Evidence for God from Science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List
The sumerian list has people like 42000 years old and stuff which really pushes it even for people who accept that Methusaleh was 969 yrs old.
I added all the dates up to the third one up from Aga and the reign turned out to be almost 260,000 years. Also interesting is that the flood took place i think about 7000 or so years before Aga (thought to be Gilgamesh).
These kings also had kingship given down from heaven, a common idea back in the day. Were these "gods" fallen angels who mated and the kings were actually nephilim?

I don't subscribe to the angel-hybrid theory; it relies on non-biblical sources, presuppositions, and a lot of sensationalism.

What I think is more likely:

https://paper.dropbox.com/doc/Who-Are-T ... Vrsj6N6JiE

SoCalExile wrote:I don't subscribe to the angel-hybrid theory; it relies on non-biblical sources, presuppositions, and a lot of sensationalism.

What I think is more likely:

https://paper.dropbox.com/doc/Who-Are-T ... Vrsj6N6JiE

That is reading INTO the bible, not reading it under the cultural context it was written in and too.

That "angels" mates with female humans ( Sons of God actually) was established up until second temple Judaism.
That was how Genesis 6 was understood and the only way all the other stuff ( references of Giants, dividing the nations between the sons of God, etc) made sense.

PaulSacramento wrote:
That "angels" mates with female humans ( Sons of God actually) was established up until second temple Judaism.
That was how Genesis 6 was understood and the only way all the other stuff ( references of Giants, dividing the nations between the sons of God, etc) made sense.

Are you suggesting the original kings and chiefs of the world were of supernatural origin?

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:
That "angels" mates with female humans ( Sons of God actually) was established up until second temple Judaism.
That was how Genesis 6 was understood and the only way all the other stuff ( references of Giants, dividing the nations between the sons of God, etc) made sense.

Are you suggesting the original kings and chiefs of the world were of supernatural origin?

I am not suggesting anything.
Deuteronomy 3: 28 says that God divided the nations and give them to the 70 sons.
This is a statement about the Tower of Babel.
Here is a link to the various translations:
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/D ... y%2032%3A8

The oldest translations say "sons of God".

It should be noted that there was NO ISRAEL at the time of division so a reading of people of Israel or sons of Israel or anything like that is incorrect.
Also, there are many passages that speak of Israel going out and worshiping gods that were not allotted to them:
Deuteronomy 29:26
Which makes no sense UNLESS the allotment was to "other gods".

PaulSacramento wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:
That "angels" mates with female humans ( Sons of God actually) was established up until second temple Judaism.
That was how Genesis 6 was understood and the only way all the other stuff ( references of Giants, dividing the nations between the sons of God, etc) made sense.

Are you suggesting the original kings and chiefs of the world were of supernatural origin?

I am not suggesting anything.
Deuteronomy 3: 28 says that God divided the nations and give them to the 70 sons.
This is a statement about the Tower of Babel.
Here is a link to the various translations:
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/D ... y%2032%3A8

The oldest translations say "sons of God".

It should be noted that there was NO ISRAEL at the time of division so a reading of people of Israel or sons of Israel or anything like that is incorrect.
Also, there are many passages that speak of Israel going out and worshiping gods that were not allotted to them:
Deuteronomy 29:26
Which makes no sense UNLESS the allotment was to "other gods".

How long ago was this supposed to happen? People give different dates, like 100K yrs, 4500 yrs, etc.

And were these Sons of God, or some of them, did reign literally on Earth? Ik the Prince of Persia wasn't, but did some do so in the past?

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List
The sumerian list has people like 42000 years old and stuff which really pushes it even for people who accept that Methusaleh was 969 yrs old.
I added all the dates up to the third one up from Aga and the reign turned out to be almost 260,000 years. Also interesting is that the flood took place i think about 7000 or so years before Aga (thought to be Gilgamesh).
These kings also had kingship given down from heaven, a common idea back in the day. Were these "gods" fallen angels who mated and the kings were actually nephilim?

Where do you think all of the false god's came from? Like all of the hindu god's,etc they were Nephilim worshipped as god's and their off-spring the giants were worshipped as God's too like Zeus,Hercules,Mercury,Saturn,Atlas,etc,these were giants. Truth is stranger than fiction and the people worshipped these Nephilim and their hybrid offspring as god's. This is the best explanation for all of the false god's too from a biblical perspective. Also Jesus said it would be as in the days of Noah when the son of man returns and everybody focuses on violence,etc but leaves out how Nephlim came down to the earth mingled with women and produced hybrid off-spring and so we should expect it to return as in the days of Noah in the last days.Also those extra biblical sources line up with what the bible already teaches about Nephilim.But even if you reject those sources the bible still teaches about Nephilim and how they will return in the last days. Jude 1:6-7

PaulSacramento wrote:

SoCalExile wrote:I don't subscribe to the angel-hybrid theory; it relies on non-biblical sources, presuppositions, and a lot of sensationalism.

What I think is more likely:

https://paper.dropbox.com/doc/Who-Are-T ... Vrsj6N6JiE

That is reading INTO the bible, not reading it under the cultural context it was written in and too.

That "angels" mates with female humans ( Sons of God actually) was established up until second temple Judaism.
That was how Genesis 6 was understood and the only way all the other stuff ( references of Giants, dividing the nations between the sons of God, etc) made sense.

Yes, you're correct Paul. Saying that angels and humans mated, is reading INTO the Bible, something the text just doesn't say. Not to mention, it goes against natural order, as Kurieuo has already pointed out.

