Jump to content


Photo

Genetic Tampering Implied In Genesis


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 joman

joman

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Age: 57
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Southern Indiana

Posted 12 July 2012 - 04:58 PM

Gen 6:1-2 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

When men began to multiply on the earth the sons of God took them wives of all as the chose.

We can understand these are angels because of the following points….

1) Man had already begun to multiply on the earth before these sons of God saw the daughters of men and decided to take them for wives.

2) These sons of God “took” the daughters of men and therefore were a dominant group of beings.

3) Until people were born again by faith in Jesus of Nazareth the only begotten Son of God, the phrase “sons of God” is exclusively used to refer directly to angels.

4) The book of Jude explains how angels left their former estates in heaven becasuse they were as the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah in that those inhabitants also went after fornication with strange flesh.

Notice how the hybrid genetics is leads directly to judgment of wickedness involving man, beast, insect, and bird, with offspring termed, giants and extraordinary men.

Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

See here that God set a time limit on his striving with mankind because flesh cannot long survive such wickednesses.

Gen 6:4 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 those days when the angels brought hybrid reproduction to the earth giants appeared in the populations. Notice that the term “giants” is not restricted to man only, in that it is stated before the time of the hybridization of mankind by angelic beings, and in that the subsequent judgment of God falls on “all” flesh. And, note that the global size fossil record of the global flood of Noah records giantism among all kinds of creatures. Giant insects, birds, beasts, and man. And, note that the oral history of mankind includes myths of such men of renown, sons of gods, and gods, living among man, and inhabiting high places of the earth, and in the deep forest glens, and that some of them were myths of extraordinary strong men.

Then notice the phrase “and after that” means that “after” the giants appeared “in” the earth (compare with the well known myths of dragons, subterranian gods and beasts, cyclops, underground dwellings etc) then it was that the angels bore children of mankind.

Note that giantism as a breeding result directly suggests that mankind of smaller stature fornicated with large beings.

Note that “renown” in reference to the hybrid men the angels produced can refer to intelligence.

Please notice that the invasion of the gene pool of mankind agrees with the straightforward tactic of preventing the birth of a “seed of the woman, Eve” by corrupting the genetics of mankind. Note that the coming of the only begotten Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth involves the legal right to inherit the throne of Adam, and all his God ordained authority over mankind and the whole earth. And explains why the world that was then had to be destroyed lest the salvation plan of God be thwarted by corruption of all flesh.

Gen 6:5-6 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

The evil being done at the time of the flood of Noah was great. This means that it was not a natural kind of evil such as natural fornication, murder by loss of temper, and other such common ailments of the sin nature all men struggle with. Instead the term “great” inconjunction with the way it grieved God “at his heart” reveals a strange and vile insult as obtained by reprobate rebellion against the natural order ordained by God. This suggests that the reason only eight souls were saved by the ark of Noah is due to the fact that all good and faithful peoples were systematically violated by violence.

Note that the propensity of man for genocide against God’s people, or even diverse people, is historically proven to be very great and accomplished systematically by means of conspiracies. And, rears its head whenever evil dictators get any opprotunity.

Lastly notice that, as Jesus said the days of his return would be indentical to the former days of Noah. Look at how in Daniel’s interpretation of the God ordained king of the whole earth, Nebuchadnezzar’s first dream, he points out that as the last days of the ten final kings that reign together at the very end (the ten toes of the metal man, technological image) that “they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men” but, shall not mix even as iron cannot be mixed with miry clay. Once again suggesting genetic hybridization with mankind occurring again as part of a plot to achieve a strong rebelliousness against God’s kingdom.

Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Here we see that all flesh was involved as accords with the fossil records and the myths of mankind about ancient times.

#2 herebedragons

herebedragons

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Age: 45
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 18 July 2012 - 06:35 AM

Hi joman, I finally got time to put my reply together and here is what I came up with.


Gen 6:1-2 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

When men began to multiply on the earth the sons of God took them wives of all as the chose.

We can understand these are angels because of the following points….

1) Man had already begun to multiply on the earth before these sons of God saw the daughters of men and decided to take them for wives.

2) These sons of God “took” the daughters of men and therefore were a dominant group of beings.


