Maamin:


I have been waiting to hear from you. God's speed.

I know brother. I deeply apologize. I'm not running, it's just that I want to take a little time to go a little further into this subject since this is a discussion.

Just give me a few more days...and I'm gonna be able to focus and try to present this in the best way possible. I'm looking for a specific thing..so please bear with me.
Folks are more than likely, gonna disagree...but I want to at least give an alternate interpretation of (beliefs) that many of us Christians have always held so dear.....
Ultimately we want to have the correct scriptural interpretation..led by the Holy Spirit (although I don't know that we, humans, can ever come to that agreement).


CC: MuttleyLaff
(Are you a theology major? Just wondering..)

Mobilia:



I know brother. I deeply apologize. I'm not running, it's just that I want to take a little time to go a little further into this subject since this is a discussion.

Just give me a few more days...and I'm gonna be able to focus and try to present this in the best way possible. I'm looking for a specific thing..so please bear with me.
Folks are more than likely, gonna disagree...but I want to at least give an alternate interpretation of (beliefs) that many of us Christians have always held so dear.....
Ultimately we want to have the correct scriptural interpretation..led by the Holy Spirit (although I don't know that we, humans, can ever come to that agreement).


CC: MuttleyLaff
(Are you a theology major? Just wondering..)

OK dear! Take your time. Will be looking forward to it.

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=70994045]Yeah now.
Of course, they're physically big as big if not bigger than the original and previous Nephilims

OK, can you tell me what is responsible for this extra size looking beings?

Human beings are the only ones permitted and mandated to physically impregnate themselves

It is only God that is capable of physically impregnating humans.
Not angels, whether fallen or non fallen, who are 110% incapable of physically impregnating humans.

Humans procreate after their own kind. All animals are mandated to procreate after their own kind. Plants and trees and vegetations. But then comes in cross breeding of two different species to produce another special one.

Yes it is only God capable of physically impregnating humans. Angels are only said not to be given in marriage or marry in heaven. They are not specifically said not to be able to do so on earth.

Show me one incident of fallen angel shape shifting in the bible.
None. Nada, not even one

Angels that left their original estate and took daughters of men , are likely to be taking a human form to do just that not spirit.

Mobilia is right, about the effect of all these fantastical/Hollywood-inspired influences

Yes she is right about nollywood/hollywood and all fantasy fictions you can think of...but this particular teaching of the fallen angels is not. I might term snake and donkey speaking as Hollywood inspired too...since we don't see such in our day to day living. In fact Isn't Satan crafty enough to had made a snake to speak?

The neatly arranged perfect natural order with its serene and systematic functioning set up was disrupted the instant the fruit was shared.
The world's already is and still is, in disorder.

I couldn't agree with you more on this. But the perfect natural order of angelic beings cohabiting with humans was not Until the sons of God took in daughters of men.

Be my guest, if you want to live in that fantasy world of fallen angels humping humans

It is even more of fantasy to even think the falling angels can't procreate since it was not categorically stated about them.

Is that the only scripture for your fallen angel transforming into or appearing in physical human forms and performing fleshly activities?

It is..and it is very explicit about it. Tell me what was the sin of these angels.

2 Peter 2:4-5
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;

5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Jude 1: 6
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day."

You will wonder what this their first estate and own habitation is exactly.

I can list you lots of, a not fallen angel transforming into or appearing in physical human forms and performing fleshly activities

You will have to tell me the very sin of these falling angels or Sons of God in Gen. 6


While this falling angels are bound it is obvious that Satan and his cohorts are the demons wrecking havoc on humanity. Ichuka said angels or falling angels don't posses, and that demons are different from falling angel which I also strongly disagree. Well , Luke 22:3 says "Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve."

I will and more, after you have answered the 5 questions listed,
and answer them one after the other the same manner I asked

I did not see much questions in your replies, may be I did not notice. But I will reply them as best as I can.

sons of God is not an exclusive title for angels
It is not used only for angels

The bible, in John 1:12, says:
"But as many as received Him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,
(i.e. she, daughters of God, as well) even to them that believe on his name"

The word received, in John 1:12, refers to "regard",
as in, "regarding someone's power, authority, position etcetera"
adding up to mean, as many as have regard of/to Him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God.

It is not fallen angels but it is the human beings that had high regard for God, that went further down the slippery slope
by lusting after women (i.e. daughters of men) who had no high regard for God

Sons of God is not used for angels alone. But that of Genesis was not speaking about human sons of God but angelic sons of God.

John 1:12 is after Jesus came for redemption. That we are born into the body of Christ and given the power to also become sons of God.

Why make an exception in this particular sons of God in Gen 6. While all older scriptures in the Torah refers to sons of God as no other than angelic beings.?

Why dont you drop the bible verse here.
Lets, together, do a peer review of it

We read, "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh..." (Jude 6-7).

The first estate of the angels was to serve the purpose of God, not their own lusts for power, a lust for the daughters of men, or a lust to do their own will. Their "own habitation" is the spirit world as they were made "ministering SPIRITS" (Heb. 1:13-14). They were not made "ministering flesh." They (the sons of God) were not to use their transformation powers to put on the flesh of men, which was "strange flesh" for them, in order to sire children with the daughters of men (mortal women). Nowhere in scripture do we read of demons being able to do this. However, the holy angels of God are still able to appear as men (Luke 24:4, Mark 16:5). Although the holy angels of God tend to appear in shining garments, scripture reveals that they look like adult males to people. Some of them look totally like ordinary men. This is how it's possible to entertain them without being aware that they are an angelic being (Heb. 13:2). Now It is no wonder that demons/devils now crave possession of a body. In their chains under darkness, they no longer have the power to transform themselves into ordinary looking adult males as the holy angels of God can do.

