Are Nephilims Hybrid Angel/Human Beings
and
Does Satan Still Have Limited Access To Heaven

The following article is specifically intended to offer clear and concise factual Scriptural evidence whereby refuting both of the doctrines of hybrid angel/human Nephilims and Satan's ongoing but limited access to Heaven.

 

Therefore, let it be echoed throughout the entirety of this commentary what apostle Paul boldly declared to the Athenians as he stood in the midst of Mars Hill and proclaimed that God had given "ALL" LIFE TO and made of ONE BLOOD "ALL" MANKIND to dwell on "ALL" the face of the earth - and likewise setting their bounds of habitation. 

 

Meanwhile, if we insist that created angles are also the "Sons of God' then they by default become our "BRETHREN" - even though we will judge angels.

 

1 Corinthians 6:3 (KJV)

3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

 

Moreover, in Heb. 1:14 apostle Paul declares that "ALL" created angels are "MINISTERING" spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be the HEIRS of SALVATION - the Sons of God.

 

Hebrews 1:14 (KJV)

14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

 

IF angels are indeed our created BRETHREN (Sons of God) then they go into the kingdom by being our created servants and we enter into and inherit the Kingdom through FAITH in the shed blood of Yeshua Jesus.  

 

Let it be declared now - Created angels cannot procreate nor CREATE human LIFE.  Only God can.

Acts 17:25-26 (KJV)
25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

26 And hath made of ONE BLOOD all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Meanwhile, this publication and commentary is purposely written in a simplistic manner and at a grammatical level that both the scholar and the common Bible student together can each easily appreciate and understand its objective and evidential content.  Likewise, all referenced Scriptures (repetitiously when necessary) are clearly posted relevant to each argument, and therefore, for the reader's convenience.  Thus, each supporting Scripture is cited in order that the reader does not have to interrupt their progressive chain of analytical thought by pausing their reading and literally transiting back-and-forth looking up each of the cited Scriptures themselves. 

 

It will also be shown that the notion that the "Sons of God" are created angels comes from published works such as Josephus; Zohar Bereishis 25a – the book of Zohar is rooted in the Jewish Kabbalah (the Jewish religious pagan sister to Hinduism - YOGA); Mishneh Torah - Yesodei Emunah 2:7; Igeret HaTeshuva ch. 4; Apocrypha Book of Enoch; Apocrypha Book of Jubilees; the Dead Sea Scrolls Apocrypha account of Genisis; and The Alexandrian Septuagint (LXX); et. al.

 

Meanwhile, many cite the published works of Dr. Michael Heiser for support respective of their created angels as the "Sons of God" claim.

However, Dr. Michael Heiser makes the following statement I have cited below in his published work entitled “The Divine Council” under subsection “The Structure of the Divine Council”. (emphasis added)

 

PLEASE pay very close attention to the red highlighted section that I have highlighted for you and the clear ADMISSION that Dr. Heiser makes regarding the “Sons of God” as created angels respective of the Hebrew Bible – early in his commentary.

 

There is solid evidence in the Hebrew Bible for a three-tiered council. In the divine council of Israelite religion, Yahweh was the supreme authority over a divine bureaucracy that included a second tier of lesser אֱלֹהִים (elohim), also called the “sons of God” (בְנֵיֹאֵלִים , beney elim, בְנֵיֹהָאֱלֹהִים , beney ha'elohim, or בְנֵיֹאֱלֹהִים , beney elohim) or “sons of the Most High” (בְנֵיֹעֶלְיוֹן , beney elyon). It may be significant that these “sons of God” are never clearly referred to as angels (מַלְאָכִים , mal'akhim) in the Hebrew Bible, as that word denoted the lowest tier of the Canaanite council, and thus a third tier in the Israelite version. Still, mlʾkm at Ugarit were considered gods, despite their subordinate role. It is possible that מַלְאָכִים (mal'akhim) are referred to as אֱלֹהִים (elohim) in the Hebrew Bible. http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/DivineCouncilLBD.pdf

 

This above cited statement by Dr. Heiser is on pg. 3 of 23 in his posted publication.

 

To this end, it is clearly understood by Dr. Heiser that there are absolutely NO direct references to created angels actually being called the “Sons of God” in the Hebrew Bible.

 

Hence, it is only INFERRED.

 

Meanwhile, it is an admitted and obvious feature of the OT that (elohim) can refer to angels also.   For example, Psalm 8:5, quoted in Hebrews 2:7, states that man is lower than the angels (elohim).  Elohim is also a Scriptural word for a judge(s) as well (1 Sam. 2:25, “judge” = “elohim”).

 

Be that as it may, it is nonetheless clearly understood by Dr. Heiser, et. al., that there are absolutely NO direct references whatsoever to created angels actually being called the “Sons of God” in the Hebrew Bible.  However, there are ample direct Scriptural references to "God's People" being clearly and emphatically called the "Sons of God" in both the OT and the NT. (see cited Scriptures below)

 

Hosea 1:10 (KJV)
10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in
 the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are
the sons of the living God.

 

Romans 8:14 (KJV) and MANY New Testament others...
14
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

 

The phrase "b'nai e-lohim", is not defined in any Hebrew lexicon as “an angel”.  However, "b'nai e-lohim", as we well know, is a composite phrase consisting of two separate but individually distinct Hebrew words ben and elohim, with each having it own individual meaning.  As such, the Hebrew word “ben” does not carry as one of its allowable alternate meanings an “angel” while the other word “elohim” does, as I have noted above.

 

Therefore, if we insist that the phrase "b'nai e-lohim", actually refers to “elohim” angels – then the phrase must be translated as “Sons of Angels” which in and of itself creates considerable theological concerns, because nowhere in all of the Bible is a created angel ever emphatically and directly declared to have a child, hence a Son.  Although, if we are going to be consistent with substituting "angels" (elohim) for Sons of God - we must equally apply 1 Sam  2:25 and its "judge" (elohim) to the Sons of God as well.  To this end, we now have the "Sons of Judges"...

