment on Mankind because God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually?? It’s clear from the context of the passages that this is just sinful humans doing what they do. Why would God pronounce judgment on weak humans who would be unable to stop powerful angels? That doesn’t even sound logical.
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. (Matt. 22:30, ESV) For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. (Mark 12:25, ESV) Genesis 6:1-4 “Sons of God” cannot refer to angels in Genesis 6:4 because it warps God's ultimate plan for humanity's salvation. He states His purpose in Genesis 1:26, “Let us create man in Our image, according to Our likeness.” In other words, God is reproducing Himself! Human beings are not fashioned after the angel-kind but after the Godkind!
@jeromeofmiddleton Hi Jerome. Proper exegesis is context, context, context. No angels are mentioned in the Bible until Genesis 16. The storyline in Genesis 6 is all about the apostasy of 'MAN'. Genesis 3,4, & 5 are about original sin, and one group that rejects God, and another group that is seeking God (Gen 4:26 Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord). Then comes Gen 6 'sons of God' and daughters of men. Are we now going to interject angels into the narrative for one verse and then continue to see God blame 'MAN' for the remainder of the chapter? Does the Bible define the 'sons of God'? Yes! Here is God's definition: ~ Romans 8:14; "For all that are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God." It really comes down to who are the 'sons of God' in Gen 6:2. The 'sons of God' of Gen 6:2 are revealed in Gen 6:3. ~ Genesis 6: (2) the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. (3) 'Then' the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not 'ABIDE' in 'MAN' forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” Was God's Spirit 'abiding' in 'MAN' then? Yes, or else God would not threaten to remove His Spirit. Again, "For all that are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God." MAN Now the chapter continues with the wickedness of MAN, the thoughts of MAN were only evil continuously, and God was grieved in His heart for making MAN. About the Nephilim (Hebrew definition 'Fallen Ones'). ~ Psalm 53:2-3; “God looks down from heaven on the children of man to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all ‘FALLEN AWAY’; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.” The Bible NEVER mentions angel/women /hybrids and NEVER warns against them, but it continually warns against marrying idolators, here is just two of probably 100 verses: ~ Deuteronomy 7:3-4; "Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons. For they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods; Then the anger of the Lord will be kindled against you, and He will quickly destroy you." Trust and Faith in Jesus alone can save. Look Up
@@larrymoore2571 Genesis 6 can also be seen as a paraphrase of the book of Enoch where hair is specifically mentioned and where Paul may have gottten his ideas about the watchers
@mikecara8181said, "He is CLUELESS….sad" Hello Mike, have you ever considered that the Bible never says that angels procreated with women? Have you considered that whenever the Bible defines the 'sons of God', or children of God it is always mankind? The Bible never states that angels are called 'sons' because Hebrews 1 tells us that 'son' is a more excellent name than that of angels. Angels were spoke into existence, whereas mankind were fashioned from the earth and mortal life was breathed into them with the command 'be fruitful and multiply.' Genesis 1 dictates that God's natural law of reproduction is that all creation reproduces after their own kind (God repeats this 11 times for emphasis). Angels are all immortal Spirit beings (Hebrews 1), and mankind are mortal flesh, vastly different. We see that God's people are forbidden to marry ungodly pagans repeated almost 100 times in scripture, however something as serious as angels procreating with mankind producing a hybrid line that threatens the bloodline of Jesus, is never clearly mentioned in scripture. There is speculation and innuendo also uninspired writings and godless cultures but the Bible never says angels married women and procreated with them. What is clear is that Jesus said the angels do not marry in heaven, but even more important is Jesus describing the days of Noah. He says people were eating, drinking and marrying until the flood suddenly took them all away. He speaks of marriage and the flood but is silent on the angel/women/hybrids? The fact is no Patriarch, Priest, Prophet, Pharisee, Apostle, Disciple or even Jesus Himself EVER mentions angel/women/hybrids. If this was true and important it would be mentioned more than the unequally yoked marriages of humans. The Bible alone is all we need for Christian living. God Bless You
In the OT it was created beings that were designated "Sons of God" including Adam. Luke 3:38. In the NT when the Christian is made a new creation by the work of the Holy Spirit, He receives the great honor and privilege to be called a "Son of God" 1 John 3:1
I love the teaching of R. C Sproul.