Assumption, no concrete bible verse and outright speculation.
This is exactly what you are doing.

No sir! All the verse you put forward are weak in supporting your teaching. So no!

On the other what you read there, is reality, miles more and away from being assumption or speculation

Things of God are even more than reality for a spiritual mind. Trust me they are spiritually discerned.

ROTBL.
You know why "Noah was still termed as a Man and favour in the eyes of the lord" sic?
It is because he didnt think with his head. He thought with his other, better and correct head

Yet he was not called Son of God in Genesis, but a righteous man.

You don't want fiction/fantasy doctrine. But this is what it is all about right now...O Yes! angels took human females for themselves. It is possible. And this is what the scripture teaches. No amount of sugar quoting or length you can water this down to say other wise.

Cc: Mobila

Mobilia:
I know brother. I deeply apologize.
I'm not running, it's just that I want to take a little time to go a little further into this subject since this is a discussion.

Just give me a few more days...and I'm gonna be able to focus and try to present this in the best way possible.

Pick your battles, those who fight and run, live to fight another day.

Mobilia:
I'm looking for a specific thing..so please bear with me

Just tell, what it is you're specifically looking for, darling.
You know what they say:
"a problem shared is a problem halved"

Mobilia:
Folks are more than likely, gonna disagree...
but I want to at least give an alternate interpretation of (beliefs) that many of us Christians have always held so dear.....

Are finger lengths equal?

Mobilia:
Ultimately we want to have the correct scriptural interpretation..led by the Holy Spirit
(although I don't know that we, humans, can ever come to that agreement).

It's not going to happen as long as "the jacket, shirt/blouse, trousers and shoes look too big on some of us" remains

Mobilia:
CC: MuttleyLaff
(Are you a theology major? Just wondering..)

Psalm 119: 97-176

Maamin:
OK, can you tell me what is responsible for this extra size looking beings?

Maamin, I recall remarking that your earlier post has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.
Now in this new post, you're digging bigger holes to the already present ones in your previous post
I dont even know where to start from, as you've presented too many holes for me plug

I will try and curtail my post, so not to cause information overload

Now, you earlier asked me, by typing:
"This giants were they physically big?"

At which I replied:
"Yeah now
Of course, they're physically big, as big, if not bigger than the original and previous Nephilims"

"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well,
when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
- Genesis 6:4

"We even saw the Nephilim there—the descendants of Anak that come from the Nephilim!
We seemed like grasshoppers in our own sight, and we must have seemed the same to them!”"
- Numbers 13:33

"Some of these nations are descendants of the Anakim.
You know how tall and strong they are, and you've heard that no one can defeat them in battle."
- Deuteronomy 9:2

As I earlier said, the giants truly were wiped out during the Noah flood.
but guess what again Maamin, the giant (i.e. the Nephilim) gene survived.

The gene survived the flood, to re-produce Nephilims (i.e. still extra size looking beings)
Aside Numbers 13:33 and Deuteronomy 9:2, we know, anyway from Genesis 6:4, that giants were on the earth in those days and afterwards.

So, the gene surviving, is what is responsible for the still extra size looking beings

I know what your next question will be or should be

Maamin:
Humans procreate after their own kind.
All animals are mandated to procreate after their own kind.
Plants and trees and vegetations.
But then comes in cross breeding of two different species to produce another special one.

Yes, it is only God capable of physically impregnating humans.
Angels are only said not to be given in marriage or marry in heaven.
They are not specifically said not to be able to do so on earth.

1/ How, where and when has God impregnated humans?
2/ How do you mean " they are not specifically said not to be able to do so on earth"?

Maamin:
Angels that left their original estate and took daughters of men, are likely to be taking a human form to do just that not spirit.

1/ What verses are you basing "Angels that left their original estate and took daughters of men..." on?
2/ Who do you think angels in "angels that left their original state" are?

Maamin:
Yes she is right about nollywood/hollywood and all fantasy fictions you can think of...
but this particular teaching of the fallen angels is not.
I might term snake and donkey speaking as Hollywood inspired too...
since we don't see such in our day to day living.
In fact Isn't Satan crafty enough to had made a snake to speak?

You should know better, not to repeat the narrative that it is a snake that spoke
You also should know better, that Satan hasnt the power to make smallest animal to speak, talkess making a "snake" sic to speak
Get the facts right.

Maamin:
I couldn't agree with you more on this.
But the perfect natural order of angelic beings cohabiting with humans was not until the sons of God took in daughters of men.

Please stop doing this, it feels like hearing fingernails on a chalkboard

Bearing in mind, that the sun and moon are called sons of God,
I half expect you to say, the sun and moon took the daughters of men

Maamin:
It is even more of fantasy to even think the falling angels can't procreate since it was not categorically stated about them.

I hear you Maamin
even though Genesis 1:26-28, identifies categorically, clearly and definitely, who is to procreate
and knowing that angels when dispatched for a mission, dont have sexual designs, when they are sent and/or when they appear

Maamin:
It is..and it is very explicit about it.
Tell me what was the sin of these angels.

