Were the sons of God in Genesis 6 fallen angels? Who were the Nephilim?

Summary

The video script discusses the interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4, focusing on the identity of 'sons of God' and the Nephilim. It presents three interpretations: descendants of Seth marrying the daughters of Cain, angels intermarrying with humans, and ancient heroes or tyrant kings. The script argues for the angelic interpretation based on biblical references and New Testament corroboration. It also clarifies the Nephilim were not products of angel-human unions but pre-existing figures, debunking the myth of their origin from such unions.

Takeaways

• 😇 Genesis 6:1-4 is a complex biblical text with various interpretations, and it's important to approach it with humility and without causing division among Christians.
• 👥 The 'sons of God' in Genesis 6 could refer to the godly line of Seth, angels, or heroes from the mythical past like Gilgamesh.
• 👼 The term 'sons of God' is used sparingly in the Hebrew Bible and typically refers to angelic beings, not human beings.
• 📖 The New Testament, specifically 2 Peter and Jude, supports the interpretation that the 'sons of God' are angels who sinned by intermarrying with humans.
• 🔍 Jesus' statement about angels not marrying in heaven does not contradict the idea that angels left their proper dwelling to engage in immorality with humans, as described in Genesis 6.
• 🌏 The Nephilim, mentioned in Genesis 6:4, are a subject of debate. Some believe they were the offspring of the unions between angels and humans, while others think they were ancient heroes unrelated to these unions.
• 📚 The expression 'in those days and afterward' suggests that the Nephilim existed both before and after the cohabitation of angels and humans, implying they were not a product of these unions.
• ✍️ Moses may have been 'demythologizing' the Nephilim by stating they were ancient heroes, distancing them from the story of angel-human cohabitation.
• 📖 The first readers of Genesis were assumed to be familiar with who the Nephilim were, indicating their fame in ancient mythologies.
• ❌ Misinterpretations of Genesis 6 in the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC led to the Enochic traditions, which were later criticized in the New Testament for promoting foolish myths.

Q & A

What is the main difficulty in interpreting Genesis 6:1-4?

The main difficulty lies in the ambiguity of the text, which has led to different interpretations, and the importance of remaining humble and non-divisive among Christians when discussing these interpretations.

What are the three interpretations of who the 'sons of God' are in Genesis 6:1-4?

The three interpretations are: 1) The sons of God refers to the godly line of Seth marrying the ungodly line of Cain. 2) The sons of God are angelic beings intermarrying with humans. 3) The sons of God are heroes from the mythical past, like tyrant kings.

How does the speaker suggest we find the correct interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4?

The speaker suggests examining the few occurrences of the term 'sons of God' in the Hebrew Bible and considering the New Testament references to the story, particularly in 2 Peter and Jude.

Why does the speaker believe the 'sons of God' refers to angelic beings?

The speaker points out that the term 'sons of God' is used exclusively to refer to angelic beings in the few instances it appears in the Bible, including in the book of Job and the book of Daniel.

What do the New Testament references in 2 Peter and Jude suggest about the interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4?

The references in 2 Peter and Jude suggest that the 'sons of God' in Genesis 6:1-4 are indeed angelic beings who sinned by intermarrying with human women.

What is the significance of the phrase 'and also afterward' in Genesis 6:4?

The phrase 'and also afterward' in Genesis 6:4 is significant because it could imply that the Nephilim were present both before and after the angels had relations with human women, suggesting they were not a product of those unions.

What are the two possible interpretations of the Nephilim mentioned in the script?

The two interpretations of the Nephilim are: 1) They were the children resulting from the unions of angels and human women, or 2) They were ancient heroes or men of renown who existed before and after the天使s cohabited with humans.

Why does the speaker argue that the Nephilim were not a product of the unions between angels and humans?

The speaker argues that the Nephilim were not a product of the unions because the Hebrew phrase 'and also afterward' typically indicates a continuation of a previous state, and because the sentence structure in Genesis 6:4 suggests that the Nephilim were known figures to the original readers and were not being newly introduced as a result of the angel-human unions.

What does the speaker mean by 'demythologizing the Nephilim'?

The speaker means that Moses is clarifying that the Nephilim, who were likely figures from ancient mythology known to the original readers, were not part of the story of angelic beings cohabiting with humans.

How does the speaker address the argument that Jesus' words in the Gospels contradict the idea of angels marrying humans?

The speaker clarifies that Jesus' words refer to angels in heaven, not those who left their proper dwelling place to commit immorality, thus there is no contradiction between Jesus' words and the story in Genesis 6.

What warning does the speaker give about the interpretation of Genesis 6 found in the book of Enoch?

The speaker warns against the interpretation found in the book of Enoch, which incorrectly suggests that the Nephilim were giants produced by angelic cohabitation with humans, an idea that Paul also cautions against in his letters to Timothy.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 Interpreting Genesis 6:1-4

This paragraph discusses the complexity of interpreting Genesis 6:1-4 and emphasizes humility in interpretation. It mentions that there are different interpretations and warns against divisiveness among Christians. The text describes how 'sons of God' took 'daughters of men' as wives, leading to the question of who these 'sons of God' might be. Three interpretations are presented: descendants of Seth marrying the ungodly line of Cain, angels intermarrying with humans, or heroes from the mythical past like Gilgamesh. The paragraph also explores how the term 'sons of God' is used elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, suggesting it refers to angelic beings, and how the New Testament supports this interpretation.

05:03

📜 Biblical References to 'Sons of God'

The paragraph delves into the biblical usage of the term 'sons of God,' noting its occurrence in Genesis 6, the book of Job, and the book of Daniel, where it consistently refers to angelic beings. It contrasts this with other biblical references that depict a father-son relationship between God and humans, such as with Adam and David, without using the term 'son of God.' The New Testament references in 2 Peter and Jude are highlighted, showing how they reinforce the Old Testament's depiction of angels who sinned. The paragraph also addresses the argument that angels do not marry, as mentioned in the Gospels, by clarifying that this refers to angels in heaven, not those who left their dwelling to commit immoral acts.

10:04

🧝‍♂️ The Nephilim: Mythical Heroes or Angelic Offspring?

This section examines the identity of the Nephilim mentioned in Genesis 6:4. It discusses two interpretations: one suggesting the Nephilim were the offspring of the unions between angels and human women, supported by Enochic traditions, and another proposing that the Nephilim were already present before and after these unions, thus unrelated to them. The paragraph argues for the latter view, based on the examination of the Hebrew phrase 'and also afterward' and the sentence structure in Genesis 6. It suggests that Moses was demystifying the Nephilim, indicating they were well-known ancient heroes and not a product of angel-human relations.

15:07

📖 The Consequences of Misinterpretation

The final paragraph addresses the historical misinterpretation of Genesis 6, particularly during the 3rd and 2nd centuries B.C., which led to the Enochic traditions that incorrectly identified the Nephilim as giants born from angel-human unions. It contrasts this with the biblical view that attributes the world's chaos, death, and evil to human sin, not angelic sin. The paragraph emphasizes that the Bible places the blame for sin on human rebellion against God, as depicted in Genesis 3, rather than on angelic beings.

Keywords

💡Interpretation

Interpretation in this context refers to the act of explaining or understanding the meaning of a text, particularly a religious or historical text. The video discusses the importance of humility when interpreting Genesis 6:1-4, as there are various interpretations that have been adopted by different groups. The theme of the video revolves around the correct interpretation of this biblical passage, emphasizing that it should not lead to division among Christians.

💡Sons of God

The term 'Sons of God' is a key concept in the video, referring to a group mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. The video explores different interpretations of who these 'Sons of God' might be, including the descendants of Seth, angelic beings, or heroes from ancient mythology. The discussion of this term is central to understanding the various views on the text and the video's exploration of the correct interpretation.