I perceive he teach the truth, though dome may see it in their own way.
If nothing else I respect Sproul for the athleticism he exhibits.
Them’s some mighty big hoops.
The late RC Sproul had a wonderfully blessed career and he was certainly a champion for Christ in many ways, but this video is a great example of a theologian doing terrible linguistic work. Theology can never be used to run the definitions of terms, theology can only be inductively arrived from good linguistic work.
Bless you RC Sproul - The 1st place you go to explain the text is what else is said in the same book! You study closely the passages right below and right after the text in question. Genesis is talking about the sons of Seth and the sons of Cain. You don't go to understand what Paul is saying about faith and works in Romans by going to faith and works in Galatians. Much of the fallen angel stuff comes from the non-biblical book of Enoch where the fallen angels are even given names.Enoch Chapter 6-7 And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: ‘Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.’ …And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, … And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells:
Elohim is the word for God. Bene Ha Elohim is used for angels. The fallen ones. Cast down. The mighty ones. So this I believe is a big part of the confusion, the word Elohim!
Malak is Angel. Bene ha elohim is “son of god”
I love R.C., but respectfully disagree. The text draws a clear distinction between the sex of those involved, as well as their nature, and it draws particular attention to the unique characteristics of their offspring.
Also, Jude 1:6-7 seems to confirm that the angels desired "strange", or "different", flesh (in the Greek)- and for this reason they are kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness. This should indicate that, at the very least, angels possessed men in order to cohabit with women, which is the view expressed by John MacArthur in his ESV Study Bible. Although personally, I believe there's a little more to it than that.
Jude & 2 Peter supports angel/human unions? Let's break down Jude:
~ Jude 1:5; "Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that the Lord, after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, subsequently destroyed those who did not believe."
~ Jude 1:6; "And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day,"
~ Jude 1:7; "just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire."
~ NOTE: Jude 8 is a summary of the preceding verses in reverse order... (parenthesis are my notes).
~ Jude 1:8; "Likewise also these filthy dreamers 'DEFILE THE FLESH' (Verse 7 SODOM & GOMMORAH),
'DESPISE DOMINION' (Verse 6 ANGELS WANTING TO BE LIKE GOD), and 'SPEAK EVIL OF DIGNITIES'' (Verse 5 EGYPT REFUGEES LIKE 'KORAH' THAT REBELLED AGAINST MOSES & GOD)."
The following explains Jude 6 when Satan & 1/3 of the angels ' did not keep their own domain and abandoned their proper abode': ~ Isaiah 14:12-14; "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High." ~ This has nothing to do with angels making demigod hybrids by marrying women.
I hope this helps... God Bless
When it comes to anything miraculous in the bible....please...ignore the evangelicals and reformed theology folks...
@blvckmagik , why is that? They can be a bit wonky on modern miracles, but the vast majority affirm every miracle in the Bible.
Could be too.. through the man's entertainment of strange flesh.. hence a possession then transference onto the woman.
Whichever way, eww.. yucks to imagine. No wonder there was only 1 summary verse about that in the bible
@@trulyso734, sadly, I'm sure we will see stranger things before the Lord returns.
Christians are children of God. We pray, "Our Father..."
1 John 3:1
The phrase “sons of God” is a biblical expression that has different meanings depending on the context It can refer to angels who were created by God to serve and worship Him in heaven or to Israel as the chosen people of God. It can also be a metaphorical representation of righteous individuals or divine messengers The phrase signifies the profound relationship between God and His creation ..I guess only God knows...
Thank you Lord for the wisdom you imparted to this beautiful man 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Okay
RC’s explanation and exegesis of this text or scripture makes more sense than actually believing that angelic beings (which should not have the propensity to sin) could somehow come down to earth with uncontrollable lust and rape women. That theory does not make any logical or rational sense. The “sons of God” being the Godly heritage of Seth and the “daughters of men” being the wicked heritage of Cain, seems to be the more reasonable and sound doctrinal conclusion.
But angelic beings do have the propensity to sin and defy God, if they didn't Satan and fallen angels would not exist. Its just they don't have the element of forgiveness that we have because they are directly in God's presence and aware of his power.
