How do you at WLC not see that your Nephilm interpretation is in error? Print

Question/Comment:

The video recently released by WLC about Nephilim and the sons of YHWH in the bible is of big concern to us. Can you not see clearly who the sons of YHWH are? They remain the same, forever.

Your video message is the most backward understanding of this topic we have heard and the subject appears to have not been given the attention, consideration or level of bible study and research we look for as a standard from WLC when addressing bible topics, spiritual understandings and the word of YHWH. Please revisit this matter and we pray that our father YHWH reveals to you the true identity of his sons spoken of in Genesis and Job. The sons of YHWH have been made higher that the angels. (Hebrews 1:4)

We know that all of creation praises YHWH. That includes the stars, the sun and the moon. We know that when it comes to man, what makes one a "Son of YHWH" is the same today as it was in the time of Noah, and forever. Our father YHWH has never called any angel his son. Also, remember the word "son" is a title that show position not a personal name (Hebrews 1:4-6).

Answer/Response:

Greetings, beloved, and peace be unto you from Yahuwah our Father, and from the Master Yahushua, the Anointed.

May we ask kindly who you believe the sons of Elohim are in Genesis 6 and in Job? Who were the sons of Elohim that shouted for joy when the foundations of the earth were being laid (before anything/anyone else was yet made)? Who were the sons of Elohim that came in to the daughters of men [H120/Adam] and fathered giants?

If one proposes that the sons of Elohim were Yahuwah's faithful men, then one must posit that men existed before day 6 of creation (Job 38:7 / Gen.1:26-31). One must also posit that Yah-fearing men and worldly woman, when joined together, will have giant children.
If one proposes that the sons of Elohim were the descendants of Seth (as popular theology teaches today), then an endless number of issues arise. See: How can you be certain that the sons of Elohim in Genesis 6 are not the sons of Seth?
If one proposes that the sons of Elohim were the celestial bodies, then one must posit that the celestial bodies procreated with the daughters of men and had offspring. This is, of course, ridiculous.
If one proposes that sometimes the sons of Elohim are men and sometimes they are the celestial bodies, then the entire meaning of language and context is destroyed.

It must be stressed that Genesis 6 is contrasting earthly woman (daughters of Adam/H120) with the sons of Elohim (B'nai HaElohim). The offspring of this union were nephilim/giants. (The coming together of those with differing religious views does not produce giants. That is to say that the intimate union of a Yah-fearing man and an unbelieving/wicked woman does not result in the woman giving birth to giants.) Much more could be said about this, but we trust that you will take the time to prayerfully review all of the material offered at WLC and elsewhere on the subject.

Note: Hebrews 1, in context, is referring to Yahushua's elevated status as the only begotten Son of the Father.

"Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?"

The above text in no way negates Moses' consistent use of the expression "sons of Elohim" to denote angels (Genesis 6:2; Genesis 6:4; Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Job 38:7). All Scripture must be allowed to speak before we settle on a conclusion. The weight of evidence must have the final say.

It is our prayer that you will kindly take the time to study all of the available material before committing to a position from which you refuse to be moved.

Incidentally, there is nothing new about this interpretation. It wasn't until the 5th century AD¹ that men began trying to twist the Scriptures to get away from the angelic incursion interpretation.

"For many angels of [Elohim] accompanied with women, and begat sons that proved unjust, and despisers of all that was good, on account of the confidence they had in their own strength; for the tradition is, that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants." Flavius Josephus (First Century Historian), Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3, 1.3.1, http://www.biblestudytools.com/history/flavius-josephus/antiquities-jews/book-1/chapter-3.html)

"And it came to pass when there began to be many men upon the earth, that daughters also were born to Them. . . . And when the angels of [Elohim] saw the daughters of men that they were beautiful, they took unto themselves wives of all of them whom they Chose." The Works of Philo Judaeus (First Century Historian), On the Giants, http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/book9.html

In this, as in all studies, we must follow the evidence wherever it leads. Yahuwah bless you and keep you, as you daily commit yourself to His care.

¹"It was in the 5th century a.d. that the "angel" interpretation of Genesis 6 was increasingly viewed as an embarrassment when attacked by critics. . . . Celsus and Julian the Apostate used the traditional "angel" belief to attack Christianity. Julius Africanus resorted to the Sethite interpretation as a more comfortable ground. Cyril of Alexandria also repudiated the orthodox "angel" position with the "line of Seth" interpretation. Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages.^"(Chuck Missler, Textual Controversy: Mischievous Angels or Sethites?, http://www.khouse.org/articles/1997/110/.)