SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Who are the sons, what is the devil doing there?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread
ZekeO
Member



Joined: 2004/7/4
Posts: 1014
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

 Who are the sons, what is the devil doing there?

There is this scripture in Job 1:66Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.Does anyone have any ideas as to what is going on here?

Who were the sons of God?
Why did satan join them before God?

p.s. This is the KJV of this scripture, the NIV has 'angels' instead of 'sons of God'.


_________________
Zeke Oosthuis

 2005/10/17 1:18Profile
Warrior4Jah
Member



Joined: 2005/7/5
Posts: 382
The Netherlands

 Re: Who are the sons, what is the devil doing there?

The sons of God are angels so far I know.
That satan came along only means that he's an angel.
I heard this at a study at a biblecamp that there was a time where every angel (fallen or not) had to present themselves before God. satan is not more powerfull then God so he has to obey. :-)


_________________
Jonathan Veldhuis

 2005/10/17 2:38Profile
letsgetbusy
Member



Joined: 2004/9/28
Posts: 957
Cleveland, Georgia

 Re:

I agree with Warrior.

Sons of God = Angels

Satan = Fallen Angel

Job 1:6 is one of the instances that shows God created Satan and all the other angels, and commands and uses them whether they are fallen or holy angels.

Other Scriptures about these fallen angels are Gen 6:2, 2 Peter 2:4, and Jude 1:6.

The assembling of the angels before God shows they are still accountable to Him, and that even though they are given the ability to try us, they still can only do what God gives them the ability to do.


_________________
Hal Bachman

 2005/10/17 22:42Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
The assembling of the angels before God shows they are still accountable to Him, and that even though they are given the ability to try us, they still can only do what God gives them the ability to do.


a valuable reminder, thanks.
Rev. 6:4 (KJVS) And there went out another horse that was red: and [u]power was given to him[/u] that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.
Rev. 6:8 (KJVS) And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And [u]power was given unto them[/u] over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.
Rev. 7:2 (KJVS) And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, [u]to whom it was given to hurt[/u] the earth and the sea,
Rev. 9:3 (KJVS) And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and [u]unto them was given power[/u], as the scorpions of the earth have power. There is mystery here, but that "God is on His throne" is the core message of the Revelation.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/10/18 11:20Profile
ZekeO
Member



Joined: 2004/7/4
Posts: 1014
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

 Humble beginnings of error

Quote:

There is mystery here, but that "God is on His throne" is the core message of the Revelation.

Who said anything about a mystery. 8-)

In regards to the angles and the sons of God. The reason that it struck me so is because many consider the the KJV the standard for bible interpretation/translation. So if this version says 'sons of God' why would the NIV say angels if it is a less than accurate version? :-?

So maybe to rephrase the question, which is the best rendering of this verse? I can see how the mormons can use the KJV of the scripture to come up with the crazy idea that Jesus and the Devil are brothers, and all the stuff about the Nephilim.

If anyone wants any example of how far someone can go by taking parts of scripture and building a house out of it, that is it.


_________________
Zeke Oosthuis

 2005/10/22 5:40Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re: Humble beginnings of error

Quote:
Who said anything about a mystery.

The mystery is that God gives creatures the empowerment to do 'wicked' things. eg. the prodigal could not have gone to the 'far country' without his father's enabling. :-)

Quote:
and all the stuff about the Nephilim.

I am not endorsing all that the Mormon's say as I am not sure what they do say, but many Bible students over the centuries have believed that the 'sons of God' from Gen 6 were rebellious angels. The OT uses the phrase 'sons of God' very infrequently...Gen. 6:2 (KJVS) That [u]the sons of God[/u] saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Gen. 6:4 (KJVS) There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when [u]the sons of God[/u] 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.
Job 1:6 (KJVS) Now there was a day when [u]the sons of God[/u] came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
Job 2:1 (KJVS) Again there was a day when [u]the sons of God[/u] came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.
Job 38:7 (KJVS) When the morning stars sang together, and all [u]the sons of God[/u] shouted for joy? There can be little doubt about who the Job references relate to. In fact, the LXX ([url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=954&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go]Septuagint[/url]) translators built their answer into their translation, translating the phrase 'sons of God' as 'angels' throughout the Job references. The NIV is similarly making up your mind for you (a fairly persistent habit of that translation). The translators are not translating here but interpreting. I would prefer to know what it says and do my 'own' interpreting! ;-) The KJV is more literal here; 'ben elohim' = 'sons of God'.