 

However, those who insist the phrase “Sons of God” are actually created fallen angels is only INFERRED, but is not based on Scriptural FACT from the WRITTEN Hebrew Bible itself.

 

However, I declare this over and over again, theological inferences in substitution for Scriptural fact when such inferences are completely unnecessary and not even suggested by CONTEXT is fraught with and soliciting errors.  For example, it is completely theologically illogical to substitute by inference angels for the Sons of God, whenever we have clear and ample Scriptural evidence that the Sons of God are indeed the “People of God” – both OT and NT, and not created angels.

 

Furthermore, this suggestion of created angels being God's Sons and therefore our "Brothers in God" is NEVER once mentioned in either the Masoretic Texts (OT) nor the Textus Receptus (NT) as well.  Likewise, this suggestion generates serious theological concerns respective to Jesus' work of redemption and the sanctification of subsequent believers.

 

Going forwards, I will begin my presentation by asking each of the readers of this publication, the same question that I have equally submitted to the wisdom of many other Bible students and scholars alike - regarding whether or not "created angels" are actually Biblically referred to and called the "Sons of God".

 

Could you please be so kind as to cite for me any one, or more, specific Scriptures in the Bible that “directly” and “unambiguously”

call CREATED ANGELS the Sons of God? 

 

PLEASE do not cite Gen. 6:2, 6:4, Job 1:6; Job 2:1 and Job 38:7 because each of these noted Passages does not specifically declare

CREATED ANGELS as SONS of GOD (that is inferred) – the individuals revealed in these Passages are merely called Sons of God. 

 

Once again, each of these above referenced Passages has no “direct” or “unambiguous” correlation to CREATED ANGELS of GOD

specifically described as the SONS of GOD.

 

Thus, I am looking for a “DIRECT” citation that clearly, without IMO (in my opinion) or circumstantial implications, that specifically Scripturally states and defines a CREATED ANGEL(s) as the SONS of GOD. 

 

Meanwhile, here are some Scriptural FACTS regarding the actual identity of the "Sons of God" as revealed by both the Masoretic Texts (OT) and the Textus Receptus (NT) - in direct supporting evidence to the above cited Scriptures in question. (Gen. 6:2, 6:4, Job 1:6; Job 2:1 and Job 38:7)

 

Hosea 1:10 (KJV)
10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in
 the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are
the sons of the living God.

 

Hosea 11:1 (KJV)
1
When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.

 

Deuteronomy 14:1-2 (KJV)
1 Ye are
the children of the LORD your God: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.
2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations
that are upon the earth.

 

Exodus 4:22 (KJV)
22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD,
Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

 

  Luke 3:38 (KJV)
38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of
Adam, which was the son of God.

 

Romans 8:14 (KJV) and MANY New Testament others...
14
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

 

Moreover, regarding the phrase of “took them wives” of Gen. 6:2...we see the referenced parallel to this phrase in the following passages.

 

Genesis 6:2 (KJV)
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they
took them wives [women] of all which they chose.

 

Genesis 11:29 (KJV)
29 And Abram and Nahor
took them wives: the name of Abram's wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor's wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran,
 the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah.

 

Ruth 1:4 (KJV)
4 And
they took them wives of the women of Moab; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth: and they dwelled
there about ten years.

 

Therefore, with respect to the "Sons of God" and their taking of "wives" one must answer the following realistic concerns and questions.

 

First and foremost, why would rebellious fallen angels agree to “marry” mortal women in compliance with the righteous moral requirements of God’s Law - seeing that marriage itself is a designed decree and institution of God?

 

Mark 10:6-8 (KJV)
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall
a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then
they are no more twain, but one flesh.

 

Thus, the concept of “marriage” in and of itself implies an ongoing and progressive male/female relationship.  As such, marriage by its very design is/was not intended to simply be a brief one and done event, but rather an ongoing relationship between a man and his wife over an extended period of time.

 

As such, there is NOT one verse to be found in the entire Bible where wife, wives, husband, husbands, or marriage was anything other than between a human male and a human female.

 

To this end, can anyone kindly cite ANY “NON-SPECULATIVE” evidential Scripture(s) whatsoever from the entire Bible itself where a FALLEN angel(s) or a so-called WATCHER angel (s), has ever made a visible physical bodily intrusion into the mortal human realm – remaining for an extended period of time, in that said visible physical bodily form, that will unequivocally validate a suggested hypothesis and theological claim that angels have indeed married mortal women and had sexual martial relationships?”

 

Another major difficulty in suggesting that the Sons of God are indeed created angels is first and foremost ALL created angels were created as "spiritual beings" and have no natural genetic DNA structures of their own.  (Psalms 104:4 & Heb. 1:7) 

Psalms 104:4 (KJV)
4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:

Humans however are created creatures of flesh and bones, made of the atomic/molecular elements of the earth.  As such, RIGHTEOUS (not fallen) created angles have at various times in Scripture "briefly" taken on the form of humans, they are still nonetheless created spiritual beings, and are not created physical beings. To be capable of having sex and copulating with female humans consequently producing the suggested angel/human hybrid Nephilim - they would have to have a cellular biological structure, 23 chromosomes and DNA genes.  In addition, those said 23 chromosomes and DNA genes would have to be male human specific in order to be compatible with female human 23 chromosomes and DNA genes.  Subsequently producing hybrid angel/human mutants. 

 

I'm sorry but this is nothing more than theoretical "speculative" NONESENSE!!!

 

As I have stated at the very beginning, let it be echoed throughout the entirety of this commentary what apostle Paul boldly declared to the Athenians as he stood in the midst of Mars Hill and proclaimed that God had given "ALL" LIFE TO and made of ONE BLOOD "ALL" MANKIND to dwell on "ALL" the face of the earth - and likewise setting their bounds. 

