|
Author |
Message |
Admin
Administrator
Posts: 1227
Registered: Dec 2004 |
 Posted March 24th, 2005 01:11 PM IP   
Quote:
Genesis 6 ;
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, whomsoever they chose |
Who were these sons of God ?
Were these Angels ?
Rick 
Kenilworth #29 Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
|
|
    |
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 27th, 2005 01:48 AM IP
You are winding us up surely
It is easily resolved recognising the word translated as god is Elohim.
Elohim derives from Ilu (sumerian) for tall ones - the gods were tall - Osiris 17 feet tall. And was El Elyon, the tallest of the tall - the most high?
And the real word is Eloha (tall females) with the male ending -im hence gods and goddesses.
Interestingly Eloha is Aleph, Lamed, Heh, Aleph - ALHA - no god but Allah.
So the sons of the gods were half breed of the Elohim and the bred worker (lulu) and funnily enough were giants.
Read Epic of Gilgamesh or THe 12th Planet for more details of how it was that Elohim could breed with the lulu.
And it was not only the males breeding with lulu females, it was also the females with human males else we could not be sons of the widow.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 27th, 2005 10:43 AM IP
Quote:
Admin wrote:
Who were these sons of God ?
Were these Angels ?
Rick
|
Weird topic that I've never found a definitive answer to.
Depending on who's explanation you read, they could be:
Angels
Fallen Angels
A more advanced race of human(Sumerians, etc.)
Aliens who genetically engineered homo sapiens
I'm more inclined to believing the 3rd. 
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted March 27th, 2005 12:18 PM IP
17 foot tall Gods and Goddesses is a bit difficult to accept, and I'm not into angels, fallen or otherwise, neither am I prepared to accept aliens, at least not yet.
Height is relative to the size of the behokder. A six foot man would be a giant to a dwarf, for instance. I beleive that the early humans were quite small in stature, so it wouldn't be necessary to be 17 feet tall to be a giant.
I'm in favour of the advanced race theory, it seems more logical than the other outlandish theories.
Well I did say that I was a skeptic
S&F
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 27th, 2005 07:45 PM IP
Quote:
russellholland wrote:
And the real word is Eloha (tall females) with the male ending -im hence gods and goddesses.
|
hmmm...I always believed the reason for the use of the word Elohim was to reflect the understanding of the dual nature(male/female) of G-d.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 27th, 2005 09:10 PM IP
Quote:
skiendhu wrote:
Height is relative to the size of the behokder. A six foot man would be a giant to a dwarf, for instance.
|
Good point.
I've also got a sneaking suspicion, that with the peculiarities of the written Hebrew language, the word translated "giants" may not necessarily have anything to do w/ physical size.
If my Hebrew wasn't so limited, I might be able to confirm that.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted March 28th, 2005 10:26 AM IP
Quote
Dave Mavity wrote
the word translated "Giants" may not necessarily have anything to do W/ physical size.
Several different languages made up the documents that eventually became the bible. They were translated and interpreted by scholars of the early Roman Church. I have no doubt that many mistakes were made during that early translation and interpretation.
It would be foolish to accept everything that's written in the bible as we know it, at face value
S&F
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
Admin
Administrator
Posts: 1227
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted March 28th, 2005 08:30 PM IP
Maybe the Sons Of God were aliens that crashed
on the planet.
So they were stranded and starting
mating with us little people...........
My theory..............
Rick 
Kenilworth #29 Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 29th, 2005 05:10 AM IP
skiendhu
I suggest you pick any Egyptian depiction of Osiris that shows him with people. You may see that when he is seated his head is level with that of those standing. Look at the size of his feet compared with the pharaoh in the picture.
But perhaps the artists were all rather polite and did not wish to offend him by portraying him as small.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted March 29th, 2005 11:34 AM IP
Quote
Br. Russell wrote
But perhaps the artists were all rather polite and did not wish to offend him by portraying him as small
And there you have it. We tend to portray our deities, or people that we look up to, as being larger than life, but if we step back and take a good look, we usually find that we all have the same number of arms and legs, and we are all pretty much the same.
I'm quite happy to accept that Osiris was a big man/deity, but 17 ft?
S&F
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted March 29th, 2005 02:51 PM IP
Further to my last post, I am aquainted with the highly improbable tale of Osiris and Isis, and no doubt there is an esoteric explanation for it.
Never the less, one has to wonder why there was such huge people then, but not now.
The tallest woman in the world today lives in Holland and is a mere 7 feet tall. Add another 2 feet to that for the tallest man, and all you get is 9 feet.