@@JohnDoe-jg7giThe problem is Satan convinced the angels that God was unjust and there was a rebellion against God's authority and God's Son. That was the only (supernatural) fall despite what Heiser taught about Revelation 12. The loyal angels remained loyal throughout the ages of Earth's history. Beautiful women aren't going to cause them to fall. The birth of Jesus isn't going to cause them to fall. No assignment from God is going to cause them to fall. After seeing the condition of their fellow angels and the condition of fallen man, there is absolutely no thing that would entice them to be disloyal. They aren't battling a sinful nature like we are. If angels cannot control their urges, then heaven cannot be a safe place for humans.
@@JohnDoe-jg7gibeing able to sin doesn’t mean they can put on flesh, have bones and blood, dna and sperm to be able to procreate with an entire different species of creation.
R C great common sense Biblical presentation of this pagan myth that seems to be the rage these days.
~2 Timothy 4:3-4; "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths."
~ Titus 1: 13-14; "For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith, not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth."
Give it a rest. You are off the beam.
@@drivebyquipper No, I will not be silenced when people interject pagan myths from godless cultures as scripture. I will defend the plain truth of the Bible. Gen 1 all creation reproduces after their own kind. Angels are immortal spirit beings, and mankind is mortal flesh, vastly different.
@@larrymoore2571 I reread. At first, I thought you were dissing RC Sproul. My Bad.
@@drivebyquipper Yeah, sometimes it is hard to understand my ramblings. No problem.
@@larrymoore2571 hi Larry ! We’ve discussed on other sites, your a pleasant poster.
What are the myths specifically? The OT is filled with visions and encounters with heavenly beings. We don’t exactly know what all of them look like. Some look like men others have wings.
CS Lewis was able to take what would look like mythical creatures and use them in an allegorical way. He understood the grandness of God that we miss in our own Bible. Now, I think he could have used the actual description of actual creatures in the heavenly realm but one could argue even that would look more “ mythical “
than the actual mythology.
God Bless!
This is what happens sometimes in seminaries that refuse to really look at the true context of this biblical passages. The majority of scholars today agree that the term here as “Ben Elohim” refers to supernatural beings that have taken upon themselves to intervene in the natural or physical world. There is much evidence to support this. One of the leading scholars on this subject is the late Dr. Michael Heiser who wrote extensively on his book Reversing Hermon and the Unseen Realm. Dr. Sproul is great scholar but on this subject he is not accurate.
Why did Jesus say in like 24:39 that spirits don’t have flesh or bones? Also, the context in Genesis 4-7 is talking about Godly people and ungodly people and how that mixture lead to wickedness and people falling away from God. Genesis 6:5 says “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” So where do fallen angels having sex with human women come into play?
What about PS 82?
.....and Psalm 89?
We have ONE example of a birth by a woman and the father was NOT human...JESUS! It took the "power of God" to do so. NO angels can claim that power-equal to God Himsel. Absolutely impossible.
Thank God, your explanation confirmed my stand about sons of men marrying the daughters of men. May God bless Ligonier ministries
Out of respect to RC Sproul I believe he was a good teacher and saved. The following is not too disrespect him, since he’s passed. It’s just an argument to the video.
RC Sproul has to twist and turn the narrative and use vague associations to try prove his point. Calvinism has a very real problem seeing the spiritual side of the scripture. Yet the scripture is full of angels, spirits and creatures. Seriously it’s like half the Bible. There is war going on in Heaven and on earth, Paul even warns us that this is our main enemy. The spirit world not flesh. (Eph 6:12 ) But I guess that’s mythology?
The Bible explains itself. The Sons of God in Genesis are not humans. We know this because they were there before man was created. Job 38:7. and Job 1:6 the Sons of God met with God in heaven. Now the term in the old testament “Sons of God” seems to not be used after a certain point until the New Testament. What happened to them? There are times in the Old Testament that God calls, Israel, children of God or Gods sons and daughters, but no point they are called Sons of God. The created things, in Job and Genesis are specifically called Sons of God (bein Elohim. )
There is no getting around it.
It’s simple proof that doesn’t need a lot of “well this is what this means. This is what that means. “ RC doesn’t see the grandeur of God. it’s almost like he saying it’s impossible for God to have a different world before us and that eternity before us, God was alone? That doesn’t make sense. The Bible doesn’t teach that. Paul wants us to know there is an active spiritual world out there and there are created things that HAVE authority.