"²The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.
³So the LORD said,
“My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.”
⁴The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well, when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown. "
- Genesis 6:2-4

"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 3:38

I sure hope you clearly can see this, that, they are no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4
You're asking an invalid question, when you ask of the sins of imaginary celestial beings (i.e. angels)

Watch this. You're like asking a single man "Are you still beating your wife?"
That's an invalid question, as he has no wife,
just as, there were no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4, for you to be asking what where the angels sins.

The question shouldnt be what was the sin of these angels (i.e. celestial beings that are angels or messengers)
but it should have been what were the sins of these human beings

Maamin:
2 Peter 2:4-5
4For 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;
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Jude 1: 6
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day."

You will wonder what this their first estate and own habitation is exactly.

You got caught up in the metaphors used in the bible.
The bible does this quite a lot,
using figure of speech that directly refers to one thing (e.g. human beings) by mentioning another (e.g. celestial beings) for rhetorical effect.

Maamin:
You will have to tell me the very sin of these falling angels or Sons of God in Gen. 6

"³Never marry any of them. Never let your daughters marry their sons or your sons marry their daughters."
⁴These people will turn your children away from me to worship other gods.
Then the LORD will get very angry with you and will quickly destroy you.
- Deutronomy 7:3-4

Did I notice you, in there above, capitalised the s, in sons of God?

Mobilia succinctly on Page 1 and I on Page 3, had already told you, their very sins were intermarrying
The giants were already on the earth before and after, produced by the sons and daughters of men
but when the sons of men decided to begin having sex with the daughters of men too,
then the children born turned out to be famous with plenty of brains, as well as not just only brawn.

Read Genesis 6:4-7 slowly but loud out, to see how because of their infamy, wickedness and warrior fixated attitude they met their waterloo.

Maamin:
While this falling angels are bound it is obvious that Satan and his cohorts are the demons wrecking havoc on humanity.
Ichuka said angels or falling angels don't possess, and that demons are different from falling angel which I also strongly disagree.
Well, Luke 22:3 says
"Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve."

All fallen angels are demons of some sorts
The word angel, designates messenger, beings whether celestial or human, who is given work to carry messages or do a task

I disagree along with you too

You get possessed by whatever you expose yourself to.
You can be possessed by whatever you permit yourself to come under its influence.
All it takes is, a lapse of judgement, drop in guard, error of judgement, metal lapse, being emotionally vulnerable for possession to take place

Satan has a free pass, and so with it, enters everywhere on earth with it.

Satan doesnt really need a green light before popping head in or around
Satan is already being and still is here on this thread, reading aptly with keen interest

Satan enters you, I and everyone.
It's not just Judas, remember the serpent, remember Peter
(i.e. when and where in Matthew 16:23, Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan!'')

Maamin:
I did not see much questions in your replies, may be I did not notice.
But I will reply them as best as I can.

Thank you. I am grateful to you for replying back as best as you can.

Maamin:
Sons of God is not used for angels alone.
But that of Genesis was not speaking about human sons of God but angelic sons of God.

I am sorry to be the one bursting your bubble
but your beliefs believing that Genesis was not speaking about human sons of God but is speaking of angelic sons of God are false and wacky.

Maamin:
John 1:12 is after Jesus came for redemption.
That we are born into the body of Christ and given the power to also become sons of God

"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 3:38

Luke 3:36-38 goes back, to men, before the period of the flood and its happening.
and then verse 38, tracing to the very beginning, says about Adam, that he was the son of God.

The sons of God, are descendants of Adam, but more specifically that of Seth, who had high regard for God.

Maamin:
Why make an exception in this particular sons of God in Gen 6.
While all older scriptures in the Torah refers to sons of God as no other than angelic beings.?

You are making a fallacy of equivalence.

Paste here each or all these older scriptures in the Torah that refers to sons of God as no other than angelic beings
and I'll prove you wrong, that not all the so called older scriptures in the Torah, refers to sons of God, as angelic beings (i.e. celestial beings)

Maamin:
We read,
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh..." (Jude 6-7).

The first estate of the angels was to serve the purpose of God, not their own lusts for power, a lust for the daughters of men, or a lust to do their own will. Their "own habitation" is the spirit world as they were made "ministering SPIRITS" (Heb. 1:13-14).

They were not made "ministering flesh." They (the sons of God) were not to use their transformation powers to put on the flesh of men, which was "strange flesh" for them, in order to sire children with the daughters of men (mortal women).

Nowhere in scripture do we read of demons being able to do this.
However, the holy angels of God are still able to appear as men (Luke 24:4, Mark 16:5).

Although the holy angels of God tend to appear in shining garments, scripture reveals that they look like adult males to people.
Some of them look totally like ordinary men.
This is how it's possible to entertain them without being aware that they are an angelic being (Heb. 13:2).

Now It is no wonder that demons/devils now crave possession of a body.
In their chains under darkness, they no longer have the power to transform themselves into ordinary looking adult males as the holy angels of God can do.

Written up the way you've done, I have just come across and read a discombobulated post
I am sorry Maamin, but just you have to improve and do better than this

Maamin:
No sir! All the verse you put forward are weak in supporting your teaching. So no!

I am not teaching.
We havent, even with all I've put forward, scratched the tip of the iceberg, for it to even to be called teaching

Maamin:
Things of God are even more than reality for a spiritual mind.
Trust me they are spiritually discerned.

Buff up and start pushing the envelope then

Maamin:
Yet he was not called Son of God in Genesis, but a righteous man

"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil:
whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."
- 1 John 3:10

If Adam is called a son of God in Luke 3:38, what do you think makes Noah?

Why repeat a known and unnecessary fact, huh?
Look at 1 John 3:10 now.
Maamin, anyone practising righteousness, is of God, and by default, is a son of God.