I don't beleive that in the history of this planet, that there ever existed human beings who were as tall as the wild imaginings of the artists and historians say there was.
S&F
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 29th, 2005 04:50 PM IP
Quote:
skiendhu wrote:
Further to my last post, I am aquainted with the highly improbable tale of Osiris and Isis, and no doubt there is an esoteric explanation for it. |
Real simple, Bro..- an allegory illustrating Diety manifesting in a triune nature. Esotericism isn't always that complicated...
Quote:
Never the less, one has to wonder why there was such huge people then, but not now. |
Yeah, I'm sticking with the more advanced race theory.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
dbweinberg
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted March 29th, 2005 10:16 PM IP
Quote:
Admin wrote:
Who were these sons of God ?
Were these Angels ?
Rick
|
To get back to the original (since it's certainly took an odd turn )
The Stone translation of the quoted passage:
Quote:
(1)And it came to pass when Man began to increase upon the ground and daughters were born to them (2) the sons of the rulers saw that the daughers of man were good and they took themselves wives from whomever they chose. |
The marginalia notes: "These were the sons of the princes and judges, for elohim always implies rulership (Rashi). Daughters of man refers to the general populace (R' Saadiah Gaon)"
As for the Nephilim, the marginalia states they were giants, and to refer to Numbers 13:33.
(Edited for bad spellings)
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted March 31st, 2005 05:24 AM IP
Come on guys. You need to read more widely. Try these Australian finds:
• Bathurst, Australia... In fossil in the 1930's deposits found around Bathurst from a depth of 6 feet below the surface a fossil lower back molae tooth was found. The owner would have been at least 25 ft. tall.
Also found were huge stone artifacts -- clubs, pounders, adzes, chisels, knives and hand axes all of tremendous weight, scattered over a wide area weighing from 8 to 25 pounds, implements which only men of tremendous proportions could possibly have made and used. Estimates for the actual size of these men range from 10 to 12 feet tall and over, weighing from 500 to 600 lbs.
• At Gympie, Queensland, a large fragment of the back portion of a jaw which still possessed the hollow for a missing lower back molar tooth was discovered. The owner of the tooth would have stood at 10 feet tall.
• Blue Mountain In the Megalong Valley in the Blue Mountains NSW, a depression found in ironstone protruding from a creek bank was the deeply impressed print of a large human-like foot. This footprint measures 7 inches across the toes. Had the footprint been complete it would have been at least 2 feet in length, appropriate to a 12 foot human. The largest footprint found on the Blue Mountains must have belonged to a man 20 feet tall!
• Mulgoa A set of 3 huge footprints was discovered near Mulgoa, south of Penrith, N.S.W. The prints, each measuring 2 ft 7 inches across the toes, are 6 ft. apart, indicating the stride of the 12 ft. giant who left them.
• Macleay River Noel Reeves found near Kempsey, N.S.W. monstrous footprints were discovered in sandstone beds on the Upper Macleay River. One print shows toe 4 inches long and the total toe-span is 10 inches suggesting that the owner of the print may have been 17 feet tall.
Try:
http://www.s8int.com/giants6.html
http://www.stangrist.com/giants.htm
http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/p...iant.femur.html
http://www.returnofthenephilim.com/...sInHistory.html
And it might seem obvious if ancient Egytians built very large monuments with very large stones that they themselves may have been very large.
"there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamed of in your philosophy" Shakespeare - Hamlet.
I'm with Shakespeare on this one.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted April 1st, 2005 06:11 PM IP
Ah!Br. Russell, now you've set me a task that will probably take me a year to complete.
Interesting looking sites which I've just scanned through at the moment, but I intend to take a closer look.
Off the top ofmy head I will venture this much.
Tall people in many tribes throughout the world is not unknown, but they are tall people not giants.
I t seems peculiar to me that all of a sudden there are web sites talking and showing pictures of huge bones etc. that were discovered decades ago, and yet I've never heard mention of them before now.
So before I start reading, I'm already doubting their authenticity.
However, time will tell.
S&F
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted April 2nd, 2005 10:07 PM IP
Skiendhu
There has been vast editing of archeological findings as any examination of Eqyptian conventional history will demonstrate. This of course parallels the editing of history of the last millennium.
If you are interesteding in pursuing it further try: Forbidden Archeology by Micheal Cremo. http://www.mcremo.com/
Many manufactured artifacts have been discovered in rock layers up to 200 million years old.
From memory the oldest apparently manufactured objects are in geological layers a billion years old.
But then our history of civilised life is only 10 000 years.