 

Let it be declared once again - Created angels cannot engender nor CREATE human LIFE.  Only God can.

Acts 17:25-26 (KJV)
25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined
the times before appointed,
and the bounds of their habitation;
 

Once again PLEASE, created angels do NOT have the capability to create nor synthesize the necessary DNA and male sperm that could effectively fertilize the human female egg, and thereby producing life.  ONLY God through Jesus Christ has the power to CREATE - and that CREATIVE power is not delegated to nor shared with fallen angels nor any other created angel. (see marriage of angels and relevant argument section above)

Ephesians 3:9 (KJV)
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

Nonetheless, there are those who choose to change the meaning of the Hebrew "ishsha" (H802) in Gen. 6:2 from the KJV, et. al., translated "wives" to that of "women", in order to be less contradictory, as the argument stated above, and to be more agreeable with their hybrid Nephilim theory.

 

Meanwhile, with respect to the SONS of GOD in Job 1:6 & 2:1 please note the Scriptural examples cited below (as well as above) as to who the "Sons of God" actually were who “presented/appeared” before the Lord God...

 

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

 

Job 2:1 (KJV)
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.

 

Exodus 23:17 (KJV)
17
Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord GOD.

 

Exodus 34:23 (KJV)
23
Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord GOD, the God of Israel.

 

Exodus 34:24 (KJV)
24 For I will cast out the nations before thee, and enlarge thy borders: neither shall any man desire thy land, when
thou shalt go up to
 appear before the LORD thy God thrice in the year.

 

Deuteronomy 16:16 (KJV)
16 Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall
 choose; in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the LORD empty:

 

Deuteronomy 31:11 (KJV)
11 When
all Israel is come to appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law
 before all Israel in their hearing.

 

1 Samuel 1:22 (KJV)
22 But Hannah went not up; for she said unto her husband, I will not go up until the child be weaned, and then I will bring him, that
he may appear
 before the LORD,
and there abide for ever.

 

There are many Bible students and scholars alike who make the incorrect "ASSUMPTION" (INFERRENCE) that Job 1:6 and 2:1 are referring to created angels because of the Sons of God appearing before/to the Lord and the likewise presence and appearance of the fallen angel Satan coming among them.  For example, one such scholar states...

 

Since this verse mentions "the sons of God" as assembled before the Lord contemporaneously

with the life of Job (i.e., during human history), obviously enough these have to be angels, not human beings

who, at present, cannot travel to the third heaven in our physical bodies to appear before Him

 (nor were any human beings in His presence, even in interim state, before the resurrection and ascension of Christ).  Furthermore, Satan

is an angel, so that this is clearly an angelic convocation with which we have to do. 

 

To this end, there is little agreeable consensus among Bible scholars as to just when the Book of Job was actually written and the era in which the man Job himself lived.

 

Some scholars believe this book was written before any other book of the Old Testament, even before the Pentateuch.  However, many conservative Bible experts think it was written during the reign of King Solomon.  A few scholars have taken the position that it may have been written by Moses while others have suggested that the patriarch Job himself may have written this account of his experiences, although these theories have little concrete evidence to support them.  The only thing we can say for certain is that the book was written by an unknown author and at an unknown time.  The exact date of the book’s writing is still a mystery.  Some believe its unknown author put it in writing as late as the second century B.C.  Others insist it must have been written about 450 B.C., long after the Jews returned from the captivity in Babylonia.  Although, many conservative scholars assign the writing of the book to the time of King Solomon, about 950 B.C.  Historical evidence favors this date, since this was the golden age of Biblical wisdom literature.  Ezekiel (who wrote around 600 BC) mentions Job in 14:14.  Some scholars claim it is dated to B.C. 2000–1800.  If by Moses, it was probably written some-time during his sojourn in Midian.

 

However, here are some points that should be mentioned and therefore considered – in Chpts. 1& 2 of Job the term “Satan” is used some 12 times while this term “Satan” is first introduced in the Bible one time in 1Chron. 21:1.

 

While Job himself was actually a gentile (and even that is debated) and the Book of Job was about a man’s suffering as a test of his FAITH – it would make applicable references to the Law (works) without appropriate place within the context of this book.

 

Meanwhile, there are those who argue that Gen. 46:13 is a direct reference to the man Job himself – even though it must be clearly noted that the name of Job was a quite common name in those days.  

 

Genesis 46:13 (KJV)
13 And the sons of Issachar; Tola, and Phuvah, and Job, and Shimron.

 

Additionally, there are those who also try to date the Book of Job by isolating particular referenced elements such as coins, cattle, etc.. However, the bottom line is this...short of Yahweh Himself revealing just actually when Job lived, the factual timing of his life will most likely remain an inviting mystery – and for those who insist upon dating the publication of the book it will remain an endless chain of IMO’s.

 

As such, the reader of the Book of Job must realistically understand that the book itself is highly poetic and has both literal and figurative expressions that could no-less tax the wisdom of Solomon himself to decipher.  

 

Therefore, when it comes to the actual interpretation of Job 38:7 the reader should also keep the following figurative preponderances in mind.

In Psalms 148:3 the literal "stars" are requested to praise the LORD "figuratively".

 

Psalms 148:3 (KJV)
3 Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light.

 

In Job chpt. 38 there are many references to physical elements of the creation.  While, all of them are inanimate, that is without life.  All of them are surrounded with “figurative” language.  A foundation fastened, a cornerstone laid, morning stars singing, seas needing doors, clouds being a garment, darkness a swaddling band, dayspring personified as if to know his place fit together well, dayspring knows its place that it takes hold of the ends of the earth shaking out the wicked, gates of death open, shadow of death with doors, treasures of snow, treasures of hell, ice coming from womb, etc..

 

Moreover, here is a Scripture in the Book of Judges using some of the same figurative and poetic language as used in Job 38:7. 

Judges 5:19-20 (KJV)
19 The kings came and fought, then fought the kings of Canaan in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo; they took no gain of money.
20 They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera. 

