"Daughters of men" and "Sons of God"

[Big J]

God's Peon said:

Quote[/b] ]Genesis 1:27.  First God created man (singular).  Adam?  No mention at the beginning of verse 27 of female until the end.  Then God created them (plural) male and female.
Adams line (or seed) is not the same as the others.
Genesis 4:14  Cain whines that he has become a wonderer in the Earth and who ever finds him will kill him.  Who is the "who ever" in his lamentations?
Cain found a wife?  Who was that, where did she come from?  He built cities?  For who, and where did they come from?
Adam and Eve did not only have Cain, Abel and Seth, they had many other sons and daughters.
The way I see it, the sons Adam and Eve had were the Sons of God.  And the daughters of Men are the daughters of the others.

Please tell me if I am reading it wrong.  I am aware of the "dual creation" in Genesis...your points are interesting, because most apologetics that I have seen claim that the second one was just more detail than the first.

Interesting.

So...the way you understand it, God created generic man and woman, and God created Adam and Eve as another act of creation?

I am aware that Adam and Eve had more kiddies than are mentioned in Gen.  Obviously, they would have had to.

I do have a few other questions...if your theory is correct, would that kind of not kill the idea of "original sin?"  I mean, if there are "Sons of God" descended from Adam...then they would have his sin.  The "Daughters of men" would, by definition, not have adam's sin on their heads, since they are not descended from Adam.

Were they in the Garden too? I mean, creation occurred before the fall..so they must have been.

 

[Guest]

My idea of Paradise and Creation (inspired somewhat by the notebooks of Anne Catherine Emmerich -- Catholicisms greatest Seer) is that Paradise was a Spiritual Realm -- "Astral" if you like the word.

Procreation was to be Spiritually Accomplished -- there was no need to even touch.

But when Adam and Eve sinned they were cursed by being thrown down to Earth, virtually into the bodies of Monkeys. This is where all those extra 'people' come from.

Adam and Eve's progeny could not keep up against the pure animal evil of the most part of mankind, and sent The Flood to reset the clock, if I may phrase it like that. Even after that, it took only a few generations before the World was neck deep in evil again -- though, this time, Righteousness had gained a firm enough root where it would never again be entirely forgotten.

As in interesting aside -- right before Adam sinned the Angel of God reached out and deprived Adam of His Progenitary Organ -- The Spiritual One, of course. This was to play a major role in the History of Redemption. It would be given by Melchissedek to Abraham. Abraham would pass it to Issacc, where it would be stolen by Jacob, but an Angel would take it back to give it to Joseph who would die with it in Egypt. Moses would find it in Joseph's Tomb and transfer it to the Arc of the Covenant. It would be rescued from the Arch of the Covenant before Jeremiah would lose it forever by hiding it too well. Eventually the Holy Thing would be given to Zacariah to place into Anne, Mary's Mother to facilitate Mary's Immaculate Conception. Therefore Mary would not be a Monkey like the rest of us, but She would be as Spiritual as Eve before the Sin. Mary was born without human genitalia.

 

[Kidan]

Quote[/b] ](inspired somewhat by the notebooks of Anne Catherine Emmerich -- Catholicisms greatest Seer)

Which says so much. ....


 No, there is no backing for an 'astral' creation.  God plainly says that He formed us from the dust of the earth, which would imply a physical creation.  And once again, you are impling that the Original Sin had something to do with  sex.  Again  I say, you are utterly full of yourself.  And if Mary was born without human genitalia, this would imply that she could not birth a child (humans that have their genitalia removed do  not/cannot sire children.  So, if Chirst was born of this non-human, then He would not be human, and if He's not fully human, then His sacrifice loses meaning.  For the Bible tells us that He was fully human, and tempted in all  the ways that we are, yet He remained pure and   undefiled, perfect in the Law.  To remove the human element, removes the value of the sacrifice.

