1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Questions

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by Druidus, May 19, 2005.

  1. Druidus

    Druidus Keeper of the Grove

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,816
    Ratings:
    +515
    This is not an attack. I just want to hear what you think.

    In Genesis, why does God create man and women twice, once before the non-humans, and once after?

    Who are the other "sons of God" that are seen in Genesis 6:1-4? (I mean other than Jesus)


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

    Why does Abraham have to convince God to spare the city of Sodom if he is able to find ten righteous in it? How can Abraham convince God of anything? Why does God spare Lot's family, claiming they are righteous, when Lot's wife turns around against God's will, and Lot's daughters turn around and rape him while he is drunk? In the bible, we are told that children were amongst those killed in the destruction. How were they not righteous?

    How is Moses able to advise God not to kill the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel? How does God "repent" of the evil which he had thought to do unto his people?

    A person who took this vow had to abstain from wine or anything made with grapes, he never cut his hair, and he never came in contact with anything that was dead. If the person kept this vow, they were considered holy or righteous no matter what else they did.

    Why is it that Samson, as a Nazarite, got away with breaking most of the rules of the Nazarite without losing his strength? Why did only the hair count?

    As a Nazarite, if he drank wine, or anything made with grapes, never came into contact with anything that was dead, and never cut his hair, he was holy, and with God's strength. But clearly when Samson killed and hid the lion from his father, he came into contact with something dead. Why then, did he keep his strength? What about when he killed people with his bare hands in order to pay back his gambling debts with their clothing? Why is it that many times when he killed innocent people, it is said that "the spirit of the Lord" came upon him?

    Any answers are appreciated. Thank you.
     
  2. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,809
    Ratings:
    +2,115
    Religion:
    Christian
    God creates more animals in the garden of eden. It also shows a more indepth creation of man.

    I believe they are angelic beings.

    Don't understand this.

    Conversation? A plea for mercy?

    Decides not to do it.

    Hold on while I get my bible out, and will answer the rest.
     
  3. Druidus

    Druidus Keeper of the Grove

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,816
    Ratings:
    +515
    But according to the bible, God is unchanging. How can she repent, when the act of repenting is to change one's mind?

    Thank you for the answers so far. What don't you understand about the Sodom bit?
     
  4. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    Whew, that's a lot of questions... I'll answer what I can...
    How many times Have I heard this question? I don't know how many ways I can try and explain it. Genesis 1 is a general telling of the order of creation. Chapter 2 is an in-depth, detailed description of the creation of man. THe same creation in chapter one, just retold in more detail.

    Some believe they are angels that came to earth and mated with human women (the doughters of men). It is believed that the offspring of such unions produced giants. The other major theory out there is that they are godly men that descended from the line of Seth, Adam and Eve's youngest son. But it is mysterious to me why their offspring would be so mighty.


    Abraham didn't have to convince God to do anything. He wanted to do it though. Abraham wanted to save just a few more people, but God knew that it wasn't going to happen. I think God is sort of humoring Abraham to prove a point. I dunno. That's what I think.

    As far as I know, Lot is the only one who found favor in the sight of God. I haven't read anywhere where his family is said to be righteous. I think they come along because they are his family and they are just sorta with him. Kinda like a package deal ya know?

    It appears that the children were doing the same evil as well as the adults. Verse 4 of Genesis 19 says that both the young and the old were surrounding Lot's house. Additionally verse 11 says that the angels struck both the small and the great with blindness. So it appears, as sad as it may be, that even the children of the city were committing evil in the sight of God.

    Again we have another insance of God changing His mind. I don't see the big deal...

    I think that the hair is the key to his strenght. That was where the emphasis was placed. I'm not exactly sure about all the details of the Nazirite vow so I can't give youa definite answer.

    I hope this has been helpful.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Druidus

    Druidus Keeper of the Grove

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,816
    Ratings:
    +515
    I see.

    But aren't angels spirit beings, and not physical? How could they mate with a partly physical being like a human? The second theory, to me, answers nothing. They would not be "sons of God" if they were descended of man. To me, the phrase "sons of God" would be symbolic rather than literal, but as the same verse also references "daughters of man", the phrase becomes less symbolic.

    This makes sense.

    But if the young were doing the evils, was it not only because they were taught to do it by their parents? Surely the newborn babies were not evil, and should have been spared.

    Because the bible says that God cannot change, that she is perfect. If he had to change something about him, he is either no longer perfect, or was not perfect before.

    (Cf. Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; Psalm 102:26-27; Malachi 3:6; Romans 11:29; Hebrews 6:17-18; James 1:17)

    I kind of understand what you mean, but the vow of the Nazarite is broken whenever you break any of the rules. Until you break those rules, you can do anything else and still be considered holy (say, sleep with a prostitute, which is exactly what Samson does). However, God seems not to care that he broke nearly every other rule of the Nazarite, only caring when his hair was cut.

