Who are the Sons of God?

[Christ4Ever]

Whether you believe in them or not, at least the faith or unbelief of their existence does not undermine or confirm one's salvation.

Yes, not a salvation issue .More of how can we hear the voice of Christ rightly dividing the parables. The comparing of the temporal historical things seen to the eternal gospel of faith not seen the spiritual understanding hid from men

Parables, which without Christ spoke not. They teach us how to walk after the eternal not seen of faith rather than the temporal seen.

The recipe for every Bible study

2 Corinthians 4:18While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal(historical) ; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

You wanted proof, and I have given you from the words of Jesus that proof concerning angels or the Greek aggeloi. I can only assume you don't believe what He said to be true, but only a parable. Is this correct?

Now in your quote of what I stated about the faith or unbelief of angels not being a salvation issue, you make the implication that all that Jesus spoke in were parables (bolded/underlined above in your quote) and that what Jesus said in Matthew 18:10 was a parable or are you saying that He didn't say what is found in that verse from the rest of what you wrote?

I have asked you two questions, because the implication of what you wrote as statements really needs clarification.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Garee]

I just presented only scripture, and what the Greek could mean in translation from Strongs.
It's up to you on whether to believe what Jesus said or not, also according to scripture.
You are not arguing with me but with what Jesus said. To me anyway, that's a no-win situation, but you make your own decisions.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

Thanks for the reply

Not the most popular personnel commentary as an opinion but seems to ring out when compared to His living word .

Can these so-called angels take on form as a theophany?

Beginning with the apostle in Genesis, Abel sets the standard for all apostles "sent messenger" (not angel)

No such thing as apostolical succession, or apostolical time period. The abomination of desolation. The idea of thinking of dying mankind puffed above that which is written (sola scriptura) is a wile of the evil one (1 Corinthians 4:6)

Abel sent by God, the second born is used to represent that mankind must be born again from above the spiritual seed, Christ. Abel the first apostle sent messenger and martyr, his blood like that of all apostles' prophets cries out for the new promised incorruptible body the bride.

Genesis 4:8And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

The second born again seed was passed on for 28 generations and fulfilled with Jesus the Son of man. The first born again Son of God.

God replaced born again Abel with Enos another second born used to represent the gospel law "a man must be born from above"

Only after it was established that mankind must be born again . . . then they were empowered to call on the Lord.

Genesis 4:25And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Not the most popular personnel commentary as an opinion but seems to ring out when compared to His living word .

Can these so-called angels take on form as a theophany?

Beginning with the apostle in Genesis, Abel sets the standard for all apostles "sent messenger" (not angel)

Each mention of messenger in scripture must be taken individually with context, then expanded to greater context.
As far as "these so-called angels" taking on a tangible form I'd have to say yes.

If you take a look at 2 Kings 19:35, and read the entirety of this story that surrounds this event recorded in the OT, you must conclude this was not a human, though who it was according to the Hebrew; mal'āḵ - מַלְאָךְ they could be.

מֲלְאָךְ mălʼâk, mal-awk'; from an unused root meaning to despatch as a deputy; a messenger; specifically, of God, i.e. an angel (also a prophet, priest or teacher):—ambassador, angel, king, messenger.

Knowing that it could even apply to messenger, prophet, priest, teacher, etc. The context of the surrounding evident is very important. I would just not add to what is not evident in this story, i.e., malady, natural occurrence, etc.

You can also reference Isaiah 37:36-38 and 2 Chronicles 32:20-23 that also speaks to this evident.

Now maybe you could use "Sons of God", "Heavenly Host' ec., instead of the word angels. Your choice, but from what I can see they were beyond the abilities of humanity at the time of their appearances and any of the terms I mentioned including angels would fit the description of a creation that is other than humanity as we now are.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[th1bill]

Each mention of messenger in scripture must be taken individually with context, then expanded to greater context.
As far as "these so-called angels" taking on a tangible form I'd have to say yes.

If you take a look at 2 Kings 19:35, and read the entirety of this story that surrounds this event recorded in the OT, you must conclude this was not a human, though who it was according to the Hebrew; mal'āḵ - מַלְאָךְ they could be.

מֲלְאָךְ mălʼâk, mal-awk'; from an unused root meaning to despatch as a deputy; a messenger; specifically, of God, i.e. an angel (also a prophet, priest or teacher):—ambassador, angel, king, messenger.

Knowing that it could even apply to messenger, prophet, priest, teacher, etc. The context of the surrounding evident is very important. I would just not add to what is not evident in this story, i.e., malady, natural occurrence, etc.

You can also reference Isaiah 37:36-38 and 2 Chronicles 32:20-23 that also speaks to this evident.

Now maybe you could use "Sons of God", "Heavenly Host' ec., instead of the word angels. Your choice, but from what I can see they were beyond the abilities of humanity at the time of their appearances and any of the terms I mentioned including angels would fit the description of a creation that is other than humanity as we now are.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

This is great to study and informative but we must also remember that in Heaven we, men and women, will be like the Angels and from the entire context of Scripture I cannot find a single instance of Spiritual Beings reproducing, save Yahovah impregnating Mary and evenj there, there was no sex.

I perceive that Angels take on Human Form only when they are dispatched by the Heavenly Father. This is a very difficult part of Scripture to teach.

Bill Taylor
Killer Spade 806, 1969