Quote[/b] ]As in interesting aside -- right before Adam sinned the Angel of God reached out and deprived Adam of His Progenitary Organ -- The Spiritual One, of course.  This was to play a major role in the History of Redemption. It would be given by Melchissedek to Abraham.  Abraham would pass it to Issacc, where it would be stolen by Jacob, but an Angel would take it back to give it to Joseph who would die with it in Egypt.  Moses would find it in Joseph's Tomb and transfer it to the Arc of the Covenant.  It would be rescued from the Arch of the Covenant before Jeremiah would lose it forever by hiding it too well.  Eventually the Holy Thing would be given to Zacariah to place into Anne, Mary's Mother to facilitate Mary's Immaculate Conception.  Therefore Mary would not be a Monkey like the rest of us, but She would be as Spiritual as Eve before the Sin.  Mary was born without human genitalia.

And your entire theory of a 'Spiritual Penis' is highly disturbing, especially when you say that Mary had it.



BigJ--I've always been of the mind that they're just different versions of the same story.  Take the Gospels for example, they tell the same story, but  each version has slightly different information.

And yes, for the existance of multiple sets of men, that would destroy  the thought of the Original Sin.  As well, I've been of the opinion that these Sons of God were  angels, while the Daughters of  Men, were the daughters and granddaughters of Adam and Eve. (and with the Nephilim being the product of angelic and human intermingling, it would explain their reoccurance post-flood)

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Kidan @ Nov. 01 2003,9:23)]

Quote[/b] ](inspired somewhat by the notebooks of Anne Catherine Emmerich -- Catholicisms greatest Seer)

Which says so much. ....


 No, there is no backing for an 'astral' creation.  God plainly says that He formed us from the dust of the earth, which would imply a physical creation.  And once again, you are impling that the Original Sin had something to do with  sex.  Again  I say, you are utterly full of yourself.  And if Mary was born without human genitalia, this would imply that she could not birth a child (humans that have their genitalia removed do  not/cannot sire children.  So, if Chirst was born of this non-human, then He would not be human, and if He's not fully human, then His sacrifice loses meaning.  For the Bible tells us that He was fully human, and tempted in all  the ways that we are, yet He remained pure and   undefiled, perfect in the Law.  To remove the human element, removes the value of the sacrifice.

Quote[/b] ]As in interesting aside -- right before Adam sinned the Angel of God reached out and deprived Adam of His Progenitary Organ -- The Spiritual One, of course.  This was to play a major role in the History of Redemption. It would be given by Melchissedek to Abraham.  Abraham would pass it to Issacc, where it would be stolen by Jacob, but an Angel would take it back to give it to Joseph who would die with it in Egypt.  Moses would find it in Joseph's Tomb and transfer it to the Arc of the Covenant.  It would be rescued from the Arch of the Covenant before Jeremiah would lose it forever by hiding it too well.  Eventually the Holy Thing would be given to Zacariah to place into Anne, Mary's Mother to facilitate Mary's Immaculate Conception.  Therefore Mary would not be a Monkey like the rest of us, but She would be as Spiritual as Eve before the Sin.  Mary was born without human genitalia.

And your entire theory of a 'Spiritual Penis' is highly disturbing, especially when you say that Mary had it.



BigJ--I've always been of the mind that they're just different versions of the same story.  Take the Gospels for example, they tell the same story, but  each version has slightly different information.

And yes, for the existance of multiple sets of men, that would destroy  the thought of the Original Sin.  As well, I've been of the opinion that these Sons of God were  angels, while the Daughters of  Men, were the daughters and granddaughters of Adam and Eve. (and with the Nephilim being the product of angelic and human intermingling, it would explain their reoccurance post-flood)

"The Spiritual Penis thing". No!!!!!! It was given to Zachariah to use on Anne, Mary's Mother. Besides, whatever It was -- it wasn't some dirty penis. I told you it was Spiritual and that Adam and Eve had been intended to procreate without touching. So don't be disgusting!

You know, if there is one book that you couldn't possibly take literally it is Genesis. The whole thing is a metaphor! The difference between the scribes metaphor and my own metaphor is that it is designed to answer more questions in the frame of additional information. And here you are saying that there is no Spiritual Paradice because God had to use actual dust from the actual ground. Great! there is no heaven because we need this dust of yours.