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”.
These beings are not flesh and blood and they are not just demons. Some are Rulers some are principals some are wicked spirits in HIGH places. Paul doesn’t call them all angels because they are not. They are fallen creatures. We know they are fallen because we are at war with them!! They are not on our side.
Dan 12:1 “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise”
Here is an angel who is a Chief Prince to Israel
And Dan 10:13 “However, the prince of the kingdom of Persia opposed me for twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the kings of Persia.
Why did the Angel talking to Daniel need help fighting an earthly prince of Persia? It’s because he wasn’t a human. So now we have Michael, as the prince of Israel And Someone else who is a prince of Persia. It’s all spiritual but it affects humans on earth too. Sounds like mythology if you agree with RC Sproul.
So the biblical truth is the Sons of God were spiritual creatures. There is a heaven full of them, spiritual creatures, So if God is sovereign why is that so hard to believe. It’s literally in the Bible. It’s what the Bible says, in its plain and simple form.
While I have listened and respected RCSpoul, in this sermon, I believe he gets off track with the Sethite argument for this scripture. It should not be something, and for isn't, that would cause divisiveness or negative response. My comment is simply one of brother to brother type critical disagreement.
No, the sons of God were Adam's children seeing their sisters and fulfilling the command, be fruitful and multiply.
100% agree with Dr Sproul’s teaching on this passage of the Bible. Angels having intercourse with earthly women, is the most ridiculous explanation of this text I’ve ever heard. Anyone who doesn’t agree with Dr Sprouls teaching on this subject and believes the contrary doesn’t know or understand the scriptures.
Not just intercourse, they apparently had officiated wedding ceremonies. I wonder what their family home dynamics looked like? Did they argue over financial issues and him working too long of hours? Enquiring minds want to know 😂 Let's hear some of their dirty laundry 😁😆
@@Atomic568 The question is who are the sons of God and where did the Nephilim come from. The Sethite view explains neither.
Moses wrote Genisis so he knew what he meant by sons of God. Nowhere does he say Sons of God were from the line of Seth. It’s not there. It’s not even hinted at. What makes maters worse with that view is the daughters of men. It says daughters of men. Both Cain and Seth were men. They both had daughters. Once again the text doesn’t say daughters of Cain. It’s just not there.
Then one has Sons of God. It’s doesn’t say Sons of Seth’s line were sons of God. Once again, not in scripture.
The oldest book in the Bible is the Book of Job. Moses probably knew of this Book because it was probably written during the time of the patriarchs. When using exigencies this would be a good place to look for answers because it pre dates Moses.
In Job 38 it says that the Sons of God shouted with joy when God laid the foundation of the earth and in Job 1 the sons of God met with God in heaven.
The next problem is the Nephilim. Moses had to fight these guys, they were giants. The book of Numbers says so. With the Seth view Seth’s line having sex with Cain’s line made giants? That makes zero sense, plus it says when the sons of God came into the daughters of men and bore children.
It says the daughters of men. All men.
The distinction is not between Cain and Seth( it’s not anywhere in scripture) but between men and sons of God which according to Job the sons of God were there before creation and in heaven.
There are many other scripture verses to prove the heavenly being having sex with humans is the proper interpretation. This infection into mankind is why God destroyed the earth and why God told Moses to completely eliminate the clans that had giants in their linage. It’s easy to check out and it harmonizes difficult passages.
One more thing Moses never calls sons of God angels. That is what Jude and Petter called them. The term angel means messenger. It’s not a thing but an occupation It could be any heavenly being God chooses. Jude and Petter wrote in a time
when the term angel became a generic term for any heavenly being so when they write about angels being “put into chains in dark places” during the time of the flood. Tthey knew their readers knew about Genesis 6 and the flood, Heavenly beings having sex with man kind is the best explanation for Gen 6. I didn’t write out all the verses, I assume
since you claimed this view is ridiculous that you had already read these verses and you know what I’m saying.
Angels don't have blood or semen
How do you know?
@@jeromeofmiddleton Cue the scoffer trolls.
Abram gave two angels and The Lord a good meal thou...
@@donajohanna You can't use that to support the ridiculous notion that angels can procreate with humans.