It is a very old fashioned view and one which I dislike in many ways, but I am forced to interpret the 'sons of God' in Genesis or Nephilim (fallen ones) as rebellious angels. And consequently to interpret Gen 6 as a rebellious union between angels and human women. There you are... you always knew I was a dinosaur didn't you?

My interpretation of the early Job verses would be that God does require a 'regular account' of those that he has empowered and that their empowerment is within carefully defined parameters.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/10/22 10:17Profile
dohzman
Member



Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132


 Re:

It's interesting to note that satan had to give account also in the Job scriptures you referenced.


_________________
D.Miller

 2005/10/22 11:26Profile









 Re: Who are the sons, what is the devil doing there?

I think I've missed something in the translation here...

What is the linguistic or otherwise basis for translating 'sons of God' to mean [i]angels[/i]?

We know that Job was an Elamite

Genesis 10:22
The children of Shem; Elam, and Asshur, and Arphaxad, and Lud, and Aram.

and that God was still appearing to man in

Exodus 24
10 And they saw the God of Israel: and under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in clearness.
11 And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.
12 And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount,...

so what is the basis for assuming that the 'sons of God' were [u]not[/u] on earth... and therefore angels? Earth, after all, is where Satan had been spending his time... Let's face it, there's no way he could have appeared in God's presence without God noticing, because of the attitude he brought with him.

And there is

Luke 3:38
Which was [the son] of Enos, which was [the son] of Seth, which was [the son] of [b]Adam, which was [the son] [u]of God[/u][/b].

Now that I've written this, I see '[son of]' - which is not in the original. Still, my other questions stand, please.

OK. So I'm suggesting there is an underlying assumption that God was not on earth when the 'sons of God' assembled in His presence, which has led translators to believe 'sons of God' must be angels.

Can this assumption be justified?

 2005/10/24 22:10
dohzman
Member



Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132


 Re:

'ben elohim' = 'sons of God'

In scripture thats only used for angels, the reference Ron gave was from Gen. and Job




Do you have Albert Barnes notes on the bible? or any other commentary? that might be helpful.
From what I've read 'ben elohim' is not used when it refers to human beings. When I had read what Ron had put down I had an explosion of understanding on satan having to give account or answer to God. That's what my comments were mainly of.


_________________
D.Miller

 2005/10/24 22:27Profile









 Re: Who are the sons, what is the devil doing there?

I must admit I tend to look the whole way across scripture for consistency, regardless of what commentaries say.

There is no other place where it is suggested that angels are God's 'sons' and that worries me, because the link between man being in His image, and the only begotten Son of the Father being made Flesh so irrevocably connects God with man, that I feel very resistant to the idea 'sons of God' could ever mean angels. And I want to give it a good fight before capitulating - if you know what I mean.

There is also a clear separation at the beginning of Hebrews, between angels and man and the idea that angels (fallen) and women had children is just nonsense.

To me, there is more sense in thinking the phrase is linked to Adam being breathed into by God and Eve being taken out of Adam's side, as an explanation for the separation 'sons of God' and 'daughters of men'. But, I can't justify that thought from translation - it just makes sense to my understanding.

With due respect to venerable translators, you can all laugh now :-P

Daryl,

Nothing I've said militates against Satan having to make an account to God. My points are simply that there was a time when God was with man without a tabernacle and that the assumption God was in heaven [i]above the earth[/i], is just that - an assumption - and this means that if the sons of God were actually human, then their having children with the daughters of men makes much more sense and doesn't interfere with any other premise in scripture.

Satan's appearance in the presence of God, in the company of [i]men[/i] (sons of God), is what he has been doing from the beginning, and ties in with several other scriptures. We know he can make himself look like anything from a serpent to an angel of light, so why not a man? - but, God would have 'recognised' him.

Quote:
It is a very old fashioned view and one which I dislike in many ways, but I am forced to interpret the 'sons of God' in Genesis or Nephilim (fallen ones) as rebellious angels.

Ron,

Are you able to elaborate on why 'fallen ones' [u]has to[/u] refer to [i]angels[/i] and [i]not[/i] Adam's descendants? Thank you.

 2005/10/25 0:07





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy