MuttleyLaff:
¹And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
² That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
- Genesis 6:1-2

In a sentence, my stand on Genesis 6:1-2, is that
the sons of God in the Genesis 6:2 aren't angels
nor are they the sun and moon metaphors used in Job 38:7

That's much better. So, what would you say they could be?

budaatum:
That's much better. So, what would you say they could be?

It's not a matter of could
but is the case of what they are or were.

At the barest minimum, they are human beings,
just as much as you are or the next person is

MuttleyLaff:
¹And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
² That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
- Genesis 6:1-2

In a sentence, my stand on Genesis 6:1-2, is that
the sons of God in the Genesis 6:2 aren't angels
nor are they the sun and moon metaphors used in Job 38:7

mutt, you keep saying that but you cannot explain why "the morning stars" in job 38:7 is a metaphor for a constellation, and you cannot explain why "all the sons of God" in job 38:7 is a metaphor for the sun and the moon

if you feel you have done so then copy and paste it again here, that's an easy thing for you to do,
keep your quotes to just the facts and backing scripture, leave out all the twisting

johnw47:
mutt, you keep saying that
but you cannot explain why "the morning stars" in job 38:7 is a metaphor for constellations,
and you cannot explain why "all the sons of God" in job 38:7 is a metaphor for the sun and the moon

Saying, I cannot explain, is not true johnw47.

I can admit, I havent, in an excessive or forceful way, explained the why and/or how "the morning stars"
and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7, are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon

For most people johnw47, this matter, is uncharted territory,
and so is part of why, you havent yet, in any noticeably large extent, read me, explain

Another good and valid reason, why you're yet to see me prominently explain, is that,
I am conscious of, what will be for some, a likely adverse effect, because of an exposure to information overload.

So, what I have, in terms of explaining, so far, done?

MuttleyLaff:
Angels, whether fallen or not, are never called sons of God

It was never intended to mean fallen angels nor confuse sons of God to be fallen angels

The term sons of God, right from the Book of Job have always been used for either two things.

Unfortunately, fallen angels aren't among the two things meant when the expression sons of God is used

"For to which of the angels did He ever say: "You are my Son; today I have begotten You"?
And again: "I will be to Him for a Father, and He will be to Me for a Son"?"
- Hebrews 1:5

Yes, there's fundamental problem
Actually there are loadsaproblems with that

Look at Hebrews 1:5 above, to see why there is/are problem(s) with that

You want the truth, don't you?
Well, then I'll give it to you, straight up.
Served ice cold, no shaking, no stirring.

"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"
- Job 38:7

Maamin, you and your "jagidijagan wuruwuru" to the answer ploy sha
So for your eyes, the imaginary angelic hosts, are altogether both morning stars and sons of God in Job 38:7?

Look brother, the sons of God, there, in Job 38:7, are the sun and the moon. No more, no less.
As for the morning stars (i.e. plural star), they, simply are a constellation

The constellation sang together, and the sun & moon shouted for joy

Do you know that God is called the Father of lights?
(i.e. Father of the constellation, the sun and the moon)

Context is King.
Re-read Job 38:7 in context, slowly and loudly,
then with God being the Father of lights in mind, come back with what you find

johnw47:
if you feel you have done so then copy and paste it again here, that's an easy thing for you to do

I have just did, with the immediate above.

Here are two another "copy and paste" below

MuttleyLaff:
Its bible talk, not my words.
The bible has never had angels, whether fallen or not, called sons of God.
That's an undeniable fact

Do you know what "jagidijagan wuruwuru" to the answer means?
Havent finished with you about Job 38:7, yet you're bringing in Job 1:6 and Job 2:1,
Job 1:6 and Job 2:1 are your other two out of the three champion verses, where you've misunderstood what "sons of God" means in them

Do you remember me telling you, that Job 38:7 verse, happens to be one out of your three stars and champion verses, you were waving in Mobilia's face?

I also say let's deal with the Job 38:7 verse first, before going on to the other two (i.e. Job 1:6 and Job 2:1)
You earlier said: "I'm also learning myself."
Well guess what. By the time, we are done, do you know what apart from learning, you'll be getting?
It’s called getting an education

Where and when were they called sons of God right before they fell?
Dont even try to quote here Job 1:6, Job 2:1 and/or Job 38:7 because you'll be making a grave mistake if you do

When that scripture was revealed, was the "g" in God too, not in upper case or lower case, was the word simply just "god"?

You capital S in sons of God, writing it as Sons of God, instead of sons of God
Why, what are you playing at writing it that way?
What not write God, with lower or small letter case g?

""For to which of the angels did He ever say:
"You are my Son; today I have begotten You"?
And again: "I will be to Him for a Father, and He will be to Me for a Son"?""
- Hebrews 1:5

Good that from Hebrews 1:5a, you accept that God never beget angels at any time
Now look at Hebrews 1:5b again, to see that God never had angels at any time be his son and/or Son

Laugh as best as you can
Meanwhile just remember that he who laughs last, laughs the best

"And God made two great lights;
the greater light to rule the day,
and the lesser light to rule the night:
he made the stars also"
- Genesis 1:16

You behaving like a drowning man desperately clutching at whatever reed/straw is in sight, he can grab on, to stay afloat

I earlier reminded you that Context is King

Job 38:7, is a good 30-plus chapters faraway from Job 1:6 and Job 2:1

The meaning of sons of God in Job 1:6 and Job 2:1, isnt similar to the meaning of sons of God in Job 38:7

Job 38:7 is about God taking Job to task,
asking him about what he knows about creation and where was he during creation
and particularly when the sun, moon and the constellation in the Genesis 1:16 account were present

Believers (i.e. sons of God) and the Son of God (i.e. Jesus Christ) are
but unfortunately not and never were angels.
Sorry.

MuttleyLaff:
It is embarrassing and disgraceful to see that you didnt properly read the post and subsequent ones like the one immediately above

It's either you in a quick or hasty manner read the post or you're being mischievious and so communicating lies
You dont need laughs from me because you are a real barrel of laughs the way you responded to the post

SMH, there is always going to be the one, that will be feeling uncomfortable, when truth is told

Please show from this thread or any other place,
where I said, anything about the constellation singing and sun & moon shouting, on a first day the earth was formed.

If you cant show where, if you are unable to produce anything,
then please, retract your false accusations
and tender public apologies accordingly

I know your accusations are unfounded
Now, you being one, that does understands the meaning of honour and integrity
can be expected to know the needful that needs to be done here

Dont let me down. I trust you to eat humble pie and swallow pride

Just a brotherly and friendly advice, next time, all it will take, will be a question(s) to clear matters up

If you had asked, I would have for free, told you that
it was at the end of creation that the singing and shouting together happened
and not the first day nor fourth day you've misundertood the post and Job 38:7 to be saying

johnw47:
keep your quotes to just the facts and backing scripture, leave out all the twisting

I don’t mind any, disputing my assertion that "the morning stars" and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7,
are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon
Everyone is welcome to disagree with me as strongly as they come. I really don’t mind.

Afterall, if a crooked stick is before you, you need not explain how crooked it is.
Lay a straight one down by the side of it, and the work is well done.
Little by little, bit by bit, that is exactly what I'll be doing, presenting just facts and backed up with scripture verses.
I leave twisting for the contortionists and pros, who are the best at doing just that

I know what I bring to the table, so trust me when and/or if I say, I am not afraid to eat alone
I don't have a horse in this race, no ulterior motive etcetera

Lastly, I have to commend you for refraining yourself from using epithets in your comment
It’s not that hurling epithets about bothers me personally,
but it's always a breath of fresh air and good thing to read matured, courteous and polite clean posts.

Having said and done all this,
now, on the matter of "the morning stars" & "the sons of God", in Job 38:7,
being metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon
have you any questions for me or require sign-posted clarifications for simpler and easier understanding
on why and/or how "the morning stars" and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7, are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon ?

MuttleyLaff:
Saying, I cannot explain, is not true johnw47.

I can admit, I havent, in an excessive or forceful way, explained the why and/or how "the morning stars"
and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7, are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon

For most people johnw47, this matter, is uncharted territory,
and so is part of why, you havent yet, in any noticeably large extent, read me, explain

Another good and valid reason, why you're yet to see me prominently explain, is that,
I am conscious of, what will be for some, a likely adverse effect, because of an exposure to information overload.

So, what I have, in terms of explaining, so far, done?



I have just did, with the immediate above.

Here are two another "copy and paste" below





I don’t mind any, disputing my assertion that "the morning stars" and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7,
are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon
Everyone is welcome to disagree with me as strongly as they come. I really don’t mind.

Afterall, if a crooked stick is before you, you need not explain how crooked it is.
Lay a straight one down by the side of it, and the work is well done.
Little by little, bit by bit, that is exactly what I'll be doing, presenting just facts and backed up with scripture verses.
I leave twisting for the contortionists and pros, who are the best at doing just that

I know what I bring to the table, so trust me when and/or if I say, I am not afraid to eat alone
I don't have a horse in this race, no ulterior motive etcetera

Lastly, I have to commend you for refraining yourself from using epithets in your comment
It’s not that hurling epithets about bothers me personally,
but it's always a breath of fresh air and good thing to read matured, courteous and polite clean posts.

Having said and done all this,
now, on the matter of "the morning stars" & "the sons of God", in Job 38:7,
being metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon
have you any questions for me or require sign-posted clarifications for simpler and easier understanding
on why and/or how "the morning stars" and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7, are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon ?

Heb 1:5  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?

mutt, heb 1 is showing that God never begat angels, they are not begotten sons, Christ is the only begotten Son of God, that doesn't stop job etc. referring to angels as sons of God, no one refers to them as begotten sons of God

on a side note: heb 1 also shows that Jesus was not a angel which some believe



Jas 1:17  Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

mutt, God is the Father of lights, that doesn't mean the morning stars and the sons of God in job 38 is a constellation and the sun and the moon, when the sun and the moon and the stars were not even created yet
 
Job 38:6  Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
Job 38:7  When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

from another post:
mutt, Jesus could have had the stones cheer if the people didn't, that also doesn't mean the sun moon and stars were singing and shouting in job 38, oh duh

Luk_19:40  And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.


i asked for facts, you haven't any
some here have given facts supported by scripture which you don't believe mutt

johnw47:
Heb 1:5 
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?

mutt, heb 1 is showing that God never begat angels, they are not begotten sons, Christ is the only begotten Son of God,
that doesn't stop job etc. referring to angels as sons of God, no one refers to them as begotten sons of God

on a side note:
heb 1 also shows that Jesus was not a angel which some believe

Very good observation.
I am very grateful, that you're carefully reading and now given thoughts to what and how I type

johnw47:
Jas 1:17 
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

mutt, God is the Father of lights, that doesn't mean the morning stars and the sons of God in job 38 is a constellation and the sun and the moon, when the sun and the moon and the stars were not even created yet
 
Job 38:6  Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
Job 38:7  When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

You keep saying when the sun and the moon and the stars were not even created yet
and I keep trying to veer you off that train or line of thought

The Job chapter 38-39 grilling of Job, wasnt done in accordance to a creation logical sequence
When Job was put on the spot, the intense questioning did not follow a strict order, it was done in a haphazard fashion

It wasnt where were you when sun and the moon and the stars created
but rather where were you the when the stars sang and the sun and the moon shouted

johnw47:
from another post:
mutt, Jesus could have had the stones cheer if the people didn't,
that also doesn't mean the sun moon and stars were singing and shouting in job 38, oh duh

Luk_19:40 
And he answered and said unto them,
I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

I can see with the strikeout that, its true that old habits die hard

johnw47:
i asked for facts, you haven't any
some here have given facts supported by scripture which you don't believe mutt

I cant be more fairer that this or can I

Thinking of this, it's you who isnt being fair here, you havent at all
All because you want to maintain "the sons of God" status quo that was fabricated

I have asked you to ask if you have any questions for me
or if you require sign-posted clarifications for simpler and easier understanding
on why and/or how "the morning stars" and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7, are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon
but you've done nada about the two generous offers, instead you revert to groundless claims that I havent given any facts or facts supported by scripture

[quote author=Mobilia post=71262465]

Right. I'm saying that the 12-15 feet tall humans were normal during that time period.

No they were not normal. The first mention of giants was in Gen 14 apart from the Gen 6 giants. Other names for giants include Rephaim, Nephilim.

Gen 6:1-4 says "1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

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.

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Verse 4 shows that these giants were as a result of the ungodly union of sons of God and daughters of men in those days and after that. It went on to say "THE SAME became mighty men of old"

I was saying that there were some people who may have been even taller than that and were therefore termed "giants".
In today's society, the average height for a man is around 5'8-5'9. Anyone 6'0 or taller is considered "tall", but then basketball player's heights (which averages between 6'5-6'7) are considered giant in stature.
We know that humans (mated with humans) and reproduced humans (some who have an extraordinary height). The same process that we humans use today (sexual activity) is the same process the antideluvians used back then. There was nothing supernatural about the process....meaning "angels" didn't mate with humans to produce a human of "giant" stature.
I think that humans continued to decrease in size throughout the generations as sin became more rampant

The strange and extraordinary looking men in status did not came about until Gen 6. These giants were singled out to be exceptionally different from the normal people, renown (probably famous for looking different).

Saul in the days of Goliath the giants was said to be tall at least 6'ft tall than the average human, yet he was no match or never was he considered a giant like Goliath.

To tell you how big the Nephilims are. The scripture says that there were giants after that. And the most famous of them was Goliath of Gath. There are various discrepancies concerning his actual height. Some dead see scrolls says 6'6 some mesoretic texts says 9'0 but if we look at the description of his armour weights you can tell that it will take even a huge, taller and stronger person to wield and carry such armour in battle.

Indicative of Goliath’s size and strength was the weight of his armour. His copper coat of mail weighed 5,000 shekels (57 kg; that is 126 lb); the iron blade of his spear weighed 600 shekels (6.8 kg; that is 15 lb).​—1Sa 17:4-7.

Can you imagine a person wearing a coat as heavy as a bag of cement or a little heavier than that? And the iron blade (spear head) as heavy as a weight lifter's dumb bell or almost as heavy as a mini short put ?

You mean all of a sudden human mating with humans resulted in giants? No!

There was mixed gene of strange flesh that brought about that.

MuttleyLaff:
Very good observation.
I am very grateful, that you're carefully reading and now given thoughts to what and how I type

ha ha, i have been replying to what you type, but twisting-lying appears all you can do

MuttleyLaff: You keep saying when the sun and the moon and the stars were not even created yet
and I keep trying to veer off that train or line of thought

The Job chapter 38-39 grilling of Job, wasnt done in accordance to a creation logical sequence
When Job was put on the spot, the intense questioning did not follow a strict order, it was done in a haphazard fashion

It wasnt where were you when sun and the moon and the stars created
but rather where were you the when the stars sang and the sun and the moon shouted

the verses are very clear, and you don't believe God's word and say He meant something else

Job 38:6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

MuttleyLaff: I can see with the strikeout that, its true that old habits die hard

oh duh mutt, truly Jesus being able to make stones cheer Him if the people didn't,
has nothing to do with job 38