The exact phrase used is “they took wives of all which they chose.” The idea of taking a wife is used throughout the OT. Gen 4:19 - Lamech took two wives; Gen 11:29 - Abram and Nahor took them wives; Gen 25:1 - Abraham took a wife; 1 Sam 25:43 - David took Ahinoam to be his wife; Gen 38:6 - Judah took a wife for Er; and so on. The term “took a wife”” does not seem to have the implication of a superior or dominant group, but is instead a commonly used term to mean got married. Understandably marriages were arranged and often forced, it was a cultural norm, not an indication of superiority. “of all which they chose” could be taken to mean polygamy - they took as many as they wanted.

3) Until people were born again by faith in Jesus of Nazareth the only begotten Son of God, the phrase “sons of God” is exclusively used to refer directly to angels.


To be fair the term “sons of God” only appears in one other book in the OT. Job 1:6, 2:1 and 38:7 where it does indeed refer to angels. The Hebrew words used in all 5 of these cases are “benl elohiym” (Job 1:6 and 2:1 are slightly different: “benl ha-elohiym”). All other references to angels in the OT use the word “mal’ak”. So I don’t think it is conclusive that “sons of God” in Gen 6 is referring to angels. It may indeed, but not conclusively.

One alternative understanding is that the “sons of God” are referring the lineage of Seth and the “daughters of men” refers to the lineage of Cain. Support for this comes from the text immediately preceding this reference. Gen 4:16 - 24 gives Cain’s lineage then in verse 25 and 26 it tells us that Adam had a son, Seth; and that Seth had a son, Enos. “then men began to call upon the name of the Lord.” Gen 5:1 - 32 gives us the lineage from Seth to Noah.

Notice also that in Cain’s lineage there is much about earthly “feats” these descendants were famous for - building a city, father of such that dwell in tents, instructor in art and brass crafting, harp and organ handler and murderer. The only side note in Seth’s lineage was Enoch who “walked with God and was not, for God took him.” So Cain’s lineage was “earthly” and Seth’s lineage was “Godly”.

Elohiym can also be translated god(s) rather than referring specifically to Yahweh. This could also be taken to mean “sons of gods” or “sons of powerful rulers”, which is the way some interpret this passage.

I tend to think the lineage of Seth and the lineage of Cain is the most plausible answer.

4) The book of Jude explains how angels left their former estates in heaven becasuse they were as the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah in that those inhabitants also went after fornication with strange flesh.


Jude 5 - 7 - I will therefore put you in rememberance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. 6. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

It seems clear that Jude is giving three examples of God’s judgment. 1. the people of the Exodus, 2. The fallen angels, and 3. Sodom and Gomorrah. I believe the NIV makes verse 7 much clearer

“In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to S@xual immorality and perversion.” (Meaning that they left their “first estate” and went after something immoral)” They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.”


Notice how the hybrid genetics is leads directly to judgment of wickedness involving man, beast, insect, and bird, with offspring termed, giants and extraordinary men.


No. First the indication of “hybrid genetics” is sketchy to say the least, but it doesn’t indicate anything regarding angels mating with animals.

Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

See here that God set a time limit on his striving with mankind because flesh cannot long survive such wickednesses.


And yet, according to the genealogies in Gen 11:10 - 32, men continued to live well beyond 120 years. (500, 403, 430, 209, 200) In fact, 10 generations later Abraham was born and he lived to be 175 years. So clearly the meaning of this verse is uncertain.

Gen 6:4 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 those days when the angels brought hybrid reproduction to the earth giants appeared in the populations. Notice that the term “giants” is not restricted to man only, in that it is stated before the time of the hybridization of mankind by angelic beings, and in that the subsequent judgment of God falls on “all” flesh. And, note that the global size fossil record of the global flood of Noah records giantism among all kinds of creatures. Giant insects, birds, beasts, and man. And, note that the oral history of mankind includes myths of such men of renown, sons of gods, and gods, living among man, and inhabiting high places of the earth, and in the deep forest glens, and that some of them were myths of extraordinary strong men.

Then notice the phrase “and after that” means that “after” the giants appeared “in” the earth (compare with the well known myths of dragons, subterranian gods and beasts, cyclops, underground dwellings etc) then it was that the angels bore children of mankind.


This is truly reading too much into this passage. Nothing is mentioned about animals being infected with angelic hybridization. I don’t see anything that implies animals were giants. The passage is referring specifically to men - humans.

