There are few things quite as intriguing to many as the thought of what some new hybrid species might be like. I remember watching the ‘80s hit television show “V” (at least it was a hit to me), about “visitors” from outer space who masqueraded as human-like creatures, but who were, in reality, alien-lizards intent on farming humans for their consumption! Wow! Now that was a show! But I think I was most drawn into the plot when we, the viewers, discovered that one of the male “visitors” had mated with a young human girl. My brother and I waited with baited breath to see what their love-child would be like—half human, half space-reptile. It was awesome!
I think that many have the same sort of imagination when reading Genesis 6:1-8, the account of the Nephilim. How should we interpret these “sons of God”? Fallen angels? Sinful humans? Or something else?As a preface, we should note that this text in Genesis serves to give us the reasoning behind God’s severe actions of Noah’s flood (this is important to remember when going into the text to determine its meaning).
The big question is, who are the “sons of God,” who had sexual relations with the “daughters of men”, and seemed to produce the Nephilim (often translated as “giants”). Several answers have been given.
(1) The “sons of God” are fallen angels who cohabitated with women and produce a half-demon, half-human hybrid.
(2) The “sons of God” are the godly descendants of Seth while the “daughters of men” refer to the ungodly descendants of Cain. So, in this case the condemnation is for interfaith cohabitation).
I think that the above # (1) option would make the best Hollywood movie, and for this reason remains a popular interpretation today. However, I believe that it would also make the worst biblical option. There are several reasons why I believe “sons of God” in this text are not angels: (A). If angels got this world in trouble, then God flooded the wrong place. In this text, God says that He is angry with humanity, not angels, and not something else. His punishment is against the wickedness of the human species. (B). Further, vs. 4 tells us that the Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterwards. So, eradicating the world of these hybrids is pointless if angels are just going to do it again. As a bit of a side note, this also brings up some serious question/problems for whether or not these hybrids can be redeemed though Jesus’ sacrificial death (see Hank Hanegraaff’s discussion on this same passage in his book, The Bible Answer Book). (C). As far as we can tell from the Bible, fallen angels do not have creative power. Therefore, they are not able to create human bodies complete with DNA, sexual organs, and fertile sperm. Angels or spirits are nonphysical beings. And so, it appears that it is only by God’s command that an unfallen angel can take on physical form (appearances to humans). We never see fallen angels working in this way in the Bible.
Option # (2) is not as fraught with problems. Nevertheless, I’m still not convinced by this interpretation. First of all, this interpretation equivocates on the meaning of “man” in the text. So, you have to read “man” as referring to humanity in one place and demon-humans in another. Still, as I mentioned, this option is not as problematic, at least from the standpoint of a biblical worldview.
THE BEST OPTION
I think that the best option is to understand the “sons of God” as governmental rulers—the aristocracy. Why? Even today in the Near East (as well as in the Ancient Near East), you’ll find people claiming descent from gods and goddesses. A king or ruler will tell you that he is the son of Ra, the son of Amon, and so forth. They claim descent from various different gods in order to attempt to legitimate their rule. So, “sons of God” are kings and rulers who are claiming divine descent.
Therefore, in the text of Genesis 6, what we’re being told is that the reason why God is destroying the world is evident by the fact that the corruption reaches all the way up to, those who should be, the cream at the top of the barrel. Even the elite of God’s world–the rulers–have become desperately wicked. Those called to act on God’s behalf in establishing justice and righteousness on earth have become autocratic, impulsive, setting their own rules, doing what they want, and taking what they want. They are distorting the state and throwing it away.
As we often say, even today, a people usually get what they want. A Leader often times just reflects the hearts of the people. God destroyed the human inhabitance of the world, except for 8, because from the top down, the human heart was bent on evil. So, God here tells us that when even the cream at the top is rotten, the entire barrel must be thrown out as well. Â
Unfortunately, the real meaning of this text is nothing as racy as and exciting as angelic sexual liaisons with beautiful young women, but it does tell us about God’s expectations for right living and His dealings with His people. So, it will probably never be sexy enough to be Hollywood, but at least it is true.
9 Comments on “Did angels have sex with women in Genesis 6?”
That was a great episode of ‘V’ !!
Interesting thoughts, although I would be tempted to consider that should there be offspring from fallen angels and rebellious women, Hollywood would definitely be a candidate for the breed!!! But, Hollywood aside, I am curious how you handle the other passages in the Old Testament that refer to “sons of God� and indicate that they are of the angelic realm be it “good company� or “company of the devil?� (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7)
Also, I think it’s important to follow the train of thought from Genesis 5 where we see this is a book of the generations of Adam, sons in his image. Following that thought, as there are no chapter divisions in the original writings, Genesis 6 speaks of “men� and seems to refer to the Genesis 5 account further stating that daughters were born to these men. These daughters would appear to be of the descendants of Seth, not Cain, but could be generally daughters of all men. Then we get this loaded statement that has caused much debate referring to the “sons of God.�
One more concept to “throw in the pot� is that in Genesis 11:5, the term “sons of men� is used to describe just that. Not to say that the author couldn’t have mixed his language a bit in describing particular events, just unusual.