In addition, there are those who logically conclude that mortal man was “created” by God and likewise angels were also created by God - therefore they must be brotherly equals, hence “Sons of God”.

 

However, the term “Sons of God” implies a personal relationship with God which can only be Scripturally applied to created mortal man – angels are created spiritual ministers of both God and mortal man (heirs of salvation).

 

Hebrews 1:7 (KJV)
7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.  

 

Hebrews 1:13-14 (KJV)
13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

 

Romans 8:14 (KJV)
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

 

Leviticus 26:12 (KJV)
12 And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.

 

Nonetheless, at the end of the day any suggestion that the comparative CREATION between both mortal man and that of created angels logically demands the conclusion that both are the “Sons of God” can only be INFERRED as a personal IMO, but cannot be validated by Scripture.

 

There are absolutely NO Scriptures whatsoever throughout the entirety of the Masoretic Texts or the Textus Receptus that ever defines or directly calls created angels God’s Sons – hence, Sons of God...this is only logically but incorrectly INFERRED.

 

However, as many have correctly noted there are several Scriptures that directly and unequivocally declare God’s people as the “Sons of God”.  For example...

 

Hosea 1:10 (KJV)
10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in
 the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them,
Ye are the sons of the living God.

 

Romans 8:14 (KJV)
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

 

Therefore, reader please kindly tell me which has the greater theological credibility – a personally held IMO or Scriptural FACT?

 

Thus, briefly returning to the Job argument - there are those who suggest as proof that Job 38:7 is the exact same "Sons of God" phrase as Gen. 6:2 &4; Job 1:6 and 2:1 - bene ha'elohim, and therefore it must equally be a reference to created angels...it is NOT.  In Job 38:7 the Hebrew definite article "Ha" is missing from the bene ha'elohim phrase.  Therefore, the argument of "absolute" phrasal consistency fails. 

 

To this end, the “Sons of God” is NOT simply a "phrase" with only one singular and specific meaning (i.e angels) as many Bible theologians encourage and insist upon - but is rather comprised of two independent Hebrew words with two distinct meanings each to its own?  Hence, bə·nê (H1121) and Elohim (H430).

 

Meanwhile, the exact same Hebrew word "bə·nê" (H1121) used in Job 38:7 and translated as "SONS", is also translated in other passages of the Hebrew Bible with the alternate meanings as follows:

 

It is translated in the KJV, et. al., as "Young" 15 times; "First" 13 times; "Breed" 1 time; "Nephews" 1 time; "Men" 6 times; "Mighty" 1 time; "Appointed" 3 times; "Common" 1 time; and finally "Old" 1 time.  Likewise, variants of this same word is also translated as other meanings as well.  However, I will only focus on and present those alternate translated meanings that are of the same exact Hebrew word "bə·nê" as specifically used in Job 38:7.

 

The translation of "Young" can be found in Lev. 1:14; 12:8; 14:22; 14:30; 15:14, 29; Num. 6:10; 28:11, 19, 27; 29:2, 8, 13, 17, and Jer. 31:12   

The translation of "First" can be found in Lev. 9:3; 23:19; Num. 7:87, 88; 28:3, 9; 29:17, 20, 23, 26, 29, 32, 36

The translation of "Breed" can be found in Deut. 32:14

The translation of "Nephews" can be found in Jdgs. 12:14

The translation of "Men" can be found in 1Chr. 26:30, 32; 2Chr. 26:17; 28:6; Ps. 62:9; and Eze. 27:11 

The translation of "Mighty" can be found in Ps. 29:1

The translation of "Appointed" can be found in Ps. 79:11; 102:20; Pr. 31:8

The translation of "Common" can be found in Jer. 26:23

The translation of "Old" can be found in Mic. 6:6

 

My translation of "Them of/Those of/These of" can be found in Job 38:7

 

Furthermore, the Hebrew word "bə·nê " (H1121) has the following meanings according to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible...

 

from <H1129> (banah); a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etc., [like <H1> ('ab), <H251> ('ach), etc.]) :- + afflicted, age, [Ahoh-] [Ammon-] [Hachmon-] [Lev-]ite, [anoint-]ed one, appointed to, (+) arrow, [Assyr-] [Babylon-] [Egypt-] [Grec-]ian, one born, bough, branch, breed, + (young) bullock, + (young) calf, × came up in, child, colt, × common, × corn, daughter, × of first, + firstborn, foal, + very fruitful, + postage, × in, + kid, + lamb, (+) man, meet, + mighty, + nephew, old, (+) people, + rebel, + robber, × servant born, × soldier, son, + spark, + steward, + stranger, × surely, them of, + tumultuous one, + valiant[-est], whelp, worthy, young (one), youth.

 

As such, please note that one of the allowable and applicable meanings for the Hebrew "bə·nê  is that of the plural personal pronoun "THEM of".

 

Thus, seeing that there is absolutely no surrounding CONTEXT other than figurative/poetic context in Job 38:7, the definite article “HA” is equally missing, then there is in fact no compelling nor mandating traditional translation of "Sons" for "bə·nê" thus grammatically required.  Therefore, the following translation of Job 38:7 would equally be grammatically acceptable respective of the Hebrew language. 

 

Meanwhile, as stated many times before, there are absolutely NO clear Scriptures whatsoever in the Hebrew Bible that ever DIRECTLY define and call the “Sons of God” created angels.

 

Job 38:7 (KJV)
7 When the
morning stars sang together, and all them of / those of / these of God shouted for joy?

 

Thus, the “Singing Morning Stars” would be “created entities of whatever making - literal or figurative” and the substituting plural personal/demonstrative pronoun THEM / THOSE / THESE would be in direct reference to the antecedent “Singing Morning Stars”.  Therefore, the consequences of such a grammatically acceptable translation of Job 38:7 is that there would subsequently remain no mention whatsoever of the "traditional" translation of the "Sons of God", respective of this particular passage.  The "SONS" of God simply goes away and becomes "...them of / those of / these of God..." 

