63rd Street Christian Congregation

Answering the Skeptics -- July 23, 2007 -- Genesis 6:1-2 What the scriptures say:
�And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.�

The Skeptics Complaint:
John 3:16 and other verses say God has only 1 Son.
�For God so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son��

The Answer:
First we will address the only son, and then we will answer two more questions, this brings up.
God does only have one begotten son. �Begotten is the Greek word �monogenes� which means �only born�. �John 3:16 is talking about Jesus.
Let�s take a look at the question �Who are the Sons of God in Genesis 6:2?� �In doing this we will actually address all the other scriptures in the Bible which refer to the Son�s of God (plural).
I looked at 12 translations of this verse and they all say sons of God, except one which says God�s sons. �This leads us to believe that there was not a mistake; Moses actually did say God had multiple sons. �So who are they?
In Job 1:6 and 2:1-7 the phrase is obviously talking about angels. �Hosea 1:10 uses the phrase �sons of the Living God� referring to the people of God. �The phrase is used multiple times in the New Testament referring to those of us who have accepted Christ and have been baptized and saved. �The phrase is used in its singular form 37 times referring to Jesus Christ. �Finally, it is used 1 time in its singular form, in the New Testament referring to Adam (Luke 3:38).
So, the possibilities in short form:
� ��Angels
� ��The People of God
� ��Christians
� ��Jesus Christ
� ��Adam
We know the phrase is not talking about Adam or Jesus Christ because the phrase is plural. �Christians cannot be the answer because at this point in time the current plan of salvation was not existent. �Jesus throws out the possibility of Angels in Matthew 22:30 when he says:
�For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in Heaven.� �
Genesis says that these sons of God married, so they could not possibly be Angels since Angels cannot marry. �
This leaves the People of God. �Depending on how you use this title, you are correct. �Usually this refers to the Israelites or the Jews. �This would not be correct. �To determine how we can use this phrase/title correctly we have to answer another question; �Who are the daughters of men?�
It would appear to me that the daughters of men are not the sons of God, that is, they are different (other than gender). �When someone or a group of people are associated with God, they are usually put in higher regards, or are seen as very significant. �Look back in Genesis 5 when Moses recorded the lives of all the founding generations. �When it came to the end of everyone�s life, Moses recorded them as having lived �X� amount of years and then they died. �In Enoch�s case Moses said he �walked with the Lord.� �It is worded like to this to imply significance. �So who are the daughters of men? �They are simply the descendants of Cain. �The sons of God would then be the descendants of Seth. �Remember, the descendants of Cain are generally thought to be the symbol of all things Evil or Ungodly. �The descendants of Seth bring forth all of God�s people. �You can trace Jesus back to Abraham, and Abraham back to Seth.

Conclusion:
Basically there are different uses for the phrase Son(s) of God. �Understanding the context surrounding each instance will help you better understand who the writer is referring too. �You can safely say that Jesus was and is the only Son of God. �The rest of us are God�s creation, and have been adopted into the family. �Consider this, a single mother of 1 and a single father of 3 marries each other. �They together have 4 kids, but the mother still only has 1 child of her own, and the father still only has 3 children of his own (biologically). �The point, Jesus is God�s biological (the closest word in our language) Son. �There is not a contradiction here.