"The Sons of God!" Mere mortals, literal sons or angels? (Egyptian, America)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The ones who knew God wrote the bible. The ones who wrote the Bible were persecuted by their fellow Jews because much of the Bible testified against their traitorous ways.
As to Jude supposedly quoting the apocraphal book of Enoch or another source has been debated. Paul quoted Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12 but no one would suggest Epimenides was inspired.
But Paul's quote was not prefaced with the comment, "Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these, saying . . ." That kind of introduction means the text was thought to be inspired. Is Jude wrong? Is what is recorded in Enoch not what was prophesied by the seventh from Adam?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
In the Sacred Scriptures we have: Jude 1:14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesies to these also, saying, "Lo! the Lord came among ten thousand of His saints,
But in the book called "Enoch" not even written by Enoch, we have:
“Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him.”
But quoting a non-inspired writing does not make the non-inspired writing inspired! But some say he didn't really quote the book called "Enoch."
Well this whole "inspiration" crock is not what I am interested in. I am simply pointing out that the book of Enoch was a revered book in the Jewish community for at least a century or more and possibly REFLECTED the Jewish consensus on the matter. It does not take a rocket scientist to recognize that the story in Genesis 6:1-6 is a HIGHLY condensed version of the same story found in the First Book of Enoch.
Actually it isn't crock.
Quote:
I studied this topic intensely years ago and I am aware of the "well Paul quoted a Greek philosopher and that does not mean the Greek philosopher was inspired" argument. My point is, none of that matters in the bigger scheme of things. Learned, well trained scholars, far more qualified than you or I have settled this argument.
That is fallacious reasoning called "appealing to authority" to prove a point. It doesn't wash with me.
Quote:
The only folks kicking and screaming in protest of the clear cut facts are those who will refuse on every ground, to accept the notion that the biblical god could indeed have sired sons. This is what happens when amalgamation takes place but that is an entirely different story.
If they were sons of God (spirit beings), it wouldn't be God that sired sons among humans but supposedly His sons.
Both Santa Barbara wearing topless and Venus naked are divine beings. Gods are usually more decent!!
This is circuler, as there is no lexical distinction between decent and indecent divine beings. You're just asserting a boundary and saying it more prototypically characterizes gods. Lexically speaking, "divine being" is a synonym for "god." Full stop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango
This thread is absolutely not the one to discuss the term “Elohim.”
And you didn't feel like discussing it in the thread I started exclusively on the topic. You were more interested in barking about your silly theories and refusing to address my concerns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango
Clever guys!!
Only stupid laymen would pay to read their articles and thus they get rid of the smart ones!!
What?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango
You are quite right!
Angelic beings are products of the imagination, the Elohim were watched by our ancestors while they were producing their sons.
The sons of Elohim in the Greek tradition were called sons of Zeus
Have you read any of the following publications?
Archie T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6.1-4 in Early Jewish Literature (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005).
Sang Youl Cho, Lesser Deities in the Ugaritic Texts and the Hebrew Bible (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2008).
Michael Heiser, "The Divine Council in Canonical and Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature" (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin – Madison).
Lowell K. Handy, Among the Host of Heaven (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994).
Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).
Joel S. Burnett, A Reassessment of Biblical Elohim (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 2003).
Come back and talk after you've familiarized yourself with the scholarship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtango
whom he produced also by using the daughters of men, so why bother so much trying to interpret every single word in the OT?
But Paul's quote was not prefaced with the comment, "Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these, saying . . ." That kind of introduction means the text was thought to be inspired. Is Jude wrong? Is what is recorded in Enoch not what was prophesied by the seventh from Adam?
But it doesn't prove Jude quoted from a book which today we call "Enoch." That's my point.
Oh, by the way, you never answered if your Bible is more accurate and qualified that the Ethiopic Bible which contains the Book of Enoch?
I have never read the Ethiopic Bible so I am not able to know if it is more accurate. If you read about the Concordant Principles employed in translation
Eusebius, for the sake of establishing something here, please tell me how you would interpret these two passages:
Remember the days of old,
consider the years of many generations;
ask your father, and he will show you;
your elders, and they will tell you.