MuttleyLaff: I cant be more fairer that this or can I

Thinking of this, it's you who isnt being fair here, you havent at all
All because you want to maintain "the sons of God" status quo that was fabricated
I have asked you to ask if you have any questions for me
or if you require sign-posted clarifications for simpler and easier understanding
on why and/or how "the morning stars" and "the sons of God", in Job 38:7, are metaphors, respectively for constellations & the sun and moon
but you've done nada about the two generous offers, instead you revert to groundless claims that I havent given any facts or facts supported by scripture

mutt, your confusion is supassed only by your twisting-lies
i have shown with scripture that you are wrong,
why would i ask you to give me one of your twisted explanations
on your false beliefs
why would i ask you a dishonest one for more lies
oh duh mutt

[quote author=Maamin post=71298692][/quote]

How are you?
Ok...so I also don't want to further confuse folks, so I'll have to go back later and polish up my statements.
The issue that most people (Christian or non) have is the following scriptural verse:

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

The bone of contention in Christendom is whether or not angels (I'm assuming fallen) mated with humans and created giants?

Just want to point out that if you look at the composition of that sentence, you will see that a semicolon is placed at the end of the first sentence. Semicolons (under certain English grammar rules) can function as a period. That means that the semicolon can actually separate two complete sentences. Those thoughts don't necessarily have to be connected to each other.
So as I read that particular scriptural verse, I see two major points being highlighted....
1). There were people of extraordinary height.
2). The men who served God became attracted to the women of the world, married, and produced brilliant minds.

I do believe that MuttleyLaff gave a detailed explanation about the meaning of "renown"....as well as a thorough scriptural-backed explanation about the above verse.

I would liken (if I may be permitted) modern-day basketball player heights to that of Goliath's (in his time period) in comparison to average-sized people. I was trying to show that regardless of the average heights of the time, that societies' do consist of people with extraordinary physical structures, intelligence, strengths or skills etc.
I will look into your claim about the height situation in Gen 14..which means I will have to look into time periods. No worries...I'm still learning. All this makes me do is dig a lot deeper into the Word...cause there's so much there.
I'm either gonna get stronger (which definitely. and by God's mighty grace will be my fate) or weaker in my faith ultimately. However, I should also be open to correction if/when I am wrong.
I will say this though: "that" which I know....is "that" which I know"

Matthew 22:30-32 (KJV)
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

So with that being said, we will peacefully "agree to disagree" on your statement of angels and humans having mated to create giants....sorry my brother...which is what you still regardless of a disagreement here

mutt, your personal text:

"Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed" - Friedrich Nietzsche

that is you to a t


your signature;

"The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off "

the first part doesn't apply to you, but the truth certinally does piss you off

MuttleyLaff:


You keep saying when the sun and the moon and the stars were not even created yet
and I keep trying to veer off that train or line of thought

The Job chapter 38-39 grilling of Job, wasnt done in accordance to a creation logical sequence
When Job was put on the spot, the intense questioning did not follow a strict order, it was done in a haphazard fashion

God questioned job in a haphazard fashion, says a son of satan

MuttleyLaff: It wasnt where were you when sun and the moon and the stars created
but rather where were you the when the stars sang and the sun and the moon shouted

mutt you don't only disbelieve God, but you change and twist what He said, which is you calling God a liar:
for starters God didn't say sun and moon and stars in job 38, but said morning stars and sons of God
and God didn't say "where were you when the morning stars sang and the sons of God shouted"
God said, Job 38:4  Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?

God also said:
Job 38:6  Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 
Job 38:7  When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?



you mutt couldn't tell the truth if your life depended on it
and it does


you don't believe God and that makes you a believer of the adversary
you have been blinded by satan, the god you do believe

2Co_4:4  In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Joh_8:44  Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

satan when he speaks a lie is just speaking naturally, you take after him mutt

Mobilia:


How are you?
Ok...so I also don't want to further confuse folks, so I'll have to go back later and polish up my statements.
The issue that most people (Christian or non) have is the following scriptural verse:

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

The bone of contention in Christendom is whether or not angels (I'm assuming fallen) mated with humans and created giants?