Maamin:
You don't want fiction/fantasy doctrine. But this is what it is all about right now...
O Yes! angels took human females for themselves. It is possible.
And this is what the scripture teaches.

You whats the issue here?
You're too carnally minded, thats why you're clinging on to "angels" (i.e. incubi) taking human females for themselves
Where were and what were the succubi doing?
Painting their feet and finger nails?

Maamin:
No amount of sugar quoting or length you can water this down to say other wise.

1/ Maamin, why is it that its the men, as in human beings, that God singled out to punish for the sins of the daughter of men, committed with your supposedly "angels" with overly-imaginative and unrealistic tendencies?
2/ Why is it, that its man, that God mentions repeatedly, as having concerns over and so the reason He is going to destroy them?
3/ Why isnt there is a single mention of your supposedly randy "angels" being at fault as why He wants to clear up the earth with flood?

MuttleyLaff
Maamin, I recall remarking that your earlier post has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.
Now in this new post, you're digging bigger holes to the already present ones in your previous post
I dont even know where to start from, as you've presented too many holes for me plug

I will try and curtail my post, so not to cause information overload

Now, you earlier asked me, by typing:
"This giants were they physically big?"

At which I replied:
"Yeah now
Of course, they're physically big, as big, if not bigger than the original and previous Nephilims"

"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well,
when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
- Genesis 6:4

"We even saw the Nephilim there—the descendants of Anak that come from the Nephilim!
We seemed like grasshoppers in our own sight, and we must have seemed the same to them!”"
- Numbers 13:33

"Some of these nations are descendants of the Anakim.
You know how tall and strong they are, and you've heard that no one can defeat them in battle."
- Deuteronomy 9:2

As I earlier said, the giants truly were wiped out during the Noah flood.
but guess what again Maamin, the giant (i.e. the Nephilim) gene survived.

The gene survived the flood, to re-produce Nephilims (i.e. still extra size looking beings)
Aside Numbers 13:33 and Deuteronomy 9:2, we know, anyway from Genesis 6:4, that giants were on the earth in those days and afterwards.

So, the gene surviving, is what is responsible for the still extra size looking beings

I know what your next question will be or should be

Where you are missing it is the fact that you still havent given me a good explanation why the ordinary union of human sons of God and daughters of men produced "Giants offsprings, Mighty men of old, men of renown"

renown re·nown [ri nówn]
noun
widespread acclaim: widespread fame or honor


[14th century. < Old French renon < renomer "make famous" < nomer "to name" < Latin nominare]

why are they famous and mighty ? if not that they are extraordinarily more than the normal humans.

Sethites and daughters of men (Cainites) can not suddenly start producing giant genes of celebrities.

what about the Daughters of God and Sons of Men were they all ugly?
where did the extra size come from, just like that ? is the anointing of the descendants of Seth RESPONSIBLE for the extra size?

1/ How, where and when has God impregnated humans?
2/ How do you mean " they are not specifically said not to be able to do so on earth"?

1/ What verses are you basing "Angels that left their original estate and took daughters of men..." on?
2/ Who do you think angels in "angels that left their original state" are?

You should know better, not to repeat the narrative that it is a snake that spoke
You also should know better, that Satan hasnt the power to make smallest animal to speak, talkess making a "snake" sic to speak
Get the facts right.

Please stop doing this, it feels like hearing fingernails on a chalkboard

You earlier mentioned that only God can impregnate humans, and i believe you don't mean it in a carnal way. so i don't know why you are asking me that. @ bold
Matth. 22:30 "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven."

Does this verse says angels can't marry or reproduce? but rather they don't do so in heaven. this might be their jurisdiction.

1 Peter 3:19-20 "By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

Jude 1:6 "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day."


Jude likely understands Genesis 6:1-4 to refer to the intermarriage between spirit beings and humans. Jude 6 speaks of “angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling.” Unless Jude is speaking of an unknown event, he seems to be referencing the angels of Genesis 6:1-4 who left heaven to live on earth.

This becomes even clearer when Jude compares these angels to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, “which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire" [literally “strange flesh”] (Jude 7). We know that Sodom and Gomorrah sexually pursued “strange flesh” in that they practiced homosexuality (Genesis 19:5). (Though “men” in the passage were angels, which could also explain the “other flesh.”)

Angels that left their original estate is not Satan and the one-third angels that rebelled. Don't even go there

Bearing in mind, that the sun and moon are called sons of God,
I half expect you to say, the sun and moon took the daughters of men

Even if the sun and moon are called sons of God, The ones in Gen. 6 are not sun and moon. The sun and the moon can not take daughters of men and give birth to giants..that one doesn't add up.

I hear you Maamin
even though Genesis 1:26-28, identifies categorically, clearly and definitely, who is to procreate
and knowing that angels when dispatched for a mission, dont have sexual designs, when they are sent and/or when they appear

Are angels robots? when on mission don't they have will of their own ?, cant they conceive good and evil thought as well?

"²The sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.
³So the LORD said,
“My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.”
⁴The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well, when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men.
And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown. "
- Genesis 6:2-4

"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 3:38

I sure hope you clearly can see this, that, they are no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4
You're asking an invalid question, when you ask of the sins of imaginary celestial beings (i.e. angels)

No sir! even before Genesis was penned down , The book of Job was completed and one of the oldest. This book always refer to Sons of God as angelic hosts in all instances it was used. The "sons of God" (Genesis 6:2- 4) is a phrase used three other times in the Bible outside of Genesis 6—Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. In all three of these instances the "sons of God" are spirit/angelic beings, including Satan himself. The use of the phrase in Job suggests that Genesis 6 is speaking of spirits/angels.

