Ok, I will do as you suggest, but am not physic yet can predict the response already.That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 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. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown.In an of itself there is nothing in these verses which would really convince me one way or the other. We have giants now, we have fierce peoples now and have had both through out history. We have also always had wicked people, wicked groups of people and even wicked nations. So whether I believe one way or the other, and just looking at these verses, neither view explains why there are giants or fierce people any better than the other view. To make a choice we would have to look elsewhere.If we appeal to legend and myths, then it is true that many civilizations have god-man legends. But then does this reference in Gen 6 indicate influence on a Jewish writer captive in a land where he is surrounded by such legends or does it indicated the message intended by God?. The same legends suggest many gods, is there truth in that as well? Well again, taking ancient legends into consideration, and still not certain how we could say whether this represents influence by pagan cultures or something that is a truth that just happens to also be reflected in pagan cultures. I think either could be a possibility and nothing in the text itself directly supports one way or the other. We often say most legends contain some truth. But where to draw the line?We could appeal to the Book of Enoch, a book not found in the Bible. We could also appeal to early Christian writers commenting on Gen 6 and clearly accepting these demon-man hybrids explaining these giants. But there again, does that represent an error that developed because of an influence on these men who were using a faulty translation (Septuagint/LXX – Gen 6 “Angles of God see daughters of men”) or an actual truth? If that is the proper and correct translation of that verse why does the KJV not follow the LXX in rendering it that way? And does that constitute enough evidence to suggest ALL men of those days and Christ taught this? Certainly some of these men believed in demon-man children, but can we say they all did? Am not sure how that follows. And if it was not universal, why not? Am also not sure why would we need to appeal to extra biblical sources if the answer was clearly in Gen 6 that these giants were offspring of demons. We might consider the rest of the Chapter 6. It looks a lot like a repeating theme we can see in the OT; God hating the wickedness of man, threatening to destroy all mankind, punishing wickedness and saving godly people or providing a means of their salvation. Does anything about Gen 6 appear different from this theme that we should seek additional reasons (breeding with angels) for God punishing mankind? If it is there it is not clear to me. And again, if those angels were complicit in committing the sin that made God angry enough to flood the world, why are those beings not mentioned in the punishment? Why take it all out on only mankind? And are we not then saying that the situation was not entirely mankind’s fault? And if so, how is fair to hold mankind fully responsible?If God is punishing man in Gen 6 for breeding with fallen angles, why is that not explicit in the punishment part of story. Only thing mentioned there is general and complete wickedness. The giants are also not singled out or even mentioned again in the part where God’s wrath is explained. It is general and the great wickedness of mankind appears to be targeted with no further reference to angels or the mightymen. We could say the level of wickedness is one result of this breeding program of Satan, yet somehow it still seems odd that God’s Wrath be described as only directed at mankind here.Looking at the other view, on a whole, the idea that Sons of God are godly men marrying into tribes of wicked men, is not out of line with what happens next, punishment of wicked men. So if this is a case of angels and men behaving badly together, we should be able to at least say it is odd that the writer felt the need to mention that indirectly and then leave out God’s wrath on those angels and their offspring when speaking of the result. The story is incomplete from that standpoint with that understanding of who the giants and mightmen were. Furthermore, the typical view of demon-man offspring requires us to believe some survived the flood (however that might be). Again if these demon children are part of the flood story, and apparently important enough to be mentioned in the lead in to God’s Wrath against man, why would the writer omit the survival of some of these offspring? We are not told of any wicked men surviving. If these giants and mightymen are allegedly related to the same characters descried later in other OT text, why is there no connection in those text to these Gen 6 giants and mightymen? Or if all these beings died in the flood, why is the demon breeding program never mentioned again and connected to the appearancec of giants and mightmen later?If we say more demons appear later and do the same nasty thing again, why is there no further mention of that happening again in the OT or NT. Is simply referencing mightymen or giants alone in other books evidence that the same thing was happening again? While I guess possible, it seems weak to suggest we MUST make that connection. It is suggested that as whole, the demon-man offspring explains these events better than “daughters of men” just being women from tribes or groups of wicked people. If one explains all of Genesis or the whole Bible better than the other, then I am missing something here. A demon-man offspring understanding of these passages would seem critical to explaining a lot and indeed references are made here to the anti-Christ, the battle between God and Satan, attempts at thwarting God’s plan, final battles…etc. IOW if that is what is going on in Gen 6, (and 3 with both Adam and Eve having sex with Satan) then why would these offspring not be clearly mentioned in the NT? Why is the theme there for us to love ALL men and not instead ALL men ‘except’ these halfbreeds? I guess we could speculate that all the goats and wolves…etc represent these creatures among us today and we just cannot tell, so we must love them all.However to me, there is something also fundamentally disturbing in the idea that among us today there are creatures that look just like us but who represent pure and unredeemable evil. I can’t quite put my finger on it and it is hard to describe. My sense is that unable to tell the difference these thoughts would then require me to look with suspicion at our fellow man. Some would (and have – though not on this site) taken these thoughts further and identify races with these demon halfbreeds. Clearly that is too far, but then is there anything but love suggested in the Bible as our proper attitude toward our fellow man? So if they exist, are we to also love Satan and these halfbreeds too? Most of us have trouble with just our neighbors, I would find it very difficult indeed to be told we must love a demon or a demon halfbreed. There again, God created demons too (originally angels), but the best I can muster is maybe pity.Am also reminded of a check for reasonableness when something is not explicit in a story or in the case the Bible. Substitute the explicit idea into the text where the claim is made that it is being alluded to. Back to Gen 3;“And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every of the garden thou mayest freely : But with the fallen angels, thou shalt not : for in the day that thou thou shalt surely die.”………..”And when the woman saw that getting funky with Satan was good, and that it [was] pleasant to the eyes, and a funkiness to be desired to make [one] wise, so she got funky with Satan, and really funky, and showed this funkiness to her husband with her; and he got funky with Satan too.”Am not claiming to know what the forbidden fruit was, but whatever it was they were told not to do it. So if are to believe that Satan’s temptation was for Adam and Eve to both get funky with him (and thus produce these demon-human offspring thru Eve), then the above understanding would be correct. However the above rendering of those verses does not sound more reasonable to me than simply saying Satan tempted them with something they were specifically told not to do. Perhaps that is just me and I am not open to “God’s Word” on this matter.So to me, with one view there are issues with reasonableness, questions of why if this is such a foundational theme (these demon-humans play a central role in the whole picture if we accept that this is true) that it is only mentioned once in the entire Bible (the act of demon-human procreation that is) and why no explicit mention of it at all in the NT. These issues are difficult to over-look for me. If it works for some, and they do not see these problems then that is ok with me.