Just want to point out that if you look at the composition of that sentence, you will see that a semicolon is placed at the end of the first sentence. Semicolons (under certain English grammar rules) can function as a period. That means that the semicolon can actually separate two complete sentences. Those thoughts don't necessarily have to be connected to each other.
So as I read that particular scriptural verse, I see two major points being highlighted....
1). There were people of extraordinary height.
2). [s]The men who served God became attracted to the women of the world, married, and produced brilliant minds. [/s]

I do believe that MuttleyLaff gave a detailed explanation about the meaning of "renown"....as well as a thorough scriptural-backed explanation about the above verse.

I would liken (if I may be permitted) modern-day basketball player heights to that of Goliath's (in his time period) in comparison to average-sized people. I was trying to show that regardless of the average heights of the time, that societies' do consist of people with extraordinary physical structures, intelligence, strengths or skills etc.
I will look into your claim about the height situation in Gen 14..which means I will have to look into time periods. No worries...I'm still learning. All this makes me do is dig a lot deeper into the Word...cause there's so much there.
I'm either gonna get stronger (which definitely. and by God's mighty grace will be my fate) or weaker in my faith ultimately. However, I should also be open to correction if/when I am wrong.
I will say this though: "that" which I know....is "that" which I know"

Matthew 22:30-32 (KJV)
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

So with that being said, we will peacefully "agree to disagree" on your statement of angels and humans having mated to create giants....sorry my brother...which is what you still regardless of a disagreement here

I am doing fine

The semicolon has not or did not alter the context of that verse.

The bible did not call theme "men who served God" but rather "sons of God"

MuttleyLaff has not been helpful, he has been dabbling and twisting the scriptures for God knows why. Using one falsehood to back up another. All his bible references are taken way out of topic and context.

Modern day basket ballers are bearly little above 6 feet. Does someone like Shaqil O'neil look like a person that can put on an armour of weight as heavy as a bag of cement and move freely about in the court? I will beseech you to make your thorough research.

Well sorry to tell you, but "That" which you know is not in line with the teaching of the scripture.

Matth. 22:30-32 did not say angels can't marry or have sex either. It only says in the resurrection they will not be given in marriage or neither marry.

Yes I totally disagree with your position. It is not in tune with the bible.

Maamin:


I am doing fine

The semicolon has not or did not alter the context of that verse.

The bible did not call theme "men who served God" but rather "sons of God"

MuttleyLaff has not been helpful, he has been dabbling and twisting the scriptures for God knows why. Using one falsehood to back up another. All his bible references are taken way out of topic and context.

Modern day basket ballers are bearly little above 6 feet. Does someone like Shaqil O'neil look like a person that can put on an armour of weight as heavy as a bag of cement and move freely about in the court? I will beseech you to make your thorough research.

Well sorry to tell you, but "That" which you know is not in line with the teaching of the scripture.

Matth. 22:30-32 did not say angels can't marry or have sex either. It only says in the resurrection they will not be given in marriage or neither marry.

Yes I totally disagree with your position. It is not in tune with the bible.

Ok...
Honestly, and in my opinion, he does look like he could carry that much weight.
Well on this particular subject, I am in agreement with Muttley...
As far as Matthew 22: 30-32, if you think the very last sentence of that verse means that angels marry, then ok. It is talking about what we, humans will not do in Heaven (just as the angels).
Usually when I think of the definition "marriage", it includes sexual intercourse. But brother, it's ok.
One of us is wrong...but again we can "agree to disagree"...
I don't care for long debates. I was just trying to have people look a little deeper into this scripture passage cause I stand by my belief that it has been grossly misinterpreted.

However, God still remains supreme regardless of what we may believe or say. I hope after all of the discourse, we still remember that God wants to change our hearts....to ultimately represent His character

Guys/brothers and all reading this thread,

Here's some good reading/listening in case anyone is interested. I repeat: This is for those who may be INTERESTED.
I'm passionate about this guys, so I had to dig further and find these 2 separate informational pieces regarding Gen. 6:4
It's not up for debate, but I feel compelled to at least share this information which has been explained more thoroughly than I have done.


