"Sons of God" in the OT always refers to the angelic host.
Nebuchadnezzar saw someone like the Son of God. Was that an angel?
"Sons of God" in the OT always refers to the angelic host.
Nebuchadnezzar saw someone like the Son of God. Was that an angel?
Nebuchadnezzar saw someone like the Son of God. Was that an angel?
You should not be teaching what the bible says.Nebuchadnezzar's buddy that gave this description was a pagan giving a description. When then Bible used the term "sons of God" in the OT, it always refers to the angelic host. It never refers to humans. The sons of God took wives and bred the Nephilim. They were human/angel hybrids. This is the ancient interpretation, and the obvious one. It is confirmed by extra Biblical texts like the Book of Enoch.
When then Bible used the term "sons of God" in the OT, it always refers to the angelic host. It never refers to humans.
Enos, Seth, Adam, God. (Luke 3:38)
What kind of angels were Enos, Seth, and Adam? Was God their father?
Luke 3:38. NIV
the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, (the son-s of God.)
The Hebrew word melakh means "messenger." Melakh never means angel.Nephilim translated means "Fallen ones." They were [men] who were of a very low moral grade. Fallen, as in falling from grace. No redeeming qualities.
The Hebrew word melakh means "messenger." Melakh never means angel.
Strong's defines malak this way:
H4397
מלאך
mal'âk
mal-awk'
From an unused root meaning to despatch as a deputy; a messenger; specifically of God, that is, an angel (also a prophet, priest or teacher): - ambassador, angel, king, messenger.
The Hebrew word melakh means "messenger." Melakh never means angel.
Doesn't the Greek word used in this case, Angelos mean 'messenger'?