Watch this. You're like asking a single man "Are you still beating your wife?"
That's an invalid question, as he has no wife,
just as, there were no celestial beings (i.e. angels) involved anywhere in Genesis 6:2-4, for you to be asking what where the angels sins.

The question shouldnt be what was the sin of these angels (i.e. celestial beings that are angels or messengers)
but it should have been what were the sins of these human beings

Ok..let me rephrase, what is the exact sins of these Sons of God in Gen. 6? is the Phrase "daughters of men" denote sinful people or abomination? Remember Jesus called himself "Son of man" too.

You got caught up in the metaphors used in the bible.
The bible does this quite a lot,
using figure of speech that directly refers to one thing (e.g. human beings) by mentioning another (e.g. celestial beings) for rhetorical effect.

"³Never marry any of them. Never let your daughters marry their sons or your sons marry their daughters."
⁴These people will turn your children away from me to worship other gods.
Then the LORD will get very angry with you and will quickly destroy you.
- Deutronomy 7:3-4

I understand the figure of speech perfectly. But this verse above did not lay any emphasis on some special children that comes as a result of ungodly union of 'your son marrying their daughter etcetera.'

Did I notice you, in there above, capitalised the s, in sons of God?

Any problem with that?

Mobilia succinctly on Page 1 and I on Page 3, had already told you, their very sins were intermarrying
The giants were already on the earth before and after, produced by the sons and daughters of men
but when the sons of men decided to begin having sex with the daughters of men too,
then the children born turned out to be famous with plenty of brains, as well as not just only brawn.

NO Sir!. the NEPHILIMS existed in those days(as a result of Daughters of Men and The Sons of God) and afterward...not before those days bro! people didnt just start given birth to giant looking beings.

Read Genesis 6:4-7 slowly but loud out, to see how because of their infamy, wickedness and warrior fixated attitude they met their waterloo.

Wickedness grew in those days as people try to attain longer and uncommon life styles away from Gods purpose due to this ungodly union.

Gen 6:3 "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."

All fallen angels are demons of some sorts
The word angel, designates messenger, beings whether celestial or human, who is given work to carry messages or do a task

I disagree along with you too

You get possessed by whatever you expose yourself to.
You can be possessed by whatever you permit yourself to come under its influence.
All it takes is, a lapse of judgement, drop in guard, error of judgement, metal lapse, being emotionally vulnerable for possession to take place

Satan has a free pass, and so with it, enters everywhere on earth with it.

Satan doesnt really need a green light before popping head in or around
Satan is already being and still is here on this thread, reading aptly with keen interest

Satan enters you, I and everyone.
It's not just Judas, remember the serpent, remember Peter
(i.e. when and where in Matthew 16:23, Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan!'')

At least we agree on the bold
It is also good you agree Satan can enter anyone. But i wonder what kind of power Satan has to enter and make human or animal do something against the will of GOD, or even mimic Samuel to answer Saul in (2 Samuel).

Thank you. I am grateful to you for replying back as best as you can.

I am sorry to be the one bursting your bubble
but your beliefs believing that Genesis was not speaking about human sons of God but is speaking of angelic sons of God are false and wacky.

"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 3:38

Luke 3:36-38 goes back, to men, before the period of the flood and its happening.
and then verse 38, tracing to the very beginning, says about Adam, that he was the son of God.

The sons of God, are descendants of Adam, but more specifically that of Seth, who had high regard for God.

The book of Job goes even way back before Genesis...in the old days when it was recorded, the Phrase "Sons of God" was used for angels not Humans. Luke 3:36-38 is a later genealogy of the only spiritual begotten Son of God and the First Son of God (Adam). I can also say He is Son of Man.

You are making a fallacy of equivalence.

Paste here each or all these older scriptures in the Torah that refers to sons of God as no other than angelic beings
and I'll prove you wrong, that not all the so called older scriptures in the Torah, refers to sons of God, as angelic beings (i.e. celestial beings)

Written up the way you've done, I have just come across and read a discombobulated post
I am sorry Maamin, but just you have to improve and do better than this

I am not teaching.
We havent, even with all I've put forward, scratched the tip of the iceberg, for it to even to be called teaching

Buff up and start pushing the envelope then

"In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil:
whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."
- 1 John 3:10

If Adam is called a son of God in Luke 3:38, what do you think makes Noah?

Why repeat a known and unnecessary fact, huh?
Look at 1 John 3:10 now.
Maamin, anyone practising righteousness, is of God, and by default, is a son of God.

The fact still remains that the Sons of God in Gen 6. refers and contrast two distinct types of beings. I'm not making a fallacy But drawing you to the understanding of this particular controversial portion of the scripture.

You whats the issue here?
You're too carnally minded, thats why you're clinging on to "angels" (i.e. incubi) taking human females for themselves
Where were and what were the succubi doing?
Painting their feet and finger nails?

The spiritual is higher than the physical , the spiritual is even said to rule the physical. I'm not carnally minded to think that angels were once on earth to cohabit with human females. You should be the one to tell me what the succubies where doing. Since the sons of God were humans, i wonder what the daughters of God and sons of men were doing. Yes! may be painting their feet and nails to look attractive too in other to be equally desired.