With the above stated, I am also interested in your thoughts regarding the New Testament scriptures that have traditionally been identified with the Genesis 6 record. Those being: 1 Peter 3:1-20, especially vs. 18-20, where Christ made “proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noahâ€?; 2 Peter 2:4-5 stating “God did not spare angels when they sinned…and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noahâ€?; and Jude 6 and 7 with reference to “angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day,…went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire.”
Personally, I think Hollywood has really missed in its attempts to glorify science fiction when there’s so much entertaining truth to be portrayed between the Books of Genesis to Revelation!
To continue on the subject of evil in the world: God is warning us that there is still time and hope for us to repent and intercede for our nation. (Nehemiah 1 and Joel 1&2) Do not despair. God is gracious and compassionate. Return to your first love with all your heart and pray that our nation will return the Lord. (Deutr. 6:12-18 and Luke 21:28)
For an excellent teaching of this subject, see http://www.johndubler.com
Sons of God.
Arent’ we all sons and daughters of God?
Please tell me why the verse has been taken to mean ‘angels’?
As a lay person, I would assume that a son or daughter of God meant they belonged to God, as in believers?
Daughters of Men.
Unrepentant sinners? Unbelievers? Sin is in the bloodline beginning from Adam, a man.
Help. 🙂
Hi Melody,
My understanding is that any direct creation of God is a ‘son of God’ (i.e. Adam, Angels, etc..). Anyone born of Adam is a son (or daughter) of Adam. Gal 3:26 says that we become ‘sons of God’ through our faith in Christ Jesus.
– Mike
Hi Melody,
One more quick note, Job 38 talks about when God laid the foundation of the world and in Job 38:7 Gods states that the sons of God shouted for joy. I believe this to be an example of sons of God referring to Angels (not that it’s limited to just Angels).
-Mike
Hey Melody—Just a bit of “clarification� on the “sons of God� statement. In the Old Testament, the term is used almost exclusively in regards to angels. The only text that really creates question in this understanding is the Gen. 6:2 account. Job 1:6 and Job 38:1-7(emphasis on 7) seem fairly clear on the subject.
In the NEW TESTAMENT, the term is used for believers in Jesus Christ as THE “SON of GOD.” (Mt. 5:9; Rom. 8:14; Gal. 3:26)
Fortunately, our understanding of this term in Gen. 6 is not an essential of salvation, just material for challenging thoughts and discussion, especially when trying to unravel the: 1Peter 3:18-20; 2Peter 2:4-5; and Jude 6,7 writings.
Beth,
Yes, angels are often called “sons of God” in the OT (Job 1:6, 2:1). However, this is a description that is not exclusively given to angelic creatures. For instance, Adam is referred to as a son of God (Lk 3:38), as was Solomon (2 San 7:14), and Israel (Ex 4:22; Hos 11:1), and kings of Judah (Ps 2:7).
The 2 Peter 2 comment of those who “went after strange flesh” refers not to angels but to the human inhabitance of Sodom.
Brent
Brent,
I would agree that Lk 3:38 states Adam is the “son of God� concluding the previous genealogy account. 2 Sam. is clearly speaking of Solomon as being “a son� to God, Israel is declared “My son, My firstborn� very specifically in Exodus and Hosea continues to declare Israel as “My son� whom God called out of Egypt.
I have not previously understood Psalm 2:7 as pertaining to the kings of Judah, I have always seen that particular “My Son� as referring specifically to Christ.
As for my comment “went after strange flesh,� I believe you mean Jude 6,7 rather than 2 Peter 2? And yes, I agree that in Jude 7 the comment is pointing specifically to the men who went after “strange flesh,� but not taking it out of context, Jude 4-8 is a flow of thought illustrating judgment for the ungodly who went after strange flesh and committed gross immorality. They left the natural for the unnatural—the strange. They also rejected authority. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah even tried to rape the angels (sent in men’s bodies) whom the Lord had sent to destroy them.
The Greek words, especially the pronouns, make it clear that the angels committed the same kind of sin, indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, as the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them. (Jude 6,7)
But the example of punishment is Sodom and Gomorrah, everyone knows what happened to them. (Jude7)
I will offer that the Genesis account may surely be referring to “kings and rulers.� It is clear the world was in such a state that God determined to destroy it. From my understanding He will once again do so, just not by flood. At that time, ALL “sons of God� as declared in the New Testament, will reign with Him eternally in the New Jerusalem, not just 8 people on a big boat!!!
The devil and ALL who have followed him will have been eternally cast into the “lake of fire.” (Rev. 20:10-15)