Furthermore, from the text of Job chapter 38, these passages seem to follow a common parallel format found in the surrounding text.  Please look at the repetitious nature of the surrounding passages for consideration:

Job 38:5 (KJV)
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Please note that the phrases "laid the measurements" and "stretched the line upon it," - they each communicate the same thing.

Job 38:6 (KJV)
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

Again we see in verse six, "its foundations fastened" and "cornerstone laid," communicates the same thing.

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

Following the same repetitious pattern as before, "the morning stars" and "the sons of God" would likewise be the same entity.

Job 38:8 (KJV)
8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?

Again, in Job 38:8 the "sea is shut in", and the "sea bursts out."

Finally, in Job 38:9 the "clouds are a garment," and the "thick darkness is a swaddling band".  This also, just as before is communicating the same thing.

Job 38:9 (KJV)
9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,  

Meanwhile, it must be equally noted that Jesus Himself revealed that "traditional" methodology and approach may not always be the best.  (Matt. 15:3)

 

For those who insist upon the notion of created angels as the "Sons of God" and wish to cry foul with respect to the above Job 38:7 translation - please allow me to kindly remind you of your intentional changing of the TRADITIONAL definition and translation of the Hebrew word “ishsha” from the traditional Gen. 6:2 translation of “WIVES” to that of “WOMEN”.  This is a deliberate attempt to avoid a clear and considerable theological confrontation by declaring that FALLEN created angels actually complied with God's decreed institution of marriage, and therefore married the daughters of men in which they allegedly impregnated...

 

In response to your invalid argument I am reminded of a small grocery store I once shopped at.  Across from the cashiers checkout on the adjacent wall, there was a sign hanging above a literal hand grenade that read - for customer complaints department please pull pin...

 

Meanwhile, PLEASE allow me to restate once again, if we insist upon suggesting that the poetic language of Job chpt. 38 is indeed LITERAL (i.e. Sons of God are created angels) then we must equally accept the fact that all of the other surrounding context of creation events/elements described in Job chpt. 38 are literal as well.

 

For example, Job 38:7 would then have LITERAL “stars singing” and LITERAL “sons of God shouting”.  However, we cannot simply pick and choose without further Scriptural evidence – if Job 38:7 is to be taken literal then we must equally accept the following elements of Job 38 and the surrounding context as LITERAL also.

 

"A foundation fastened, a cornerstone laid, morning stars singing, seas needing doors, clouds being a garment, darkness a swaddling band, dayspring personified as if to know his place fit together well, dayspring knows its place that it takes hold of the ends of the earth shaking out the wicked, gates of death open, shadow of death with doors, treasures of snow, treasures of hell, ice coming from womb, etc.."

 

Meanwhile, can anyone who was not even there be absolutely and completely assured that Job 38:7 is indeed not figurative, prophetic (i.e. Eph. 1:4, cf. Lk. 7:50) or simply was in the mind of God at this described creation event, but is rather actually literal?  Would the Sons of God as angels in Job 38:7 then be based on Scriptural FACT or respective of a personal IMO inference?

 

Furthermore, for those who insist that the Sons of God stated in Job 38:7 are indeed created angels must equally accept that these suggested angels of Job 38:7 are RIGHTEOUS angels.  Therefore, their plug and play generalization model with respect to the Sons of God declared in Gen. 6:2 & 6:4 MUST be of the same equal type of RIGHTEOUS angels as those they insisted upon in Job 38:7 - and NOT just simply generic angels, because they have chosen the RIGHTEOUS angels of Job 38:7 as their one and only allowable definition for the "Sons of God"... This most certainly then will not permit the celebrated notion of FALLEN angels impregnating women and producing angel/human hybrid mutant Nephilim.  (see also Lk.20:35-36 argument)

 

Nevertheless, at the end of the day – respective of Job 38:7 and the notion that the “Sons of God” are definitely “created angels”, the Hebrew word “ben” (H1121) translated as “Sons” in Job 38:7 does not carry as one of its alternate meanings the definition of an “Angel”.  Therefore, the only way that those who insist that Job 38:7 is actually referring to created angels can credibly validate their IMO - is to present additional Scriptural evidence that clearly declares and calls created angels God’s Sons – hence, Sons of God.  However, there are NONE! 

 

Thus, which has the greater theological credibility – Scriptural INFERENCE or Scriptural FACT?

 

In summary, unless one is able to show a specific Scripture that clearly and unambiguously defines an angel as God’s Son (Sons of God), then the only validity to suggesting that Job 1:6, 2:1 and Job 38:7 - is simply a personally held inferred IMO – and will offer little sustaining credibility in the face of the “direct” Biblical passages emphatically calling God’s people the “Sons of God.  One resolve is based on inferred speculation (circumstantial theological IMO’s) while the other is based on Scriptural FACT.

 

Going forwards, those who support the notion of hybrid Nephilim angel/human cohabitation frequently cite for Scriptural evidence of their claim - Jude 1:5-7.

 

However, a careful analytical analysis of the CONTEXT of Jude 1:4-8 simply reveals a list of four separate but distinct “warning examples” for disobedience to God and cites as examples former rebellious individuals who will ultimately suffer the coming judgment and wrath of God for their sinful behaviors.  I cannot see any DIRECT COMPARISON respective of the “causal” reasoning for each sin in the stated examples - other than each one committed types of abominable provocations against God, and likewise each will equally suffer God’s coming retribution.

 

1.     “...how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.”

 

2.    “...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.”

 

3.    “...Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of   eternal fire.

 

4.    “...these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities...the Lord will come and destroy...”

 

To suggest that the warning example causal fornication sins of Sodom and Gomorrha in Jude 1:7 are directly comparable to the warning example sins of the fallen angels of Jude 1:6 – and each are causal and directly related to “fornication and going after strange flesh” is reading into the actual CONTEXT of these two suggested passages a preconceived biased theoretical opinion that is misleading and untrue.