1/ Maamin, why is it that its the men, as in human beings, that God singled out to punish for the sins of the daughter of men, committed with your supposedly "angels" with overly-imaginative and unrealistic tendencies?
2/ Why is it, that its man, that God mentions repeatedly, as having concerns over and so the reason He is going to destroy them?
3/ Why isnt there is a single mention of your supposedly randy "angels" being at fault as why He wants to clear up the earth with flood?

ANSWER 1: Gen. 6:5 "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."

ANSWER 2: God did not mention man only but also the angels that sinned only that it was not recorded directly in Genesis. 1 Peter 3:19-20 "By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

ANSWER 3: Answer 2 also answers your query on this number 3. in addition to that, Jude 1:6 "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day."

In conclusion, the “sons of God” are angels who sinned by having sex with beautiful women. This was the view of the early church fathers. Why were they able to “take wives for themselves, whom ever, they chose. The answer could be that angels are very powerful. Why did they do this? We do not know the answer, but we can guess. Finally God curtailed and addressed the e issue at the right time and passed his judgment as fit to both falling angels and Men.

Maamin tidy up the above post.
You turned it into a spaghetti post

MuttleyLaff:
Maamin tidy up the above post.
You turned it into a spaghetti post

hold on ..let me quote and answer each please.

spaghetti or macaroni ...You already elongated it when you replied

I'm kind of Busy these days , but i will answer them all..i just need time

Maamin:
hold on ..let me quote and answer each please.

The post is 99.9% a lot better now

Maamin:
spaghetti or macaroni ...
You already elongated it when you replied

You see the issue here, is that you want to get away with murder.
As much as I dont want to reply at length, I just needed to address some of the holes in your post.
There are too many to gaping holes to mention, so we have an elongated reply post

Maamin:
I'm kind of Busy these days ,
but i will answer them all..i just need time

Take your time, there isnt any need for rushed up post

I dont want to reply with a long post
so I'll look for your prominent point(s), likely going for two or three of them, if I wont do just one

Maamin, you did yourself in, when you agreed that sun and moon are addressed as sons of God

Now tell, what are the sons of God in Job 38:7, that happens to be one out of the three stars verses, you were waving in Mobilia's face?

I am trying to get you see that the expression "sons of God" isnt exclusively used for animated spiritual or celestial beings

You're not used to hyperboles and metaphors being used in the bible.
The bible does this quite a lot, like in this case,
using a figure of speech that directly refers to one thing (e.g. human beings) by mentioning another (e.g. celestial beings) for rhetorical effect.

I dont want slip into writing a lengthy post and getting information lost in it, so I'll for now, only post this much

MuttleyLaff:
The post is 99.9% a lot better now

You see the issue here, is that you want to get away with murder.
As much as I dont want to reply at length, I just needed to address some of the holes in your post.
There are too many to gaping holes to mention, so we have an elongated reply post

Take your time, there isnt any need for rushed up post

I dont want to reply with a long post
so I'll look for your prominent point(s), likely going for two or three of them, if I wont do just one

Maamin, you did yourself in, when you agreed that sun and moon are addressed as sons of God

Now tell, what are the sons of God in Job 38:7, that happens to be one out of the three stars verses, you were waving in Mobilia's face?

I am trying to get you see that the expression "sons of God" isnt exclusively used for animated spiritual or celestial beings

You're not used to hyperboles and metaphors being used in the bible.
The bible does this quite a lot, like in this case,
using a figure of speech that directly refers to one thing (e.g. human beings) by mentioning another (e.g. celestial beings) for rhetorical effect.

I dont want slip into writing a lengthy post and getting information lost in it, so I'll for now, only post this much

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

I believe you are not by any chance thinking these sons of God are Sethites( The human godly race)?

The Contrast between the Son of God and daughters of men in Gen 6 can't be overlooked as ordinary humans. No!

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

I believe you are not by any chance thinking these sons of God are Sethites( The human godly race)?

The Contrast between the Son of God and daughters of men in Gen 6 can't be overlooked as ordinary humans. No!

I do remember saying, I am trying to get you see that the expression "sons of God" isnt exclusively used for animated spiritual or celestial beings.

Now tell, what are these sons of God, in Job 38:7?
Are they animated spiritual or animated celestial beings, also known as angelic beings?

This Job 38:7 verse, happens to be one out of your three stars and champion verses, you were waving in Mobilia's face, weren't you?

Let's deal with this one first, before going on to the other two, shall we.

I warn you in advance, bubbles will be burst.

MuttleyLaff:
I do remember saying, I am trying to get you see that the expression "sons of God" isnt exclusively used for animated spiritual or celestial beings.

Now tell, what are these sons of God, in Job 38:7?
Are they animated spiritual or animated celestial beings, also known as angelic beings?

This Job 38:7 verse, happens to be one out of your three stars and champion verses, you were waving in Mobilia's face, weren't you?

Let's deal with this one first, before going on to the other two, shall we.

I warn you in advance, bubbles will be burst.

Do I sense as if you are trying to read a whole new and a different meaning to Job 38:7?

What could the "sons of God" possibly mean there if not angelic hosts singing and rejoicing during during the formation of the world?

Let's hear yours anyway!

Seun:
Why would fallen angels be called sons of God?

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

Seun:
If that was the intended meaning, why did God inspire the writer to choose such a misleading and confusing term?

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

Maamin:
You will have to tell me the very sin of these falling angels or Sons of God in Gen. 6

MuttleyLaff:
Did I notice you, in there above, capitalised the s, in sons of God?

Maamin:
Any problem with that?

"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

Maamin:
Do I sense as if you are trying to read a whole new and a different meaning to Job 38:7?

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

Maamin:
What could the "sons of God" possibly mean there,
if not angelic hosts singing
and rejoicing during during the formation of the world?

Let's hear yours anyway!

"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

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=71123911]Angels, whether fallen or not, are never called sons of God

At this point, well! it's your words against the bible's.

Job 2:1 ‎Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Let me add this one even if you are denying them to be angels.

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

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

You erred greatly again by the above. but the scripture says otherwise. Angels are called sons of God right before they fell.

"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

There are no problems whatsoever there, except the one you are making out right at this moment.
When that scripture was revealed it was not in Upper case or lower case it was simply just "son" . The use of uppercase letters are just the formal way english intend to interpret the word grammatically. Still no ambiguity.

The bold says it all..God never beget angels at any time. That is why Christ's Sonship is unique one of it kind and first of it kind.

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

Is this the truth? Now this is unequivocally laughable and amusing.

So morning stars mean stars or  the constellation? 
And sons of God mean (sun and the moon) wow! Just wow!

All these just to avoid taking sons of God in Gen 6 as angels right? Well done sir! 

How about this Rev.22 :16  "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."

Isaiah 14:12 "How you are fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! "

Rev. 12:4 "And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born."

If God is father of light, then it makes even more sense that the Son(s) is/are the light (of the world). We Christians are the light of the world Matth 5:14. Other words for "Morning star" include "shinning one", "light bringer or bearer"

So can I also say
"morning stars" = Angels
"Sons of God" = Angels ?

Maamin:
At this point, well! it's your words against the bible's.

Job 2:1 ‎
Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.

Job 1:6
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Let me add this one even if you are denying them to be angels.

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

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

Maamin:
You erred greatly again by the above. but the scripture says otherwise.
Angels are called sons of God right before they fell.

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

Maamin:
There are no problems whatsoever there, except the one you are making out right at this moment.
When that scripture was revealed it was not in Upper case or lower case it was simply just "son" .
The use of uppercase letters are just the formal way english intend to interpret the word grammatically.
Still no ambiguity.

The bold says it all..God never beget angels at any time. That is why Christ's Sonship is unique one of it kind and first of it kind.

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?

Maamin:
The bold says it all..God never beget angels at any time.
That is why Christ's Sonship is unique one of it kind and first of it kind.

""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

Maamin:
Is this the truth?
Now this is unequivocally laughable and amusing.

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

Maamin:
So morning stars mean stars or the constellation?
And sons of God mean (sun and the moon) wow! Just wow!

All these just to avoid taking sons of God in Gen 6 as angels right? Well done sir!

How about this Rev.22 :16
"I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."

"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

Maamin:
If God is father of light, then it makes even more sense that the Son(s) is/are the light (of the world).
We Christians are the light of the world Matth 5:14.

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

Maamin:
Other words for "Morning star" include "shinning one", "light bringer or bearer"

What dead on arrival point were you aiming to make with this remark?

Maamin:
So can I also say
"morning stars" = Angels
"Sons of God" = Angels ?

Capital NO!

Wow guys...lots of info here. Gotta read through all of it...
Will be here on Sunday to finally, finally contribute

Mobilia:
Wow guys...lots of info here.
Gotta read through all of it...
Will be here on Sunday to finally, finally contribute

We havent even scratched the surface of the matter.

I warned Maamin not to quote Job 1:6, Job 2:1 and/or Job 38:7, here, as being angelic celestial beings
because he'll be making a grave mistake if he does,
but would he listen. No

MuttleyLaff:
We havent even scratched the surface of the matter.

I warned Maamin not to quote Job 1:6, Job 2:1 and/or Job 38:7, here, as being angelic celestial beings
because he'll be making a grave mistake if he does,
but would he listen. No

Lol!

Patiently waiting for your interpretation of those verses. This is really interesting.

Maamin:
Lol!
Patiently waiting for your interpretation of those verses

If you couldnt handle and get to grips with what sons of God really are in Job 38:7
what makes you think you'll take in and stomach the explaining of the true meaning of the sons of God in Job 1:6 and Job 2:1.

Maamin:
This is really interesting.

The really interesting thing is that, the use of the expression, sons of God, in Genesis 6:2
came full circle with the use and it's earlier mention, in Job 1:6 & Job 2:1.

MuttleyLaff:


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

mutt, the sun and moon and constellation couldn't have sung and shouted when the earth was formed on the first day
because the sun and moon and stars were not made until the fourth day


Gen 1:1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 
Gen 1:2  And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 
Gen 1:3  And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 
Gen 1:4  And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 
Gen 1:5  And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 


Gen 1:14  And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 
Gen 1:15  And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 
Gen 1:16  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. 
Gen 1:17  And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 
Gen 1:18  And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 
Gen 1:19  And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 

Muttley thanks for the Laff

Mobilia:


CC: MuttleyLaff
(Are you a theology major? Just wondering..)