@@donajohanna
~ Psalm 78: 24-25; "He rained down manna upon them to eat and gave them food from heaven. Man did eat the bread of angels.
He sent them food in abundance."
The Bible never says that angels are ONLY allowed to eat manna. I'm sure they can eat other food as well.
The sons of God were Seth's descendants
Definitely. They were given the TRUTH as sons inherit through wills and testaments.
Daughters of men were the line of Cain. God said 8 souls were on the Ark...so how did these nephilim survive to be around after?
I refuse to perpetrate a lie and hear those words...depart from me, I never knew you.
The fallen angels went straight to hell.
2 Peter 2:4
[4]For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
Plus they have no genitalia.
Celestial and terrestrial are 2 different beings.
All conjecture….
@@KiwiKhristianat the end of Genesis 4 in verses 26 it says Seth had a son named Enos and when Enos was born “men began to call upon the name of the Lord”. Fast forward to when God said the Sons of God came into the daughters of men and after that in Genesis 6:5 “5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”
It’s clear from the passages that once the people of God intermingled and was unequaled yoked with unbelieving women, wickedness was prevalent in those days. Nothing in the context of Genesis 4-7 implies anything about angelic beings procreating with human women. How would that be even possible.
@AtreyuKhalil yes. Jehovah said to each seed its own. Celestial and terrestrial are 2 different seeds.
When we are glorified the Bible says we'll be like the angels...neither marrying or given in marriage..meaning no sex as angels do not procreate.
@@kali8085 SCRIPTURE IS NOT CONJECTURE.
Vr, LORD Jesus Christ.
Right. The sons of God refers to the godly lineage of Seth not angels and the daughters of men refers to the lineage of Cain. It is because if they were angels why then were they not able to escape the flood. We read that all were drowned in the flood except Noah and his family.
In Ps 89, Job 1, Job 37, sons of God are spiritual beings, Elohim, not humans.
@@michaelguidera1876who are the morning stars in Job 38? Are they angels?
It's a spiritual warfare
Read the book of Enoch, Jude qoutes the book of Enoch. Read book of Jasher, 2 Samuel 1:18 quotes Jasher.
Enoch contradicts the Bible in numerous ways, why are you tying that book in with actual scripted? Have you actually read Jasher? It’s just a bunch of made up “fill in the gaps” stories of stories from the Old Testament. You can’t be serious
Angels are not sons of god
Humans are God's created children. They are not the gen6 'sons of God'.
Jude 6-7 ESV, NLT,NASB,NET,
This is what I have thought all along, but was told I was wrong. Why would the Bible refer to angels that came and raped women as "Sons of God"? Wouldn't they be demons? Sons of God are those who followed God. Women of me were pagan women. They inner married, which God had told them not to.
Maybe but you should research the term 'sons of god' first before concluding on the matter.
When used that early in genesis.. from creation..
See Job 38. Valid point?
The Sethite view uses the equivocation fallacy. They take each man in verses 1 and 2 to be two different genealogies, where the context makes no such distinction. The assumption is that everyone in this line of decedents were all godly people and that everyone in Cain’s line were ungodly.
If you follow that line of reasoning according to the Calvinist teaching we are ALL unregenerate. We don’t seek God. So how then could the line of Cain be any different than the line of Seth. They are both humans. Another problem where did Cain get his wife then. If the two lines were separated. One more thing. Where are the daughters of God, they must have existed if they came from the line of Seth. So then if the daughters of God mated with the sons of Cain would they still produce giants or fallen ones. See the problem with RC Sproul’s interpretation. It has a problem.
@@robertbatista50why would God lay out cains line and Seth’s line and tell us when Seth’s son Enos was born that men began to call upon the name of the Lord then tell us after the Sons of God raped human women that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually?? What does that have to do with being unable to stop powerful angels from raping human women? That makes no sense
@@bobthomas1536Genesis 4:26 “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.”
This is clear that there were Godly men at the time. Why would God tell us men began to call on the name of the Lord then tell us in Genesis 6 that These same men married ungodly women then God pronounces a Judgment on Mankind because God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually?? It’s clear from the context of the passages that this is just sinful humans doing what they do. Why would God pronounce judgment on weak humans who would be unable to stop powerful angels? That doesn’t even sound logical.