Genesis 6:1-4
Author: Ángel Manuel Rodríguez

I've been reading some commentaries on Genesis 6:1-4, and almost all of them interpret the expression "son of God" as a reference to divine beings or angels. What is a proper understanding of this biblical text?

Until recently the prevailing opinion among commentators was that the phrase "sons of God" referred to angels. Canaanite literature used this same phrase to designate divine beings, members of the divine pantheon. This use of the phrase has been read into the passage by a number of modern scholars. They use ancient mythology to interpret the text because, supposedly, this passage contains ancient myths.
Extrabiblical materials can be helpful in understanding difficult passages. However, those backgrounds should not determine the interpretation of a passage if in the process we sacrifice the principle that the Bible is its own interpreter. We should begin with the biblical text itself. From it we can observe the following points:
1. Use of "sons of God" in the Old Testament. A study of the phrase reveals that it is used to designate the Israelite king (Ps. 2:7; 2 Sam. 7:14); angels (Job 38:7); and heavenly beings, members of the divine council (Job 1:6; 2:1). In a very special way the Israelites are called sons/children of God. Israel is the firstborn son of God (Ex. 4:22, 23).
2. Immediate context. In Genesis 4 and 5 the human race is divided into two main groups: the descendants of Cain (Gen. 4: 17-24) and those of Seth ( verses 25, 26).
In Genesis 6:1,2 this division is clearly recognized by referring to those who followed the Lord as "sons of God" and to the rest of humanity as "men." There is nothing in the immediate context to suggest that the "sons of God" are kings, angels, or heavenly beings.
3. Significance of the expression "to take a wife." Verse 2 describes a legal and permanent union between the sons of God and the daughters of men. "They took to wife such of them as they chose" (RSV) includes a verb that is a technical expression to designate marriage, the act of entering into a legal and binding relationship between a man and a woman (Gen. 4:19; 11:29; 12:19; 20:2, 3).
Had the reference been to angels, one would have to conclude that they married the daughters of men and became their legal husbands. This is rejected by all serious interpreters.
4. Concept of judgment. The sin of the "sons of God" brought judgment on the human race. Had they been angels or heavenly beings, they, and possibly the daughters of men, should have been punished for their sins, but not the human race as a whole.
5. Descendants were human beings. Children born as a result of these intermarriages are not described as semidivine or semiangelic beings. There is a reference to the nephilim who were on the earth in those days, but the Hebrew text does not say that they were the descendants of the intermarriages (although some translations make that suggestion).
The sentence "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days. . ." seems to be a parenthetical statement. Nephilim is a Hebrew word whose meaning is not clear, and translators do not provide any English equivalent. In Numbers 13:33 this term designates giants. The antediluvian Nephilim were destroyed by the Flood, but later the term was used to refer to people of unusual height and violence who inhabited the land of Canaan.
"Men of renown" means "men of reputation" and describes a person with a good character (1 Chron. 12:30), and also individuals who use their influence for evil purposes (Num. 16:2, 3;1 Chron. 5:24, 25). Here the contexts seems to require a negative interpretation of that terminology.
Thus contextual and linguistic analysis indicates that the best interpretation of the phrase "sons of God" is the one that finds in it a designation of the descendants of Seth. This appears to be the one suggested by Scripture itself.


This is a short clip of a radio show where someone called in and asked about Genesis 6:4.
https://www.amazingfacts.org/media-library/media/e/1043/f/6/t/explain-genesis-6-1-4-on-the-sons-of-god-marrying-the-daughters-of-man-

Job 38:1  Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, 
Job 38:2  Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? 
Job 38:3  Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. 
Job 38:4  Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 
Job 38:5  Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 
Job 38:6  Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 
Job 38:7  When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
 

those verses above and below also show that God of the old testament who laid the foundations of the earth
is the Word who became Jesus Christ


Heb 1:8  But unto the Son he(Father) saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 
Heb 1:9  Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 
Heb 1:10  And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: 
Heb 1:11  They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; 
Heb 1:12  And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.