When the Most High [El Elyon] gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he separated the sons of men,
he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.
For the LORD's [Yahweh's] portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage. (Deuteronomy 32:7-9 - Revised Standard Version)
Then tell me what you also gather from this conversation of land dispute between the Israel and the Ammonites:
“Now since the Lord, the God of Israel, has driven the Amorites out before his people Israel, what right have you to take it over? Will you not take what your god Chemosh gives you? Likewise, whatever the Lord our God has given us, we will possess. (Judges 11:23-24)
What do you think, from these passages, was the prevailing concept about gods in those ancient times long before your time in the sun?
גבורים does not mean "distinguished." It means "strong" or "mighty." It is used to refer to warriors and war heroes.
Here are the verses in the Concordant Literal Old Testament where "distinguished" is used:
(Genesis 6:4) Now the distinguished come to be in the earth in those days, and, moreover, afterward, coming are those who are sons of the elohim to the daughters of the human, and they bear for them. They are the masters, who are from the eon, mortals with the name.
Of my bibles for 6:4 eight have "giants," three have "Nephilim," one has "fallen ones," and one has "distinguished." So it should be "distinguished."
(Exodus 33:16) Whereby shall it be known, indeed, that I find grace in Your eyes, I and Your people? Is it not by Your going with us that we may be distinguished, I and Your people, from all the peoples who are on the surface of the ground?
In 33:16 two bibles have "glorified," five of my bibles have "distinguished," four have "separated" and one "separate."
(Numbers 13:33) There we saw the distinguished (the sons of Anak are part of the distinguished ones). And we became, in our own eyes, like grasshoppers; so we became in their eyes.
For 13:33 some bibles have "Nephilim" some "giants" and one "distinguished."
(Psalms 4:3) Now know that Yahweh has distinguished the benign one for Himself; Yahweh, He shall hear when I call to Him.
In Psalm 4:3 most bibles have "set apart" and CLOT has "distinguished"
(Psalms 139:14) I shall acclaim You, for You are fearfully distinguished; Marvelous are Your works. You have known my soul very thoroughly;"
In Psalms 139:14 Young's Literal and the Literal Translation of the Holy Bible have "distinguished" as well.
(Isaiah 29:22) Wherefore, thus says Yahweh to the house of Jacob, He Who 7distinguished~ Abraham:"Not now is Jacob ashamed, and not now is the face of Israel hot."
29:22 7-~ distinguished [lit. severed]: Hb ransomed.
The '7' represents the 70 or LXX and the '~' means conjecture. So it is conjectured from the Septuagint that "distinguished" is the correct word to be used.
Quote:
Where is Adam called a "son of Elohim"?
Luk 3:38 "the son of Cainan, the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."
Since "Elohim" is the Hebrew for "God" and since the Greek's translated "Elohim" into "Theos" and since "Theos" is used in Luke 3:38, it can be said that "Adam is a son of Elohim."
Quote:
It cannot be humans the word refers to in Gen 6 or Ps 82. Both texts explicitly contrast the "sons of Elohim" with humans. In Gen 6 the sons of Elohim are contrasted with the "daughters of humanity." In Psalm 82 the nature of the defendants as divine beings is strongly contrasted with their condemnation to mortality. In both texts the rhetoric simply falls flat if we try to read elohim as referring to humans.
Jesus quoted Psalm 82:6 and told His listeners John 10:34-36 Jesus
answered them, "Is it not written in your law, that 'I say you are gods'? "
(35) If He said those were gods, to whom the word of God came (and the
scripture can not be annulled), (36) are you saying to Him Whom the
Father hallows and dispatches into the world that 'You are blaspheming,'
seeing that I said, 'Son of God am I'?
Surely you are not going to say, that Jesus was an angel, that He was not a man and the Hebrew people He spoke to were not humans.
Eusebius, for the sake of establishing something here, please tell me how you would interpret these two passages:
Remember the days of old,
consider the years of many generations;
ask your father, and he will show you;
your elders, and they will tell you.
When the Most High [El Elyon] gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he separated the sons of men,
he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.
