†. Gen 6:1-2 . . Now it came about, when men began to multiply on
the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons
of God saw that the daughters of men were good; and they took
wives for themselves, whomever they chose.
The Hebrew word for "good" in that passage is towb (tobe) which is the very
same word that Genesis utilizes to evaluate God's handiwork in creation;
e.g. Light (Gen 1:4) Land and Seas (Gen 1:10) Vegetation (Gen 1:12) Sun,
Moon, and Stars (Gen 1:18) Birds and Aquatic Life (Gen 1:21) Beasts and
Bugs (Gen 1:25) and the finished product. (Gen 1:31)
Towb is one of those ambiguous Hebrew words that can be utilized as either
a noun or an adjective in a wide variety of applications. It can indicate
morality, it can indicate a tasty meal, it can indicate a job well done, it can
indicate a nice man, it can indicate a pretty dress, it can indicate a shapely
woman and/or a handsome man, and it can indicate an expert musician
and/or a really groovy song like Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance"
In my judicious estimation, when God's handiwork turned out "good" towb
indicates that the cosmos-- and all of its forms of life, matter, and energy
came out just the way God wanted it to; perfectly suited to the purposes He
had in mind when He designed everything. But when it comes to women; I
think it's pretty safe to assume towb indicates their looks.
Note : ambiguous Hebrew words like towb serve to illustrate why it's
virtually impossible to translate Hebrew into English with 100% verbatim
precision. No linguist in his right mind would dare to say that English
versions of the Hebrew Old Testament are perfect word-for-word renditions
of the original manuscripts-- no; they can't even be certified perfect word
for-word renditions of the available manuscripts let alone the originals.
The precise identity of the "sons of God" has been debated. Some say they
were the sons of the aristocracy of that day who married attractive women
from among the commoners. Others say they were renegade spirit creatures
who cohabited with humans to produce a hybrid strain of hominid freaks.
Others say they were pious men who, instead of marrying pious women of
like faith, married outsiders; viz: infidels-- implying that "daughters of men"
are irreverent women who didn't fear the Bible's God. (e.g. Gen 26:34-35)
It's quite rational to deduce from the text that otherwise pious men were
overcome with sensual lust and built themselves harems of impious women;
who subsequently became the mothers of irreverent children. Intermarriage
between men of faith and infidel women is as old a practice as adultery; and
a proven tactic for watering down, compromising, and even extinguishing
Bible beliefs and practices (e.g. Num 31:7-16). The people of God are
strictly, unequivocally, and clearly forbidden to marry outside their faith.
(Deut 7:1-4, 2Cor 6:14-18)
In a mixed relationship-- one a believer and the other an infidel --the
believer will be forced to compromise their convictions in order to keep the
relationship going. Compromise in the area of spiritual values is not a good
thing for God's people. It's not only bad for the conscience, but will quickly
ruin a believer's relationship with their Lord. (1John 1:6)
Most people want love, romance, companionship, and a family of their own.
According to Gen 1:27-28, and Gen 2:21-24, those things are Divine
blessings, they're perfectly normal and nothing to be ashamed of; nor is
there anything intrinsically naughty or sinful about them. But a believer has
to be self controlled, and not permit their base nature to make them lose
their heads and ruin their chances for happiness. Adult dating is where it
starts. And adult dating isn't harmless. It leads to other things, and it leads
into commitments and promises that are not easily reneged. The end result
of adult dating is ultimately marriage and children (quite possibly illegitimate
children). Whose spiritual philosophy will prevail in the marriage? Whose
spiritual philosophy will be taught to the children? The believer's or the
infidel's? And ultimately, who will get the children's souls-- God, or the
Serpent?
Some couples try to accommodate each other's beliefs by teaching their
children the concepts of both religions. For example, a marriage between a
Buddhist and a Christian. The children are given a choice between the Bible
and the Four Noble Truths; and between Christ and Siddhartha
Guatama, and between resurrection and reincarnation. That may seem like a
good idea, but it only creates confusion in the minds of the children. Why
are mom and dad not in agreement? Whose religion is right? Can both be
right? Does it mean that one religion is just as good as the next?
Teaching their children more than one system of spiritual beliefs and
practices is out of the question for Christians because the Lord and Master of
New Testament Christianity demands their exclusive devotion.
†. John 14:6 . . I am the path and the truth . . No one comes to the Father
except through me.
†. 1Tim 2:5 . . For there is one God, and one mediator between God and
humanity; the man Christ Jesus
Wives can be very effective in influencing an otherwise pious man to
compromise his convictions (e.g. Gen 3:6). All too often, in a mixed
marriage, the mother's spiritual philosophy will be taught to her children
because husbands, as a rule, put a higher priority on peace in the home
than spirituality, so they won't risk alienating mama by forcing the issue.
The sons of God in Noah's day-- whose wives were chosen based solely upon
sex appeal sans any spiritual prudence whatsoever --all perished in the
Flood right along with their infidel wives and children. Not one of them had
the good sense to go aboard the ark with Noah.
It's never wise for believers to marry outside their faith. A good example is
Solomon. He got off to a good start; but down the road accumulated a
harem of foreign women who led him into idolatry; which subsequently
caused The Lord to engineer rebellion in the kingdom. (1Kgs 11 & 12)
Cont.