Note that giantism as a breeding result directly suggests that mankind of smaller stature fornicated with large beings.


The passage states that they “took them as wives.” If they were married, that would not be fornicating. It also brings up a question. Are angels DNA based organisms? How would they mate and reproduce with humans? Are you suggesting non-S@xual conceptions as when the Holy Spirit caused Mary to conceive? I always thought angels were spiritual beings - not of this earth, not of flesh.

That spirit beings are not entirely ethereal can be implied by the angels that dined with Abraham and Jesus after his resurrection was able to eat and appear as human (on road to Emmaus). But to cast them as DNA based creatures able to bread with humans is very uncertain.

Also consider that Jesus is God’s only begotten son. I take that to mean the only Son of God that was born of flesh (DNA based body). If that is the case, then angels are not born of flesh (not DNA based organisms). I am uncertain as to what the exact nature of angels is, but I don’t think there is enough support here to make a solid conclusion about their nature.

Please notice that the invasion of the gene pool of mankind agrees with the straightforward tactic of preventing the birth of a “seed of the woman, Eve” by corrupting the genetics of mankind. Note that the coming of the only begotten Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth involves the legal right to inherit the throne of Adam, and all his God ordained authority over mankind and the whole earth. And explains why the world that was then had to be destroyed lest the salvation plan of God be thwarted by corruption of all flesh.


Now this here is some excellent insight. Notice in Gen 6:9 it says “Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.” This could be taken to mean that Noah’s ancestry had not been corrupted by the problems cited in verse 1 and 2. However, it could just as easily be explained by the lineage of Cain and the lineage of Seth interpretation rather than angelic hybrids. In Gen 4, when God cursed Cain because of his murder, Cain says (vs. 14) “Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth …” Doesn’t that sound like Cain has been cut off from the line of God? From the lineage of his father? So if Satan can corrupt the lineage of Seth with the lineage of Cain, would that not make the inheritance invalid, since the line of Cain was cut off?

Gen 6:5-6 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

The evil being done at the time of the flood of Noah was great. This means that it was not a natural kind of evil such as natural fornication, murder by loss of temper, and other such common ailments of the sin nature all men struggle with. Instead the term “great” inconjunction with the way it grieved God “at his heart” reveals a strange and vile insult as obtained by reprobate rebellion against the natural order ordained by God. This suggests that the reason only eight souls were saved by the ark of Noah is due to the fact that all good and faithful peoples were systematically violated by violence.

Note that the propensity of man for genocide against God’s people, or even diverse people, is historically proven to be very great and accomplished systematically by means of conspiracies. And, rears its head whenever evil dictators get any opprotunity.


So angels have bred with these evil dictators? If you make points like this - be consistent. What does evil dictators systematically killing God’s people have to do with Gen 6?

Lastly notice that, as Jesus said the days of his return would be indentical to the former days of Noah. Look at how in Daniel’s interpretation of the God ordained king of the whole earth, Nebuchadnezzar’s first dream, he points out that as the last days of the ten final kings that reign together at the very end (the ten toes of the metal man, technological image) that “they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men” but, shall not mix even as iron cannot be mixed with miry clay. Once again suggesting genetic hybridization with mankind occurring again as part of a plot to achieve a strong rebelliousness against God’s kingdom.


Contradiction: “they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men” but, shall not mix even as iron cannot be mixed with miry clay. So no genetic hybridization since the two cannot mix.

Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Here we see that all flesh was involved as accords with the fossil records and the myths of mankind about ancient times.


Already addressed this above.

You seem to be drawing your ideas from the account in the book of Jubilees which would surprise me that you accept the Apocryphal books. Here is the same story from Jubilees 5:

"And it came to pass when the children of men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them, that the angels of God saw them on a certain year of this jubilee, that they were beautiful to look upon; and they took themselves wives of all whom they chose, and they bare unto them sons and they were giants. And lawlessness increased on the earth and all flesh corrupted its way, alike men and cattle and beasts and birds and everything that walks on the earth -all of them corrupted their ways and their orders, and they began to devour each other, and lawlessness increased on the earth and every imagination of the thoughts of all men (was) thus evil continually. And God looked upon the earth, and behold it was corrupt, and all flesh had corrupted its orders, and all that were upon the earth had wrought all manner of evil before His eyes. And He said that He would destroy man and all flesh upon the face of the earth which He had created. But Noah found grace before the eyes of the Lord. And against the angels whom He had sent upon the earth, He was exceedingly wroth, and He gave commandment to root them out of all their dominion, and He bade us to bind them in the depths of the earth, and behold they are bound in the midst of them, and are (kept) separate. And against their sons went forth a command from before His face that they should be smitten with the sword, and be removed from under heaven. And He said 'My spirit shall not always abide on man; for they also are flesh and their days shall be one hundred and twenty years'. And He sent His sword into their midst that each should slay his neighbour, and they began to slay each other till they all fell by the sword and were destroyed from the earth." - Jubilees 5:1-8

The stories line up rather well and this passage definitely establishes that angels had children with humans and that even cattle and beasts had corrupted their way and began to devour each other. This supports your position quite well. However, there are a lot of discrepancies in the Jubilee text compared to Genesis. I think it would be hard to accept if you consider the Genesis account to be inerrant. Accepting the Jubilees account would open a whole new can of worms that would put Genesis on precarious ground as to its reliability. If you are not familiar with it here is a link so you can read it for yourself (chapters 1 - 4 tell of creation and 5 - 7 tell the story of the flood).

http://www.abu.nb.ca...est/JubText.htm

Another interesting thing I discovered is that in Numbers 13:33 when the spies returned to report of the Promised Land they said “And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants.” Now it may not be clear in this translation, but what the spies say is that the sons Anak lived there and that Anak was a descendant of the Nephilium. No the meaning of Nephilium is uncertain. Note the KJV say they saw “the giants” not some giants or just giants, but the giants. It could mean a specific race of people. But, it could also simply be referring to persons of large stature in general. (except it says the giants?) So that brings up one of two questions depending on how you understand that word.

How did the Nephilium survive the flood? Or

How do you explain gigantism post-flood without the intervention of “genetic tampering” by angels?


So, Joman, I disagree with your interpretation of this section of Scripture. I feel you have read too much into the text of Gen 6; and you have presented no physical evidence to support these claims. This may simply be a passage we can’t fully explain or understand.

However, I learned some interesting things that I had never known before; like the indication that the Nephilium were living in Canaan. I had never read anything from the Apocrypha. It was kinda interesting. I am going to read more from that book of Jubilees (not that I think it is Scriptural, just interesting) It might give some insights as to how the stories in Genesis came to be. So Thanks.

HBD

#3 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1031 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 29 September 2013 - 02:34 PM

...

Another interesting thing I discovered is that in Numbers 13:33 when the spies returned to report of the Promised Land they said “And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants.” Now it may not be clear in this translation, but what the spies say is that the sons Anak lived there and that Anak was a descendant of the Nephilium. No the meaning of Nephilium is uncertain. Note the KJV say they saw “the giants” not some giants or just giants, but the giants. It could mean a specific race of people. But, it could also simply be referring to persons of large stature in general. (except it says the giants?) So that brings up one of two questions depending on how you understand that word.

How did the Nephilium survive the flood? Or

How do you explain gigantism post-flood without the intervention of “genetic tampering” by angels?


So, Joman, I disagree with your interpretation of this section of Scripture. I feel you have read too much into the text of Gen 6; and you have presented no physical evidence to support these claims. This may simply be a passage we can’t fully explain or understand.

However, I learned some interesting things that I had never known before; like the indication that the Nephilium were living in Canaan. I had never read anything from the Apocrypha. It was kinda interesting. I am going to read more from that book of Jubilees (not that I think it is Scriptural, just interesting) It might give some insights as to how the stories in Genesis came to be. So Thanks.

HBD

 

 

 

 

 

The giants mentioned post flood are descendants of Ham or specific sons of Ham. Supernatural intervention isn't mentioned. 



#4 Dig4gold

Dig4gold

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1045 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 53
  • Judaism non-orthodox
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Raleigh, NC

Posted 29 September 2013 - 03:04 PM

herebedragons: How did the Nephilium survive the flood? Or How do you explain gigantism post-flood without the intervention of “genetic tampering” by angels?
 

 

Don't these questions beg the question of Joman's point?






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users