 

To this end, Jude 1:7 simply states respective of the phrase “cities about them in like manner [with them - greek 5125] is grammatically referring to the immediate sentence antecedent cities of “Sodom and Gomorrha.  Thus, it was the surrounding cites who also in LIKE MANNER "with them" of Sodom and Gomorrah - equally gave themselves over to fornication and the going after strange flesh. (see cited below)

 

Jude 1:7 (KJV)
7 Even
as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, [with them - greek 5125] giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

 

Thus, one can easily stand the argument that the “CAUSAL” sins of each of the four Jude 1:5-8 events have no correlations whatsoever – other than to provoke the coming vengeance and judgment of God for their individual sins.

 

Therefore, the above cited two warning examples of Jude 1:6-7 are no more DIRECTLY COMPARABLE in context than the two following simple examples: the grammatical logic and sentence structure goes like this...

 

Johnny threw the ball and knocked out Jane’s window. ------- Angels left first estate/habitation and will suffer God’s
                                                                                                             coming wrath/judgment

 

Tommy and Bill, and their friends in like manner, shot the air-rifle and knocked out Jane’s window ------------
                                                                                                             Sodom/Gomorrah and cities around them in like manner,
                                                                                                             committed fornication/strange flesh and will suffer God’s
                                                                                                             coming wrath/judgment

 

As you can easily see the only commonality between the two statements that is directly comparable is that in each of the two noted events – both succeeded in KNOCKING OUT JANE’S WINDOW.  Hence, such is the case with Jude 1:6-7 the only direct comparable commonality between the two warning events is that in each – they both have succeeded in provoking a coming judgment and wrath of Yahweh God upon themselves – ALL other “causal” content and context is a comparable “apple vs. orange” and therefore each are otherwise completely unequal.

 

Moreover, with respect to the Textus Receptus Bible Books of 1st and 2nd Peter – if those who support the notion that 1 Peter 3:19-20 and 2 Peter 2:4 actually refers to the Sons of God, cannot present clear and direct Scriptural evidence (without INFERENCE) from the Hebrew Bible (MT) or the Textus Receptus Bible (TR), that actually calls created angels the “Sons of God” then it is virtually impossible to establish a valid and creditable LINK between the fallen angels of 1st and 2nd Peter and the Sons of God respective of Gen. 6:2 and 6:4.  Thus, their theory of hybrid angel/human Nephilim fails.

 

Meanwhile, respective of the NT and those who suggest that Lk. 20.36 reveals created angels are indeed equal to the "Sons of God" I hereby submit the following detailed argument.

 

To this end, they have chosen to DEFINE the “Sons of God” as those who are EQUAL to the created angels and likewise EQUAL to the redeemed who are mentioned in Lk. 20:35-36 by Jesus.

 

Luke 20:35-36 (KJV)
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry,

 nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the

 resurrection.

 

The above red highlighted individuals of Lk, 20:35 are stated to be EQUAL with the angels and therefore EACH must meet the specific personal qualifications that Jesus described in order to be called the “Children/SONS of God” as well as to be EQUALS to each other.

 

Seeing then that these redeemed individuals and angels are EQUALS and can only be called and considered the “Children/SONS of God” ONLY if they are EQUALS - whereby each must have the same exact qualifications described by Jesus in Matt. 22:30 and Mk. 12:25 as well.

 

1.     They must be worthy to obtain that world...to be EQUAL to an Angel which is EQUAL to the Sons of God

2.     They can  neither marry, nor are given in marriage...to be EQUAL to an Angel which is EQUAL to the Sons of God

 

Therefore, as stated before there are absolutely NO other Scriptures in the entire Bible that “directly” define and describe a CREATED ANGEL as God’s Son – hence, the Sons of God.  Therefore, it is unchangeably etched in stone that the two qualifying conditions directly cited above must be met in order for an CREATED ANGEL or a REDEEMED INDIVIDUAL to be called the Son of God – hence, Sons of God.  They must be EQUAL to those who are EQUAL to them...they must be EQUAL to each other as required above.

 

As such, these angels must then be RIGHTEOUS Angels, just as those who are accounted WORTHY - and neither of the two can EVER MARRY nor can they EVER be GIVEN in MARRIAGE.  As stated before, this is evidenced in the two other supporting parallel passages declared by Jesus and cited in both the gospels of  Matthew and Mark.

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

Mark 12:25 (KJV)
25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

Therefore, it is impossible to suggest that the “Sons of God” stated in Gen. 6:2 are RIGHTEOUS Angels marrying and having sex with women who can ONLY be called the “SONS of God” if and ONLY if they meet the two conditions revealed by Jesus – and are EQUAL to those individuals who are WORTHY to obtain that world.    

 

One cannot suggest that the “Sons of God” as EQUAL to ANGELS, who have no other Biblical definition other than that described by Jesus which is cited above can still be called the FALLEN Angels, “Sons of God” and yet EQUALS of those accounted WORTHY and UNABLE to MARRY or to be GIVEN IN MARRIAGE.  There is no other Biblical declaration calling FALLEN ANGELS the Sons of God.  

 

Having said this, you and I both know that the CONTEXT itself clearly reveals that Jesus was NEVER intending to suggest that the SONS of GOD were actually created angels and EQUAL to the redeemed, who are themselves called the Sons of God – but rather He was drawing a comparison to those who would be worthy of Eternal Life in Heaven, who would never marry nor would they be given in marriage (the Redeemed), to the created angels.

 

In its most simplicity respective of the Sons of God as the created angels argument – wherever, we see the term “SONS of God” in the Bible these Sons must meet the two cited qualifications above – created angels equal to the "People of God" which are equal to the Sons of God... 

 

Thus, it is clearly demonstrated that the suggested created angels being equal to the RIGHTEOUS Sons of God in Heaven are the one and same Sons of God revealed in Gen. 6:1 and 6:4, and who literally impregnated the daughters of men, resulting in hybrid angel/human Nephilims - is absolutely NOT true.