MuttleyLaff:


Psalm 119: 97-176

ha ha

johnw47:
mutt, the sun and moon and constellation couldn't have sung and shouted when the earth was formed on the first day
because the sun and moon and stars were not made until the fourth day
Gen 1:1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 
Gen 1:2  And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 
Gen 1:3  And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 
Gen 1:4  And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 
Gen 1:5  And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 

Gen 1:14  And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 
Gen 1:15  And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 
Gen 1:16  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. 
Gen 1:17  And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 
Gen 1:18  And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 
Gen 1:19  And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 
Muttley thanks for the Laff

MuttleyLaff:
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

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

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

oh duh mutt, false accuser, you sure have little understanding, and are unable to admit you are wrong
job 38 tells of the angels, referred to their as the morningt stars, the sons of God,
singing and shouting at the beginning of the creation of the earth,
when God laid the corner stone of the earth,
which means when God first started the earths creation the angels were singing and shouting
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 also said the morning stars and sons of god in verse 7 is the sun and moon and a constellation,
you haven't a clue, the sun moon and stars didn't exist at the beginning of earths creation


Muttley thanks again for the Laff

johnw47:
oh duh mutt, false accuser, you sure have little understanding,
and are unable to admit you are wrong

job 38 tells of the angels, referred to their as the morningt stars, the sons of God,
singing and shouting at the beginning of the creation of the earth,
when God laid the corner stone of the earth,
which means when God first started the earths creation the angels were singing and shouting
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 also said the morning stars and sons of god in verse 7 is the sun and moon and a constellation,
you haven't a clue
Muttley thanks again for the Laff

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

You are more clued up and smarter than this johnw47
Is it really necessary to spell this out
and/or painstakingly show where/how God took Job to task about creation?
(i.e. where and how God challenged Job to a question and answer session)

God, with a flurry of questions, was bombarding Job
At Job 38:7, the haphazardly questioning, had moved on and away from laying down the foundations of the earth etcetera,
to where was Job, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy

Yes, johnw47, I said and still maintain that the morning stars singing are constellations
and that the sons of God shouting are the sun and moon

johnw47 do you understand the difference between invented truth and discovered truth?
Dont worry, if you dont, as I'll a tad bit, explain below next

You learned a manufactured truth because you havent yourself discovered the truth about Job 38:7

You're creating an invented tautology, if you equate "morning stars" & "the son of Gods" to mean the same thing (i.e. angelic beings)

johnw47, what purpose does this writing serve, written this way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"

as opposed to having it written like this other way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"

It is just so incongruous to be true that "morning stars" & "the son of Gods" in Job 38:7 are angelic celestial beings
but hey what's my own, its kuku not up to me, to make you believe.

I am just an angel, so dont shoot me, the messenger, just because you've missed the message.

Keep up with the laughs,
but just keep in the back of your mind, I'll have the last laugh
and you know what that means.
Means, I'll laugh the best

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

You are more clued up and smarter than this johnw47
Is it really necessary to spell this out
and/or painstakingly show where/how God took Job to task about creation?
(i.e. where and how God challenged Job to a question and answer session)

God, with a flurry of questions, was bombarding Job
At Job 38:7, the haphazardly questioning, had moved on and away from laying down the foundations of the earth etcetera,
to where was Job, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy

Yes, johnw47, I said and still maintain that the morning stars singing are constellations
and that the sons of God shouting are the sun and moon

Do you understand the difference between invented truth and discovered truth?
Dont worry, if you dont, as I'll a tad bit, explain below next
You learned a manufactured truth because you havent yourself discovered the truth about Job 38:7

You're creating an invented tautology, if you equate "morning stars" & "the son of Gods" to mean the same thing (i.e. angelic beings)

johnw47, what purpose does this writing serve, written this way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"

as opposed to having it written like this other way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"

It is just so incongruous to be true that "morning stars" & "the son of Gods" in Job 38:7 are angelic celestial beings
but hey what's my own, its kuku not up to me, to make you believe.

I am just an angel, so dont shoot me, the messenger, just because you've missed the message.

mutt, if you didn't have your lack of understanding, your inability to admit a wrong, your absence of a clue, then you wouldn't have anything

johnw47:
mutt, if you didn't have your lack of understanding, your inability to admit a wrong, your absence of a clue, then you wouldn't have anything

facts are: the morning stars - the sons of God, in job 38 are angels,
they were singing and shouting at the beginning of the creation of the earth,
before the sun and the moon and the stars were made,
the morning stars - the sons of God in job 38 are not the sun , the moon and a constellation,
but keep fooling yourself

johnw47:
facts are:
the morning stars - the sons of God, in job 38 are angels,

they were singing and shouting at the beginning of the creation of the earth,
before the sun and the moon and the stars were made,

the morning stars - the sons of God in job 38 are not the sun, the moon and a constellation,
but keep fooling yourself

johnw47, what purpose does the below writing serve, when written this way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"

---

---

as opposed to having it written like this other way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and the sons of God shouted for joy"


You're creating an invented tautology, if you equate "morning stars " & "the sons of God" to mean the same thing (i.e. angelic beings)

It is just so incongruous, to be true, that
"morning stars " & "the sons of God" are both used in one sentence, as in Job 38:7, to mean angelic celestial beings
but hey what's my own, its kuku not up to me, to make you believe.

MuttleyLaff:
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

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

You inferred that the "sons of god" meant the stars and the moon, and since the "sons" sang, one would infer the stars and the moon sang!

Need to check that last bold though.

MuttleyLaff:
johnw47, what purpose does the below writing serve, when written this way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"

---

---

as opposed to having it written like this other way:
"When the morning stars sang together, and the sons of God shouted for joy"

Point!

budaatum:
You inferred that the "sons of god" meant the stars and the moon, and since the "sons" sang, one would infer the stars and the moon sang!

Need to check that last bold though.

No, you misread the post.
I nowhere said "sons of god" meant the stars and the moon

What I typed, is that the "morning stars" are constellations, whilst "the sons of God" are the sun and moon