For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. (Matt. 22:30, ESV)
For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. (Mark 12:25, ESV) Genesis 6:1-4
“Sons of God” cannot refer to angels in Genesis 6:4 because it warps God's ultimate plan for humanity's salvation. He states His purpose in Genesis 1:26, “Let us create man in Our image, according to Our likeness.” In other words, God is reproducing Himself! Human beings are not fashioned after the angel-kind but after the Godkind!
For someone as well respected as RC Sproul, this is just poor biblical exegesis.
You don't know from Shinola.
@jeromeofmiddleton Hi Jerome. Proper exegesis is context, context, context. No angels are mentioned in the Bible until Genesis 16. The storyline in Genesis 6 is all about the apostasy of 'MAN'. Genesis 3,4, & 5 are about original sin, and one group that rejects God, and another group that is seeking God (Gen 4:26 Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord). Then comes Gen 6 'sons of God' and daughters of men. Are we now going to interject angels into the narrative for one verse and then continue to see God blame 'MAN' for the remainder of the chapter?
Does the Bible define the 'sons of God'? Yes! Here is God's definition:
~ Romans 8:14; "For all that are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God."
It really comes down to who are the 'sons of God' in Gen 6:2. The 'sons of God' of Gen 6:2 are revealed in Gen 6:3.
~ Genesis 6: (2) the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. (3) 'Then' the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not 'ABIDE' in 'MAN' forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”
Was God's Spirit 'abiding' in 'MAN' then? Yes, or else God would not threaten to remove His Spirit.
Again, "For all that are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God." MAN
Now the chapter continues with the wickedness of MAN, the thoughts of MAN were only evil continuously, and God was grieved in His heart for making MAN.
About the Nephilim (Hebrew definition 'Fallen Ones').
~ Psalm 53:2-3; “God looks down from heaven on the children of man to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all ‘FALLEN AWAY’; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.”
The Bible NEVER mentions angel/women /hybrids and NEVER warns against them, but it continually warns against marrying idolators, here is just two of probably 100 verses:
~ Deuteronomy 7:3-4; "Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons. For they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods; Then the anger of the Lord will be kindled against you, and He will quickly destroy you."
Trust and Faith in Jesus alone can save. Look Up
@@larrymoore2571 No doubt!
this is heretic, worse than his eschatology and I am so saddened
@@larrymoore2571 Genesis 6 can also be seen as a paraphrase of the book of Enoch where hair is specifically mentioned and where Paul may have gottten his ideas about the watchers
He is CLUELESS….sad
You are clueless....sad.
@mikecara8181said, "He is CLUELESS….sad"
Hello Mike, have you ever considered that the Bible never says that angels procreated with women? Have you considered that whenever the Bible defines the 'sons of God', or children of God it is always mankind? The Bible never states that angels are called 'sons' because Hebrews 1 tells us that 'son' is a more excellent name than that of angels. Angels were spoke into existence, whereas mankind were fashioned from the earth and mortal life was breathed into them with the command 'be fruitful and multiply.' Genesis 1 dictates that God's natural law of reproduction is that all creation reproduces after their own kind (God repeats this 11 times for emphasis). Angels are all immortal Spirit beings (Hebrews 1), and mankind are mortal flesh, vastly different.
We see that God's people are forbidden to marry ungodly pagans repeated almost 100 times in scripture, however something as serious as angels procreating with mankind producing a hybrid line that threatens the bloodline of Jesus, is never clearly mentioned in scripture. There is speculation and innuendo also uninspired writings and godless cultures but the Bible never says angels married women and procreated with them.
What is clear is that Jesus said the angels do not marry in heaven, but even more important is Jesus describing the days of Noah. He says people were eating, drinking and marrying until the flood suddenly took them all away. He speaks of marriage and the flood but is silent on the angel/women/hybrids?
The fact is no Patriarch, Priest, Prophet, Pharisee, Apostle, Disciple or even Jesus Himself EVER mentions angel/women/hybrids. If this was true and important it would be mentioned more than the unequally yoked marriages of humans.
The Bible alone is all we need for Christian living.
God Bless You
RC was many things. “Clueless” was not one of them.
@@Revolver1701. He is totally ignorant on this subject about the elohim (sons of God or gods)
@@mikecara8181 Save it for the Star Trek convention. Lol!