Could it be that our history is veiled in allegory.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted April 2nd, 2005 10:12 PM IP
And there is evidence - artifacts - from very small people. E.g shoes 2 inches long made of rat skin with wear marks on the heel and very small hand axes from flint.
I'm still with Shakespeare.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
Admin
Administrator
Posts: 1227
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted April 7th, 2005 10:47 PM IP
Quote:
6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God 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.
|
The average life span of man was 120yrs !
I wonder if Goliath was one of these giants,
that David slew............
Just thinking out loud..............
Rick
Kenilworth #29 Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted April 8th, 2005 05:45 AM IP
Rick
The OT contains accounts of a number of giant tribes that were progressively wiped out.
As I recall Goliath was the last of one such tribe
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted April 9th, 2005 08:00 PM IP
Br. Russell, I found the mcrema.com website quite interesting but not surprising.
When the British Government backed archeological organization sent a group of archeologists to north africa, they gave them specific instructions that whatever they found had to conform to the Christian bible. I suppose they felt that they had to preserve the teachings of the accepted religion of the country.
I would imagine that the same process is widespread over the whole Christian world.
So I suppose I must defer, albeit reluctantly and partially, to the possibility of your giants, and midgets with rat skin shoes.
How embarrassing would it be if the established Christian church were obliged to admit publicly that the planet earth didn't suddenly come into being around 4000BC. I have difficulty understanding why people still beleive that nonsense, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.
S&F
skiendhu
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
Dave Mavity
Super Moderator
Posts: 2371
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted April 9th, 2005 08:09 PM IP
Quote:
skiendhu wrote:
I have difficulty understanding why people still beleive that nonsense, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.
S&F
skiendhu
|
Well, you could always fall back on Dave's First Rule: People are Stupid.
Admittedly unMasonic, but it applies frequently.
S&F,
Dave Mavity
Academia Lodge #847 F&AM, Oakland, CA: Traditional Observance, baby.
Golden City Lodge #1 AF&AM, Golden, CO
Oakland, CA Valley A&ASR
Intra Nobis Regnum Iehova
|
|
|
|
irishmason
Unregistered
Posts:
Registered: |
Posted July 31st, 2006 06:58 AM IP
Quote:
Admin wrote:
Who were these sons of God ?
Were these Angels ?
Rick
|
They were archangels, beings with a very high intelligence. When you read the 5 books of Moses, you will find that each book has been written by a different author, the times were influenced by different archangels. One to guide the Isralites out of Egypt, another one to give laws (Moses apparently met an archangel on top of the mount when he received the 10 commandments, the fire colums during the night was an archangel, Gabriel appeared at various stages,
Luzifer was an archangel, but was downgraded, because he envied the other archangels.
What I think at that time they possibly cloned people, created an new (human) being.
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted July 31st, 2006 06:28 PM IP
>They were archangels, beings with a very high intelligence.
Irishmember
I think you have been reading their press releases.
Why was it that Abraham thought it proper to kill and cook his son for his god?
Some of the gods were distinctly nasty thinking nothing of launching wars and having the captured killed - men, women, children and animals. Followed by razing the cities and salting the fields. This is not only anti-environmental, it is economic madness.
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
blackdragon1
Member
Posts: 74
Registered: Dec 2007 |
Posted December 24th, 2007 12:21 PM IP
Quote:
russellholland wrote:
>
Why was it that Abraham thought it proper to kill and cook his son for his god?
Some of the gods were distinctly nasty thinking nothing of launching wars and having the captured killed - men, women, children and animals. Followed by razing the cities and salting the fields. This is not only anti-environmental, it is economic madness.
Cheers
Russell
|
Could it be that these so called gods were actually mental conjurations & manifestations of the barbaric, uncivilised & backward people of those times? Could it be that their so called gods were merely a reflection of their primitive state of mind?
BlackDragon
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted December 24th, 2007 05:53 PM IP
>Could it be that their so called gods were merely a reflection of their primitive state of mind?
Native peoples across the world have physical descriptions of their gods
For example, Osiris was described as 17 feet tall and with black skin
And Krishna had black skin but that was regarded as lower class so he was depicted with blue skin
And Quetzlcoatl (as I recall) was described as white skinned and red haired - pretty odd for South America
Cheers
Russell
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
S. T. Lehane
Master Mason
Posts: 1568
Registered: Oct 2006 |
Posted December 19th, 2008 12:30 PM IP
I stumbled across this old thread and thought I'd throw in my 2 cents... (or 1.6 cents US).