For the LORD's [Yahweh's] portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage. (Deuteronomy 32:7-9 - Revised Standard Version)
Here is the Concordant Literal:
7 Remember the days of the eon;
Understand the years of generation
+ after generation.
Ask your father, and he shall tell you,
Your elders, and they shall say to you:
8 When the Supreme gave the nations allotments
When He parted the sons of Adam,
He set the boundaries of the peoples
According to the number of the sons of 7 El Q
32:8 7-Q El: Hb Israel.
So the Septuagint and Qumran has "El" but the Hebrew has "sons of Israel" in 37:8.
Israel was the head and the nations were supposed to be subordinate. When Christ returns (and He really will) He will take up with this again and subordinate the nations to the number of the sons of Israel (12) sons - 12 tribes.
Then tell me what you also gather from this conversation of land dispute between the Israel and the Ammonites:
“Now since the Lord, the God of Israel, has driven the Amorites out before his people Israel, what right have you to take it over? Will you not take what your god Chemosh gives you? Likewise, whatever the Lord our God has given us, we will possess. (Judges 11:23-24)
What do you think, from these passages, was the prevailing concept about gods in those ancient times long before your time in the sun?
Notice the lowercase 'e' and uppercase 'E' for "elohim" below:
Jdg 11:24 That which Chemosh your elohim causes you to possess--do you
not possess it? and all that which Yahweh our Elohim has dispossessed
from our presence, --it we do possess.
2Ki 23:13 And the high places that [are] on the front of Jerusalem, that
[are] on the right of the mount of corruption, that Solomon king of Israel
had built to Ashtoreth abomination of the Zidonians, and Chemosh
abomination of Moab, and to Milcom abomination of the sons of Ammon,
has the king defiled.
They knew it was an abomination to worship false idols.
The land was riddled with different people with different false gods [idols]. Chemosh was an abomination.
(Numbers 21:29) Woe to you, Moab! You have perished, people of Chemosh! He gave up his sons delivered from slaughter, and his
daughters into captivity to Sihon, king of the Amorite.
(Judges 11:24) That which Chemosh your elohim causes you to
possess--do you not possess it? and all that which Yahweh our Elohim has
dispossessed from our presence, --it we do possess.
(1 Kings 11:7) Then does Solomon build a high place for Chemosh the
abomination of Moab, in the hill that [is] on the front of Jerusalem, and
for Molech the abomination of the sons of Ammon;"
That was a very bad thing, by the way.
(1 Kings 11:33) `Because they have forsaken Me, and bow themselves
to Ashtoreth, elohim [goddess] of the Zidonians, to Chemosh elohim of
Moab, and to Milcom elohim of the sons of Ammon, and have not walked in
My ways, to do that which [is] right in Mine eyes, and My statutes and My
judgments, like David his father.
(2 Kings 23:13) And the high places that [are] on the front of Jerusalem,
that [are] on the right of the mount of corruption, that Solomon king of
Israel had built to Ashtoreth abomination of the Zidonians, and Chemosh
abomination of Moab, and to Milcom abomination of the sons of Ammon,
has the king defiled.
(Jeremiah 48:7) For, because of your trusting in your works, And in your
treasures, even you are captured, And gone out has Chemosh in a
removal, His priests and his heads together."
(Jeremiah 48:13) And ashamed has been Moab because of Chemosh, As
the house of Israel have been ashamed Because of Beth-El their
confidence."
(Jeremiah 48:46) Woe to you, O Moab, Perished has the people of Chemosh, For your sons were taken with the captives, And your
daughters with the captivity."
Back then, people were known by the idol they worshiped. Moab had the idol Chemosh. Ammon had the idol Milcom. The Zidonians had the idol Ashtoreth. It does not mean these were real beings. "An idol is nothing" the apostle Paul wrote.
7 Remember the days of the eon;
Understand the years of generation
+ after generation.
Ask your father, and he shall tell you,
Your elders, and they shall say to you:
8 When the Supreme gave the nations allotments
When He parted the sons of Adam,
He set the boundaries of the peoples
According to the number of the sons of 7 El Q
32:8 7-Q El: Hb Israel.