Thanks for pointing out the eisegesis people must use, to read angels and humans mated.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List
The sumerian list has people like 42000 years old and stuff which really pushes it even for people who accept that Methusaleh was 969 yrs old.
I added all the dates up to the third one up from Aga and the reign turned out to be almost 260,000 years. Also interesting is that the flood took place i think about 7000 or so years before Aga (thought to be Gilgamesh).
These kings also had kingship given down from heaven, a common idea back in the day. Were these "gods" fallen angels who mated and the kings were actually nephilim?

Where do you think all of the false god's came from? Like all of the hindu god's,etc they were Nephilim worshipped as god's and their off-spring the giants were worshipped as God's too like Zeus,Hercules,Mercury,Saturn,Atlas,etc,these were giants. Truth is stranger than fiction and the people worshipped these Nephilim and their hybrid offspring as god's. This is the best explanation for all of the false god's too from a biblical perspective. Also Jesus said it would be as in the days of Noah when the son of man returns and everybody focuses on violence,etc but leaves out how Nephlim came down to the earth mingled with women and produced hybrid off-spring and so we should expect it to return as in the days of Noah in the last days.Also those extra biblical sources line up with what the bible already teaches about Nephilim.But even if you reject those sources the bible still teaches about Nephilim and how they will return in the last days. Jude 1:6-7

I thought that for some, for others they were false versions of God (think Allah of Islam), fallen angels, good angels or heroic humans who later got thought worthy of worship, or just imaginations.

You guys are making arguments for the angel-hybrid theory that have already been addressed in my first post. Jude isn't equating fallen angels to the nephilim, and "sons of God" is a term used for all those of faith, angelic and human.

SoCalExile wrote:You guys are making arguments for the angel-hybrid theory that have already been addressed in my first post. Jude isn't equating fallen angels to the nephilim, and "sons of God" is a term used for all those of faith, angelic and human.

Well what strange flesh were the angels going after that Jude talks about?Was it sexual because it really seems to imply it is sexual in nature and especially when it mentions Sodom and Gomorrah and we know it was sexual there.So if "angels going after strange flesh" is not sexual then what does it mean? Do you accept the book of Enoch? Because I have heard that it confirms fallen angels producing hybrid offspring with human women and Nephilim were the off-spring.Also can you show where the term "sons of God"
applies to man too and not just angels?

RickD wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

SoCalExile wrote:I don't subscribe to the angel-hybrid theory; it relies on non-biblical sources, presuppositions, and a lot of sensationalism.

What I think is more likely:

https://paper.dropbox.com/doc/Who-Are-T ... Vrsj6N6JiE

That is reading INTO the bible, not reading it under the cultural context it was written in and too.

That "angels" mates with female humans ( Sons of God actually) was established up until second temple Judaism.
That was how Genesis 6 was understood and the only way all the other stuff ( references of Giants, dividing the nations between the sons of God, etc) made sense.

Yes, you're correct Paul. Saying that angels and humans mated, is reading INTO the Bible, something the text just doesn't say. Not to mention, it goes against natural order, as Kurieuo has already pointed out.

Thanks for pointing out the eisegesis people must use, to read angels and humans mated.

You misunderstood Rick.
The Sons of God mating with humans is what is stated in Genesis 6.
The oldest translations state that, explicitly.
It was the common view up to and during the second temple Judaism.
You can NOT make the Sons of God mean "sons of Man" or sons of Israel" or anything else without changing the actual wording AND meaning.
To take the sons of god as being human males in Genesis 6 throws off all the other mentions of them in the bible (like Job)
It throws of the natural reading of why the flood happened, the "contamination" of the nations that Israel had to battle and creates a pretty big mess to be honest.
As for Natural order, One can argue that Jesus' mention of angels not marrying IN HEAVEN is just that, what happens in Heaven and, to add to that, breaking natural order is kind of the whole issue in Genesis 6 and why punishment had to come.

The only reason the change the meaning of sons of god to something else is to avoid the supernatural element and one should ask themselves WHY they have an issue with the supernatural in the bible.

SoCalExile wrote:You guys are making arguments for the angel-hybrid theory that have already been addressed in my first post. Jude isn't equating fallen angels to the nephilim, and "sons of God" is a term used for all those of faith, angelic and human.

Jude is not saying that the Nephilim are fallen angles because they are not, they are the result of mating between the Sons of God and human females, which according to the Book of Watchers (1Enoch), which Jude is quoting, are the result of the divine sons of god going against God orders and mating with humans ( and doing other things as well).

The world view of the pre and during second temple judaism was that the nations were under control of other gods ( like the prince of persia in Daniel for example, and the "prince of this world" mantioned so many times in the NT).
This is stated in the writings outside the OT and NT of the time, just as it is implied ( and at times explicitly stated in the OT) in the NT and OT.

thatkidakayoungguy wrote:And were these Sons of God, or some of them, did reign literally on Earth? Ik the Prince of Persia wasn't, but did some do so in the past?

According to Daniel, the prince of Persia was a divine being, certainly more than human.
The prohibitions against worshiping other Gods would be pretty silly if they didn't exist.
The prohibition to worship a god not allotted to Israel would be pretty silly of other gods didn't exist.
The prohibition to have no other gods before GOD would be pretty silly if no other gods existed.
I don't think they actually ruled on Earth physically ( though they may have), but I think they ruled via influencing human rulers.
Remember this part:
Psalm 82English Standard Version (ESV)

Rescue the Weak and Needy
A Psalm of Asaph.

82 God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:
2 “How long will you judge unjustly
and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
3 Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
4 Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
5 They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
they walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
6 I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
7 nevertheless, like men you shall die,
and fall like any prince.”[a]
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth;
for you shall inherit all the nations!

Pretty silly to to say to a human that they will die like normal humans unless there was an option for them NOT to die.

This was a statement against the sons of god that ruled the 70 nations and would be tried ( Remember Paul's mention that we would judge the angels?) and found wanting and be punished as humans.