 

To this end, how can those who support the theology of hybrid Nephilims (angel/human) respective of the Mosoretic Texts of Gen. 6:2, and 6:4 have a valid argument?

 

Moreover, how can those who suggest that Gen. 6:2, 6:4; Job 1:6; Job 2:1 and Job 38:7 are CREATED ANGELS who are the “Sons of God”?

 

To reiterate, there are NO Scriptures that ever call CREATED ANGELS God’s Sons – hence, Sons of God.

 

Meanwhile, how can anyone support the preponderance that Satan still has limited access to heaven if Job 1:6. Job. 2:1 and Job 38:7 does not refer to CREATED ANGELS?

 

The burden of proof is on those who support the notion that Satan still has limited access to Heaven by proving that the Hebrew word “ben” (Hll21) actually means a created angel – it does NOT, it is only INFERRED.  Likewise, a little theological common sense should encourage anyone that God would never call a FALLEN ANGEL His Son.  Hence, the “Sons of God”.  Therefore, they that support the theory that Satan still has access to Heaven must find and present Scriptural evidence that “directly” defines and calls a CREATED ANGEL God’s Son – hence, Sons of God.  There are NONE!!!

To this end, will YHWH allow anything “unclean” (i.e. Satan) to enter the perfect purity of Heaven and the presence of His absolute light?  Let us use the example of the futuristic New Jerusalem which is to descend from God out of its current location which is in Heaven.  Rev. 21:27 speaks to its purity that nothing that maketh a “LIE” can enter therein, and as you well know Satan is the father of lies (Jn. 8:44).

Furthermore, was Satan realistically cast out of Heaven only to have limited return access when summoned of God.  There are no Scriptures that suggests nor declare that God ever summons Satan to appear before Him in Heaven – none.  With respect to Job 1:6 and Job 2:1 it must be noted that when Satan appeared among the Sons of God in the presence of God there is no mention whatsoever in Job 1:7 & 2:2 that God had actually summoned him.  Conversely, in both Job 1:7 & 2:2 God literally ask Satan “whence comest thou”?

 

Job 1:7 (KJV)

7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from
         walking up and down in it.
 

Job 2:2 (KJV)
2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

The reason why Job 1:6 and 2:1 are NOT “created angels” (Sons of God) is that Satan has been permanently banished from Heaven.  Many Bible students and theologians alike have suggested that Satan still has limited access to the throne of God in direct INFERENCE to Job 1:6, 2:1 and Rev. 12:10. 

 

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

 

Job 2:1 (KJV)
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.

 

However, this INFERENCE is not CORRECT.

 

Once again, it is a proven FACT that there is not one single Scriptural reference to CREATED Angels being defined as or called God’s Sons – hence, the Sons of God.  Therefore, the Scriptures cited below are clear examples revealing the “Son’s of God” appearing before the Lord.  Sons of God are always God’s people.

 

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

 

Job 2:1 (KJV)
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.

 

Exodus 23:17 (KJV)
17
Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord GOD.

 

Exodus 34:23 (KJV)
23
Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord GOD, the God of Israel.

 

Exodus 34:24 (KJV)
24 For I will cast out the nations before thee, and enlarge thy borders: neither shall any man desire thy land, when
thou shalt go up to  appear before the LORD thy God thrice in the year.

 

Deuteronomy 16:16 (KJV)
16 Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose; in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the LORD empty:

 

Deuteronomy 31:11 (KJV)
11 When
all Israel is come to appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law  before all Israel in their hearing.

 

1 Samuel 1:22 (KJV)
22 But Hannah went not up; for she said unto her husband, I will not go up until the child be weaned, and then I will bring him, that
he may appear before the LORD, and there abide for ever.

 

Furthermore, when we examine Rev. 12:10 and the “accuser” of our brethren who accused them BEFORE [TO] (G1799 – enopion) our God day and night – we find that this greek word and its meaning also carries a literal or a “figurative” implication and equally means “TO”, as well.  This exact same greek word and its tense (enopion) is equally translated in the KJV in Lk. 24:11 as “TO”. (see below)

 

Revelation 12:10 (KJV)
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for
the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before [TO] our God day and night.

 

Luke 24:11 (KJV)
11 And their words seemed
to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

 

Thus, when the Lord asked Satan from where he had come he replied – “from walking to and fro and up and down in the earth...” (Job 2:2), and not literally standing in front of the throne of God in Heaven accusing the brethren BEFORE (TO) Him continuously day and night.

 

Job 2:2 (KJV)
2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said,
From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

 

Once again, Satan has been banished from any further access to Heaven.  Therefore, the righteousness of God and the holy sanctity of Heaven - will not allow the father of sin and lies to proudly strut himself before the hallowed Saints of God whom he has both miserably killed and maliciously persecuted.

 

Isaiah 14:12-15 (KJV)
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

 

Ezekiel 28:13-19 (KJV)
13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.
19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

 

Briefly returning to Gen. 6:2 - this verse simply declares the following... 

Genesis 6:2 (KJV)
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.  

Thus, Gen. 6:1-2 is referring to the "Sons of God" that are the figuratively spirit people - God's people, while the daughters of men are figuratively sinful flesh - those who cared nothing for God and refers to the contrasting sinful flesh of Satan's people.

 

God’s people have always been encouraged and directed by God to remain a somewhat “segregated” people (Sons of God).  However, here in Gen. 6:2, the Sons of God begin to lose their love for God and to stray from Him, thus weakening in their faith and love towards God and consequently started giving themselves over to their individual lust of their own flesh – hence, seeking whom so ever THEY CHOSE.

