I do not know of any gender being mentioned in Scripture; although we use the names of the Angels that are named in scripture for masculine typically. (Gabriel, Michael).
Jesus indicates that angels do not have gender - Matthew 22:30 says "At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."
There are places where angels are referred to having masculine physique, which is interesting. But, if you consider that if a woman of the 1st Century were to see a modern woman soldier in full battle gear, she may think she is seeing a masculine character from her point of view.
There are female angels too, other wise how do you expect them to breed? they'r not gona live forever so they have to multiply just like other living biengs, you ahould know that angels don't mate for pleasure like humans, they mate for breading only, because they don't have instinct, they rely on mind and logic, its how they'r built.
Is it anywhere in the scriptures that speak about Angels breeding? From my understanding, I always thought that angels were servants of God, not of any gender and immortal. I can't recall the scripture off hand, but I believe that Jesus spoke regarding this when he said that we would be like angels once we go to heaven, that we would not marry. To me, this means that they have no gender, they are spiritual beings created to do God's work.
I have a study bible and I could not find any scriptures about the angels regarding this. Please let me know where did you find this because I would like to read up on it. Thank you
There are three popular views regarding the "sons of God."
2) Leaders of the day
3) Seth's children
1) Angles is the least likely based on Scripture and especially Matthew 22:30. The usuage of the original language hinders this interpretation as well.
2) Leaders of the day and 3) Seth's children can be debated fairly effectively in favor for either 2) or 3) using cultural understanding, the whole of Scripture and the specifc language used in verses 1 and 2..
Either way it is the wickedness of man that God is judging with the flood.
LT, there is a fourth one, that you did not mention, which challenges many in the traditional line of worldly & church thinking. However, it answers all of the problems that the other 3 hypotheses have. I have wrestled with this one a great deal, because there are other biblical references to the "sons of God" than just the one in Genesis 6.
Furthermore, there is evidence across the globe to support other understandings of history that aren't answered by the traditional hypotheses.
Let me explain: the "traditional" view of history says man has been making a linear progression of advancement, along the lines of those old biology charts, where a monkey turns into an ape, who becomes a caveman who eventually walks upright. There's just one problem: that chart is based on false evidence - pig's teeth and arthritic old men and pieces of monkeys that were added to lemurs to create the mishmash of "evolving man".
In the same way, there has not been a linear state of advancement in human civilization. Two examples:
1. When Rome fell, the subsequent 100 years saw the almost total destruction of all engineering, metallurgy, astronomy, arts, literature and culture that Rome had developed or stolen for it's thousand years of history. If it were not for a few people who preserved it, we would not know that Rome was a very advanced civilization - just as much as Europe was in the late 1700s to early 1800s. Imagine that. Rome was just a few steps away, technologically, from the discovery of electricity and the invention of the light bulb. When Rome fell, it cost Europe 1,000 years of knowledge and understanding - that's how long it took to recover what was lost.
2. We know that Noah came from an advanced society. We just don't know how advanced. But, if you take a look what Noah was instructed to do - build a huge barge the size of a small WWII Aircraft carrier - it becomes a great curiosity. You can do some project scoping and find that to build something of that size, from raw materials, requires much greater "Man-Hours" of labor than "4 men times 100 years" (or 400 Man-years). In fact, it's much more like 1,000 - 1,200 Man-years of labor to build something of that size by hand. That leaves you with a problem.
Either a) the story's details aren't true ..... or b) there are factors we don't know. Since the Bible does not say that Noah used other hired labor, the only conclusion I can come to is that he had power tools. With the right power-tools, you could do the job with 400 Man-years of labor.
When we look at evidence around the globe, it appears that there was an ancient global society with advanced technical abilities that we are just now discovering. I won't take time to give details here, but it appears that there was a time in ancient human history where they had advanced skills in the sciences of astronomy, geography, geometry and architecture. In fact, it looks like much of the early post-flood world was copying what was known by the former civilization(s). It begs the question of how and when such advanced technology developed.
What I can surmize from the evidence is this: there was once an advanced global society which is now largely buried under water, under the world's oceans. The evidence spans from the Americas to Russia, to the Mediteranean and Africa.
If we look at the carvings of those older civilizations, there are numerous references to visitors who came down from the heavens. My conclusion is that the "sons of God" are in fact alien visitors from off this planet. There may be some who are of the same order of species as humanity and some who may be of an advanced order, which we know as "the angels".
That advanced order of creatures seems to be a "trans-dimensional" creature which has a nature that is able to travel through the material world, at will, and possibly even through time itself. This tends to get people worked up, when you mention it, but it helps me understand the Genesis 6 events.
My hypothesis is this: an alien species of creatures violated a divine directive not to interfere with humanity. They were in full-scale rebellion to God and may have chosen to follow Satan's angellic rebellion - to become a fallen race. When God saw that they were polluting the human race, and abusing the "daughters of men" as their sex slaves - he stepped in to put an end to it. His means was to wipe out all of the "Nephilim" who were the hybrid offspring of this alien species, along with the rest of the human race that was in rebellion, by bringing the great cataclysm we know of as "Noah's flood".
In doing so, he preserved one single family that had not been polluted by this genetic dilution. I don't understand completely why that was necessary, but God apparently was not willing to put his Spirit into those fallen creatures. Something about their nature was not worthy of redemption. Perhaps their genetic make-up was of an order that would compromise the ability for God to have brought the atonement. Perhaps something more than we can understand. Perhaps their wilfull and deliberate rebellion caused greater genetic corruption than the sin of Adam.
This is my speculation alone, but this hypothesis answers the problems that the other 3 do not. At this time, I don't see any reason why it would be in conflict with scripture.