I've always thought that references to "giants" in ancient literature could very well be talking about Neanderthals. We know that they existed until at least 22,000 years ago. It's certainly possible that they survived for quite some time after that, and we just haven't stumbled across the evidence yet.
We also know that they co-existed with much smaller homo sapiens along the Mediterranean coast.
They certainly were quite a bit larger and stronger than their homo sapien cousins, and the size of their skulls would seem to indicate that they were at least comparable in terms of intelligence. Some scientists think they may have had a larger brain, introducing the possibility that they were actually more intelligent.
We know that they made tools and buried their dead, (signs of intelligence, and some sort of spirituality).
Also it's possible that this branch of the "homo" evolutionary tree hadn't differentiated itself to the point that it should be classified as it's own official species yet. (A species is defined as two creatures that can reproduce and the offspring is fertile)... So it's possible that it was just a sub-species that almost broke off from homo sapiens, but later, began interbreeding with "humans" again, diluting its gene pool to the point that they just assimilated back into human societies. Such interbreeding would account for homo sapiens getting taller around that period... It's kind of like if wolves and dogs started interbreeding again, you'd get bigger meaner dogs, and/or smaller friendlier wolves, depending on your point of view.
(As an aside, I knew someone who deliberately bred a Wolf with a Pitbull, producing a litter of vicious little mongrel puppies, but they were cute).
(Edited by S. T. Lehane)
Fraternally!
|
|
|
|
skiendhu
Super Moderator
Posts: 2627
Registered: Dec 2004 |
Posted December 19th, 2008 02:48 PM IP
Now, I like that theory, mainly because it is down to earth, has a certain merit and plausibility. I can see Golliath and his brothers as the last of the neanderthals without the need of fallen angels and other unlikely myths and legends.
Practical experience is the best teacher
|
|
|
|
russellholland
Master Mason
Posts: 998
Registered: Feb 2005 |
Posted December 19th, 2008 04:46 PM IP
Numbers 13 33 We saw the N'filim, the descendants of 'Anak, who was from the N'filim; to ourselves we looked like grasshoppers by comparison, and we looked that way to them too!"
Deuteronomy 3:11
'Og king of Bashan was the last survivor of the Refa'im. His bed was made of iron; it is still in Rabbah with the people of 'Amon. It was nine cubits long and four cubits wide, using the normal cubit [thirteen-and-a-half by six feet].
(Complete Jewish Bible)
Russell Holland
Caboolture 266
UGLQ
Australia
|
|
|
|
S. T. Lehane
Master Mason
Posts: 1568
Registered: Oct 2006 |
Posted December 19th, 2008 05:48 PM IP
Even today, people exaggerate...
It's possible that Neanderthals may have been as tall as 7 feet. (Maybe a little more, probably a little less). But they were much stronger than human beings of the same height, because proportionally they were structured very differently.
Their chests were the size of a barrel of beer. They had enormous chest cavities, that were much more rounded than those of modern homosapiens. Also their rib bones were a lot stronger than ours. You could hit one of these Neanderthals in the chest with hammer without cracking a rib.
Having survived the hardships of the ice age, they were tough as hell… They were exclusively carnivores where homosapiens are omnivores.
But I have trouble accepting the idea that there was ever a hominid much bigger than that , simply because no humanoid skeleton has been found that even comes close to those dimensions that you mention.
Also… a “cubit” at the time of the writing of Numbers… What was that? What was a cubit in the time that Deuteronomy was written? I seriously doubt it was the same as the “cubit” referred to in the time of King Solomon.
In fact, there seems to be an obvious case of editing older texts here, introducing the new "cubit" measurement in place of some older measurement system.
(Edited by S. T. Lehane)
Fraternally!
|
|
|
|
S. T. Lehane
Master Mason
Posts: 1568
Registered: Oct 2006 |
Posted December 19th, 2008 06:20 PM IP
Quote:
russellholland wrote:
Deuteronomy 3:11
'Og king of Bashan was the last survivor of the Refa'im. His bed was made of iron; it is still in Rabbah with the people of 'Amon. It was nine cubits long and four cubits wide, using the normal cubit [thirteen-and-a-half by six feet].
|
How do you get 13.5 X 6 feet? The "cubit" that Deuteronomy speaks of is a unknown unit of measurment.
I could argue that he is 3 inches tall or 75 miles tall... there is no conversion table from this ancient unit of measurment to any of our modern systems.
Fraternally!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freemason Discussion Group :: Freemasonry :: Judaism And Kabbalah :: The Sons Of God
Page: 1 2 3 |
|
|
|