 

Without quoting a vast array of Scriptures that most already know – God is a jealous God and as previously stated, has always insisted upon His people remaining SEGREGATED together (i.e. come ye out from among them and be ye separates - 2 Cor. 6:17).  God’s people then and now are encouraged to marry those of their own like-minded faith – hence, be ye not unequally yoked together with the unbeliever. (2 Cor. 6:14)  Thus, Gen. 6:2 is revealed in the Sons of God vs. the daughters of men.

 

Furthermore, every time God’s people intermingle with the lustful fleshly daughters of men (just as did the wise Solomon who God warned not to do so) – over the course of time, in more cases than not, it always ends in disaster...  Intermingling of contrasting faiths results in wavering moral compromises and faithful decay.  Hence, progressive and subsequent rebellion and the forsaking of God. 

2 Corinthians 6:14 (KJV)
14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?  

Meanwhile, the uncurbed lustful and fleshy desires of God’s people grew stronger while their faith and numbers in Him grew weaker and smaller – until there was only Noah and his three sons and their wives left that God decreed He would allow to escape death by the flood (Noah the 8th person).  The 8th day requirement for male circumcision under the Mosaic Law has a symbolic meaning of a NEW BEGINNING or new cycle.  Hence, the beginning of a new week vs. Noah’s beginning of a new world (8th) and his subsequent new life.  

 

As such, once God saw that the intents of man’s heart that He had created, had now degraded to the degree where the “thoughts of his heart were continually evil” and he was on the highway of irreversible return - something had to be done.  Thus, the flood...

 

To this end, compare the passages below and you will see where man was formally with God spiritually and where he ended up lusting after the flesh of the daughters of MEN and his own fleshly self gratifications – which brought his demise.  However, man is today equally reinventing the same decaying wheel of faith.  Jesus declared shall I find faith when I come?  (Lk. 18:8)

 

Genesis 6:3 (KJV)
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.

 

Romans 8:8 (KJV)
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

 

John 4:24 (KJV)
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

 

Furthermore, Nephilims not only suggests men with giant physical genetic structures due to progressive intermingling of DNA and varied environmental conditions, but equally great men of social stature as well both good and bad – i.e. Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Madonna, Michael Jackson, etc., of that day – the spiritual Nimrods who were devout anti-Gods.

 

Nonetheless, genetically speaking ALL dogs came from just two dogs and just look at what we have now.  So did humans all generate from just two man/female humans likewise – NOT hybrid angel/human mutants.  There are many things that could have resulted in small groups of mortal giants (i.e. Goliath), be it a medically dysfunctional pituitary gland to simply mortal DNA intermingling, as well as environmental influences – but it does not require by any means the support of fallen angels to produce Nephilims.

 

In summary, I hereby close with the same question in which I opened this argument with...

 

Could you please be so kind as to cite for me any one, or more, specific Scriptures in the Bible that “directly” and “unambiguously” call CREATED ANGELS the Sons of God? 

 

PLEASE do not cite Gen. 6:2, 6:4, Job 1:6; Job 2:1 and Job 38:7 because each of these noted Passages does not specifically declare CREATED ANGELS as SONS of GOD (that is inferred) – the individuals revealed in these Passages are merely called Sons of God. 

 

Once again, each of these above referenced Passages has no “direct” or “unambiguous” correlation to CREATED ANGELS of GOD specifically described as the SONS of GOD.

 

Thus, I am looking for a “DIRECT” citation that clearly, without IMO or circumstantial implications, that specifically Scripturally states and defines a CREATED ANGEL(s) as the SONS of GOD.

 

Finally, scholarly Biblical hermeneutics most certainly encourages and supports an analytical methodology whereby one obtains and draws concluded INFERENCES based on circumstantial evidence.  However, when realistic Scriptural facts are unwisely and deliberately ignored, and systematically rejected without analytical cause in pursuit of a preconceived notion, and the factual Scriptures which are in and of themselves both abundant and provide clear validating evidence that directly reveals without any required circumstantial inferences, then a conclusion based on INFERENCE has no place nor gravity against such. 

 

Both the OT and the NT offer considerable FACTUAL Scriptural evidence that neither violates context nor grammatical structures that the “People/Children of God” are indeed the Sons of God.  Therefore, those who insist that the Sons of God are created angels are neither compelled nor mandated by Scriptural CONTEXT, or the lack of readily available Scriptural evidence, in reaching their personal and final INFERRED resolve.  Thus, their opinion is made of a free and personal prerogative of their own choosing...hence, their personal IMO.  

 

Although, in direct respect to Biblical hermeneutics - PLEASE remember a coveted and personally held IMO supported by circumstantial supposition is NO substitute for Scriptural FACTS, especially when those Scriptural facts are readily and easily available.

 

In the mean time, what many well intentioned Bible students and publishers alike have done, and are doing, is to “force” a conformity of compliance of the Hebrew MT-TR Bible in support of the works of the likes of Josephus; Zohar Bereishis 25a – the book of Zohar is rooted in the Jewish Kabbalah (the Jewish religious pagan sister to Hinduism - YOGA); Mishneh Torah - Yesodei Emunah 2:7; Igeret HaTeshuva ch. 4; Apocrypha Book of Enoch; Apocrypha Book of Jubilees; the Dead Sea Scrolls Apocrypha account of Genisis; and The Alexandrian Septuagint (LXX); et. al. 

 

However, these cited resources have been respectfully proven fractured and unreliable in many cases.

 

Therefore, it is my position to support the Hebrew MT and the Textus Receptus only.  We simply cannot Scripture shop from one external “apocrypha” theological data source to another and then force the Hebrew MT-TR Bible into agreeable objective compliance.  As such, the suspect and consequential theological conclusion and outcome of such a hermeneutical model and methodology can never be factually and verifiably anything more than a personally held circumstantial and hypothetical INFERENCE - an IMO.

 

To this end, I gladly admit that I subscribe to the OPPOSITE analytical Scriptural methodology – the external preponderant resources must verifiably conform to the Hebrew MT-TR Bible and not vice-versa.  

 

I humbly invite ALL sincere questions and respectful comments.