    Thank you, again, for the answers so far.
     
  6. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,809
    Ratings:
    +2,115
    Religion:
    Christian
    There is a difference between changing a descision, and changing a part of yourself. At least in my eyes.
     
  7. Druidus

    Druidus Keeper of the Grove

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,816
    Ratings:
    +515
    I see what you mean, but to change one's mind is to admit that your first choice of action was wrong. How could God have been wrong? And how did Moses convince him that he was wrong? Surely omnisentient beings are never wrong.

    Thank you.
     
  8. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,809
    Ratings:
    +2,115
    Religion:
    Christian
    Deciding not to do something does not mean one was wrong.

    Oh and,

    I beleive that spiritual beings can have children with humans. I do not beleive they have intercourse per se, but that they can produce offspring.
     
  9. Druidus

    Druidus Keeper of the Grove

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,816
    Ratings:
    +515
    It implies that you believe you were wrong in your first choice of action. Since God is omnisentient, if he thinks he was wrong, he was. But how con an omnisentient being be wrong?

    I see. Much like God didn't have intercourse with Mary? So these sons of God are angelic in nature, and closely akin to God, right? So the sons of the sons of God, and the daughters of man would be partly divine? Not so much as Jesus, but moreso than normal humans?
     
  10. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,809
    Ratings:
    +2,115
    Religion:
    Christian
    All that it implies is that you choose another course of action. Not that either one is wrong.

    No, angels(to my knowledge) do not partake in divinity.
     
  11. jewscout

    jewscout Religious Zionist

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,486
    Ratings:
    +922
    well since i'm late coming in i'll try to catch up...

    Kudos Emu! This is one of many opinions on the seeming double telling of the story...
    interesting to note that in verse 7 the hebrew for "formed" when pertaining to man is spelled w/ 2 "yuds" וַיִּיצֶר where as the same word pertaining to animals and other creation has only 1 וַיִּצֶר this symbolizing the creation in this world and the creation for the time of the resurreciton of the dead (taken from Chabad.org's Rashi commentarty)
     
  12. jewscout

    jewscout Religious Zionist

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,486
    Ratings:
    +922
    well in my translation it says "sons of nobles"
    but there is some commentary saying that it could have been angelic figures...it just depends on the commentator you read i suppose...
     
  13. EnhancedSpirit

    EnhancedSpirit High Priestess

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,852
    Ratings:
    +490
    Aren't we all children of God?
     
  14. jewscout

    jewscout Religious Zionist

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,486
    Ratings:
    +922
    because he begs G-d in the name of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the people He made a covenant and a POSITIVE promise to of bringing them to the land of Canaan creation a nation of priests from them. It was their lineage that was given this promise and Moses was using this knowledge to quell HaShem's anger against the Hebrews.
    some of the Rambam's commentary on prophecy is that if the prophecy, such as this promise, is in the positive it can not be changed. If it is in the negative (which i think goes back to your question on Sodom) it is something that can be changed with the changing of the people involved.
    Rambam says this is how you can tell a true prophet...one who predicts a positive event and it happens
     
  15. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    Sometimes it does. Though, not in this case I don't think. All God is doing is choosing a diferent course of action. There are some choices where the options are neither right nor wrong...just different. I think God is simply making a different choice here.
     
  16. Finnyhaha

    Finnyhaha Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    Messages:
    125
    Ratings:
    +19
    Another question to add: Why would the "sons of God" mentioned in Genesis be taken to mean angels, and the phrase "son of God" when applied to anyone other than Jesus mean only favored by God, while Christians believe that the phrase "son of God" when applied to Jesus is literal? Isn't that a double standard?
     
  17. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    I think one reason might be the fact that in verse 4 of Genesis 6 it says that the offspring of the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" were exceptionally mighty. They were called the Nephilim and were probably giants. There really sin't an explanation for their exceptional might and renown if they are just the offspring of normal people.
     
  18. Finnyhaha

    Finnyhaha Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    Messages:
    125
    Ratings:
    +19
    . . . that doesn't really explain why the term was interpreted differently when applied to different people in the Bible. What about David, he was called a "son of God" right?
     
  19. Mister Emu

    Mister Emu Emu Extraordinaire
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,809
    Ratings:
    +2,115
    Religion:
    Christian
    Context. In the context of Genesis 6 the offspring are considered extremeley mighty, are given their name further expounding that they are different from normal humans, and it is said they are giants. This all points to sons of God being something other than human. Another note is that it says "saw the daughters of men", implying again that the "sons of God" are not human.
     
  20. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    I'm confused as to how exactly that works. How exactly does the phrase "saw the daughters of men" imply that they were not human. I'm not disagreeing with you, I just need some clarification.
     
Loading...