Somehow you missed my point about Mary's Immaculate Conception. Because of the Holy Thing which had been passed down from the Patriarchs, Mary was the Only True Creation -- Spiritual and Pure and yet Material. Now, it is Protestants who want to cast Her as just another animal, and that is what doesn't work -- as you indicate. That is why the Catholics dug around and discerned the Immaculate Conception. Read Anne Catherine Emmerich -- it superimposes a lot of sense on the Old Testament that really isn't there, as is.

About the Original Monkey Men that Adam and Eve fell amongst. Most were killed off in The Flood. Besides, Christ dying in a Human Body -- being Sacrificed as a Human Body is what Spiritualized Humanity. It may not have saved each soul of its sins for all eternity, but it gave each Human Being a Spiritual Standing. Before the Crucifixion we were animals and not even worthy of God's consideration. After the Crucifixion we would be worthy of Judgment. I do know that the Crucifixion must have been good for something.

 

[Kidan]

hmm...but if you  read the OT as literal truth it does make sense, without the use of extra reading.

Scriptures do not need 'Extra' revealing.  While some may need a dictionary, everything there, is truly understandable.


No onto this metaphor of yours, actually your theory of no  physical bodies is more metaphorical than what Genesis actually says.  As well, does the stories of Abraham, Jacob and Isaac fall under your fully metaphorical Gensis, or do we have to read some other seer to find out which parts are metaphors and which  really happened.


Also, if Genesis was metaphorical, how do you know that Melchissedek was a real person, and not some random metaphor for wandering preists?  Also, if memory does serve, Melchissedek received a  tithe, but only gave a blessing in return.  Though of course, your 'Holy Thing' (as you so lovingly call it) could be that blessing, the Bible does say children are a blessing.   And it does bring to mind, if all these folks have been  playing with the 'Holy Thing' all those years, why didn't they give it to a girl prior to Anne so that the Christ child would have been born earlier?


No Heaven because of no dust?  Where on earth did that come from?  No, God gave us fine directions to the Garden of Eden, God said He formed man from the dust of the earth (which is quite true, as if u remove the water from our body, we're composed of about 5 dollars worth of chemicals commonly found in dirt).  No, the existance of Heaven, and a physical creation of  Adam and Eve have no bearin  on one another.

 

[Guest]

According to Webster's, the word "man" is also plural.
i suppose you have confused the scripture to say;"Let us make A man in our image". It does not say that.
it does say:"and let THEM" Gensis 1:26
But in any event it refers to the creation of Adam and Eve.
The daughters of man are those women of the line of Cain.
As THE SONS OF GOd ARE OF THE LINE OF SETH.
i am nothing0.
JESUS IS THE LORD1PRAISE THE LORD1THE LORD YESHUA. AMEN

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (adelpit346 @ Nov. 05 2003,11:47)]According to Webster's, the word "man" is also plural.
i suppose you have confused the scripture to say;"Let us make A man in our image". It does not say that.
it does say:"and let THEM" Gensis 1:26
But in any event it refers to the creation of Adam and Eve.
The daughters of man are those women of the line of Cain.
As THE SONS OF GOd ARE OF THE LINE OF SETH.
i am nothing0.
JESUS IS THE LORD1PRAISE THE LORD1THE LORD YESHUA. AMEN

man can = mankind, agreed.

Of course, God saying let us make man in our image implies that "God" is plural and has a body. Or he could be schitzophrenic.

Please tell me how you got that the "daughters of man" sprung from Cain's loins, while the "Sons of God" sprung from Seth.

Understand that if God told you that...please also explain why he failed to tell Pop, CC, Lion, and everybody else.

 

[CCGR]

there's a great site called answersingenesis.org the founder Ken Ham spoke at our church and answered many questions, he believes that it all cam from Adam and Eve no other men. Cain married one of his sisters (back when inbreeding was the only option!)

 

[mpty]

Whoa someone from answersingenesis came to my church just a few weeks ago and had a little seminar ... thing. Very interesting, but he talked without ANY pauses, which made the information hard to process... I'm really slow..