/
the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons
of God saw that the daughters of men were good; and they took
wives for themselves, whomever they chose.
The Hebrew word for "good" in that passage is towb (tobe) which is the very
same word that Genesis utilizes to evaluate God's handiwork in creation;
e.g. Light (Gen 1:4) Land and Seas (Gen 1:10) Vegetation (Gen 1:12) Sun,
Moon, and Stars (Gen 1:18) Birds and Aquatic Life (Gen 1:21) Beasts and
Bugs (Gen 1:25) and the finished product. (Gen 1:31)
Towb is one of those ambiguous Hebrew words that can be utilized as either
a noun or an adjective in a wide variety of applications. It can indicate
morality, it can indicate a tasty meal, it can indicate a job well done, it can
indicate a nice man, it can indicate a pretty dress, it can indicate a shapely
woman and/or a handsome man, and it can indicate an expert musician
and/or a really groovy song like Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance"
In my judicious estimation, when God's handiwork turned out "good" towb
indicates that the cosmos-- and all of its forms of life, matter, and energy
came out just the way God wanted it to; perfectly suited to the purposes He
had in mind when He designed everything. But when it comes to women; I
think it's pretty safe to assume towb indicates their looks.
Note : ambiguous Hebrew words like towb serve to illustrate why it's
virtually impossible to translate Hebrew into English with 100% verbatim
precision. No linguist in his right mind would dare to say that English
versions of the Hebrew Old Testament are perfect word-for-word renditions
of the original manuscripts-- no; they can't even be certified perfect word
for-word renditions of the available manuscripts let alone the originals.
The precise identity of the "sons of God" has been debated. Some say they
were the sons of the aristocracy of that day who married attractive women
from among the commoners. Others say they were renegade spirit creatures
who cohabited with humans to produce a hybrid strain of hominid freaks.
Others say they were pious men who, instead of marrying pious women of
like faith, married outsiders; viz: infidels-- implying that "daughters of men"
are irreverent women who didn't fear the Bible's God. (e.g. Gen 26:34-35)
It's quite rational to deduce from the text that otherwise pious men were
overcome with sensual lust and built themselves harems of impious women;
who subsequently became the mothers of irreverent children. Intermarriage
between men of faith and infidel women is as old a practice as adultery; and
a proven tactic for watering down, compromising, and even extinguishing
Bible beliefs and practices (e.g. Num 31:7-16). The people of God are
strictly, unequivocally, and clearly forbidden to marry outside their faith.
(Deut 7:1-4, 2Cor 6:14-18)
In a mixed relationship-- one a believer and the other an infidel --the
believer will be forced to compromise their convictions in order to keep the
relationship going. Compromise in the area of spiritual values is not a good
thing for God's people. It's not only bad for the conscience, but will quickly
ruin a believer's relationship with their Lord. (1John 1:6)
Most people want love, romance, companionship, and a family of their own.
According to Gen 1:27-28, and Gen 2:21-24, those things are Divine
blessings, they're perfectly normal and nothing to be ashamed of; nor is
there anything intrinsically naughty or sinful about them. But a believer has
to be self controlled, and not permit their base nature to make them lose
their heads and ruin their chances for happiness. Adult dating is where it
starts. And adult dating isn't harmless. It leads to other things, and it leads
into commitments and promises that are not easily reneged. The end result
of adult dating is ultimately marriage and children (quite possibly illegitimate
children). Whose spiritual philosophy will prevail in the marriage? Whose
spiritual philosophy will be taught to the children? The believer's or the
infidel's? And ultimately, who will get the children's souls-- God, or the
Serpent?
Some couples try to accommodate each other's beliefs by teaching their
children the concepts of both religions. For example, a marriage between a
Buddhist and a Christian. The children are given a choice between the Bible
and the Four Noble Truths; and between Christ and Siddhartha
Guatama, and between resurrection and reincarnation. That may seem like a
good idea, but it only creates confusion in the minds of the children. Why
are mom and dad not in agreement? Whose religion is right? Can both be
right? Does it mean that one religion is just as good as the next?
Teaching their children more than one system of spiritual beliefs and
practices is out of the question for Christians because the Lord and Master of
New Testament Christianity demands their exclusive devotion.
†. John 14:6 . . I am the path and the truth . . No one comes to the Father
except through me.
†. 1Tim 2:5 . . For there is one God, and one mediator between God and
humanity; the man Christ Jesus
Wives can be very effective in influencing an otherwise pious man to
compromise his convictions (e.g. Gen 3:6). All too often, in a mixed
marriage, the mother's spiritual philosophy will be taught to her children
because husbands, as a rule, put a higher priority on peace in the home
than spirituality, so they won't risk alienating mama by forcing the issue.
The sons of God in Noah's day-- whose wives were chosen based solely upon
sex appeal sans any spiritual prudence whatsoever --all perished in the
Flood right along with their infidel wives and children. Not one of them had
the good sense to go aboard the ark with Noah.
It's never wise for believers to marry outside their faith. A good example is
Solomon. He got off to a good start; but down the road accumulated a
harem of foreign women who led him into idolatry; which subsequently
caused The Lord to engineer rebellion in the kingdom. (1Kgs 11 & 12)
Cont.
/