So the Septuagint and Qumran has "El" but the Hebrew has "sons of Israel" in 37:8.
Israel was the head and the nations were supposed to be subordinate. When Christ returns (and He really will) He will take up with this again and subordinate the nations to the number of the sons of Israel (12) sons - 12 tribes.
Notice the lowercase 'e' and uppercase 'E' for "elohim" below:
Jdg 11:24 That which Chemosh your elohim causes you to possess--do you
not possess it? and all that which Yahweh our Elohim has dispossessed
from our presence, --it we do possess.
2Ki 23:13 And the high places that [are] on the front of Jerusalem, that
[are] on the right of the mount of corruption, that Solomon king of Israel
had built to Ashtoreth abomination of the Zidonians, and Chemosh
abomination of Moab, and to Milcom abomination of the sons of Ammon,
has the king defiled.
They knew it was an abomination to worship false idols.
The land was riddled with different people with different false gods [idols]. Chemosh was an abomination.
(Numbers 21:29) Woe to you, Moab! You have perished, people of Chemosh! He gave up his sons delivered from slaughter, and his
daughters into captivity to Sihon, king of the Amorite.
(Judges 11:24) That which Chemosh your elohim causes you to
possess--do you not possess it? and all that which Yahweh our Elohim has
dispossessed from our presence, --it we do possess.
(1 Kings 11:7) Then does Solomon build a high place for Chemosh the
abomination of Moab, in the hill that [is] on the front of Jerusalem, and
for Molech the abomination of the sons of Ammon;"
That was a very bad thing, by the way.
(1 Kings 11:33) `Because they have forsaken Me, and bow themselves
to Ashtoreth, elohim [goddess] of the Zidonians, to Chemosh elohim of
Moab, and to Milcom elohim of the sons of Ammon, and have not walked in
My ways, to do that which [is] right in Mine eyes, and My statutes and My
judgments, like David his father.
(2 Kings 23:13) And the high places that [are] on the front of Jerusalem,
that [are] on the right of the mount of corruption, that Solomon king of
Israel had built to Ashtoreth abomination of the Zidonians, and Chemosh
abomination of Moab, and to Milcom abomination of the sons of Ammon,
has the king defiled.
(Jeremiah 48:7) For, because of your trusting in your works, And in your
treasures, even you are captured, And gone out has Chemosh in a
removal, His priests and his heads together."
(Jeremiah 48:13) And ashamed has been Moab because of Chemosh, As
the house of Israel have been ashamed Because of Beth-El their
confidence."
(Jeremiah 48:46) Woe to you, O Moab, Perished has the people of Chemosh, For your sons were taken with the captives, And your
daughters with the captivity."
Back then, people were known by the idol they worshiped. Moab had the idol Chemosh. Ammon had the idol Milcom. The Zidonians had the idol Ashtoreth. It does not mean these were real beings. "An idol is nothing" the apostle Paul wrote.
Now you're on to something, Eusebius. You now should look up the terms "henotheism" and "monolatry" and see if they resemble what you are saying here.
Now you're on to something, Eusebius. You now should look up the terms "henotheism" and "monolatry" and see if they resemble what you are saying here.
Thanks for the words to look up. There is another called "modalism."
1 Corinthians 8:4-7
(4) Then, concerning the feeding on the idol sacrifices: We are aware that
an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God except
One." (5) For even if so be that there are those being termed gods,
whether in heaven or on earth, even as there are many gods and many
lords, (6) nevertheless for us there is one God, the Father, out of Whom
all is, and we for Him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through Whom all is, and
we through Him." (7) But not in all is there this knowledge. Now some,
used hitherto to the idol, are eating of it as an idol sacrifice, and their
conscience, being weak, is being polluted."
According to the above, written by the the Apostle Paul we see there are many gods and many lords but for us there is one God, the Father and one Lord, Jesus Christ.
The Romans had many they termed gods and many they termed lords in heaven and on earth. But the Christian only knows one God, the Father.
The above quotation is all about eating food offered to idols.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