💡Angelic Beings

Angelic beings are considered in the video as a possible interpretation for the 'Sons of God' mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. The video suggests that these beings are referred to as 'Sons of God' in other parts of the Bible, particularly in the book of Job and the book of Daniel. The concept is integral to the video's argument that the 'Sons of God' are not human but supernatural entities.

💡Nephilim

The Nephilim are mentioned in Genesis 6:4 and are a subject of debate in the video. They are described as giants in some interpretations and are associated with the offspring of the 'Sons of God' and human women. The video argues against this interpretation, suggesting instead that the Nephilim were known heroes or figures from ancient mythology and were not a product of angel-human unions.

💡Divisive

The term 'divisive' is used in the video to describe the potential negative impact of differing interpretations of biblical texts on the unity of the Christian community. The speaker emphasizes that while interpretations may vary, they should not lead to divisions or conflicts among Christians, reflecting the video's theme of seeking unity in diversity of understanding.

💡Hebrew Bible

The Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament, is the collection of scriptures that are foundational to Judaism and Christianity. In the video, the Hebrew Bible is referenced as the source of the 'Sons of God' expression and other related texts. The video's analysis is grounded in the examination of these scriptures to determine the correct interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4.

💡New Testament

The New Testament is the second part of the Christian Bible, containing the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and his early followers. The video references the New Testament, particularly 2 Peter and the book of Jude, to support the interpretation that the 'Sons of God' are angelic beings. These references are used to align the Old Testament narrative with the broader Christian theological framework.

💡Mythological Past

The concept of a 'mythological past' refers to the ancient stories and figures that are part of cultural or religious traditions, often involving supernatural elements. In the video, the speaker discusses the possibility that the 'Sons of God' could be heroes from this mythological past, such as Gilgamesh, who was part god and part human in ancient Near Eastern mythology.

💡Demythologizing

Demythologizing is the process of reinterpreting or explaining away the mythological elements of religious texts to align them with a more historical or rational understanding. The video suggests that Moses, the traditional author of Genesis, may have been demythologizing the Nephilim by dissociating them from the story of angel-human unions and associating them with known ancient heroes.

💡Human Rebellion

Human rebellion is the theme of disobedience and rebellion against divine authority, which the video suggests is the true source of sin and evil in the world, rather than angelic sin. The video argues that the Bible places the blame for the world's troubles on human actions, such as the breaking of the covenant in Genesis 3, rather than on supernatural beings.

Highlights

Genesis 6:1-4 is a text with various interpretations and should not divide Christians.

The term 'sons of God' could refer to the godly line of Seth, the ungodly line of Cain, or angelic beings.

The expression 'sons of God' is used very sparingly in the Hebrew Bible and typically refers to angelic beings.

In the book of Job, the 'sons of God' are clearly depicted as angels in God's heavenly court.

The New Testament, particularly 2 Peter and Jude, supports the interpretation of 'sons of God' as angels.

2 Peter chapter 2 uses the story of Genesis 6 to illustrate God's deliverance of His people in the past and future.

Jude refers to angels who abandoned their proper dwelling place, aligning with the Genesis 6 narrative.

The story of Genesis 6 shares a common theme of abnormal sexuality with Sodom and Gomorrah.

Jesus' statement about angels not marrying in heaven does not contradict the Genesis 6 narrative.

The Nephilim are mentioned in Genesis 6:4, with two possible interpretations regarding their origin.

The Nephilim were likely well-known ancient heroes to the original readers of Genesis, not the product of angel-human unions.

The expression 'and also afterward' suggests the Nephilim existed before and after the angels cohabited with humans.

Moses may have been demythologizing the Nephilim by distinguishing them from the story of angel-human cohabitation.

The interpretation of the Nephilim as giants originated from the Enochic traditions and was later criticized by Paul.

The Bible places the blame for chaos, death, and evil on human sin, not angelic sin.

Genesis 3 explains the origin of sin as a result of human disobedience to God's covenant.

Transcripts

- Well, Genesis 6:1-4

is a difficult text.

And as we attempt to

interpret it, we should be humble

because there are different interpretations

that have been taken of this text

and I don't think that

whatever interpretation we take,

I don't think we should be divisive

with other Christians in the church

or among the people of God.

There are three,

Genesis 6 says that the sons of God

saw the daughters of men

and that they chose

the daughters of men for themselves as wives

and they married them.

So the question is,

who are the sons of God

that are marrying the daughters of men?

Well, there are three different interpretations.

One is that the sons of God is a reference

to the godly line of Seth.

Cain killed Abel so after Abel died,

Adam and Eve had relations

and Seth was born and Seth carried on

the godly faith of Abel.

So one idea is that the sons of God

are the descendants of Seth marrying the daughters of men,

the ungodly line of Cain.

Second interpretation is that the sons of God

refers to angels, angelic beings

intermarrying with humans.

The third idea is that the sons of God

are heroes from the mythical past, tyrant kings.

We have stories from the ancient Near East.

For example, we have stories of a person

by the name of Gilgamesh

and he was part god and part human

and accomplished many mighty feats.

So, how do we,

how do we find the right interpretation?

The exact expression, sons of God,

only occurs four or five times in the Hebrew Bible.

We have one occurrence here in Genesis 6.

We have two occurrences in the introduction

to the book of Job.

In the introduction to the book of Job,

we see God gathering in His heavenly court,

His heavenly assembly with the angels.

The angels are called sons of God there.

There's another occurrence in the book of Job,

Job chapter 38

where God is challenging Job and He says,

Where were you when I created the world?

When He created the world,

the sons of God sang for joy.

So it seems to,

there it also seems to be a very clear

reference to angelic beings.

The last occurrence is in Aramaic

in the book of Daniel.

When the king looked into the furnace,

he saw four,

four people there

and it says that one looked like a son of God,

which would mean a divine being, an angelic being.

There are only five occurrences in the entire Bible

where we have the exact expression,

son of God or sons of God

and it always refers to angelic beings.

We must distinguish this use

from other places.

There are other places in the Bible

where they indicate that the relationship of a human

to God is like a father-son relationship.

So Adam and God have a father-son relationship.

In the covenant that God makes with David,

God and David have a father-son relationship.

But it doesn't say that,

it doesn't actually say that Adam is a son of God.

It doesn't use that linguistic expression

and it doesn't say that David is the son of God.

So the only time that linguistic expression

occurs in the Bible,

it always and very clearly refers to angelic beings.

We also have the,

we also have the witness of the New Testament.

So there are two passages in the New Testament

that refer to this.

One is 2 Peter chapter 2

and the other is the book of Jude

and both of these texts

are very closely related to each other.

In 2 Peter chapter 2,

Peter is talking about

how difficult days are coming for the Christians

and there will be people who deny the faith,

who deny the truth about Jesus Christ,

the truth about His work,

who deny the gospel.

There will be false teachers

and they will bring corruption into the church

and destruction into the church.

What Peter does is he appeals to the Old Testament

and he says, well, if God could deliver,

if God could deliver His faithful people

in difficult times in the Old Testament,

then He will be able to do it in the New Testament as well.

Peter refers to two examples

in the Old Testament.

One is the story of the,

of Genesis 6 and Noah

and the other is the story of Lot

being rescued from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

And if you look in the Greek text

of 2 Peter, it's very clear

that there are two examples

and not three examples

by the use of the word and.

So if God did not spare the angels who sinned

and He delivered Noah

and He did not spare the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah

and He rescued Lot.

So there are two examples

joined by the word and

and each example has two parts,

a negative part and a positive part.

A negative part and a positive part.

So, when Peter is talking about the angels

who sinned, he's very clearly talking about

Genesis chapter 6 because this is connected

with the story of Noah.

Some people say, well, no,

he's not talking about Genesis 6.

Well, then my question to them is,

if Peter is trying to encourage

his readers from well-known stories

in the Old Testament and if the angels who sinned

is not Genesis 6, then where else is the story?

There is no other story in the Old Testament

that it could be referring to.

Some people think that it's the fall of Satan

but as we, we're going to see when we talk about that,

there is no story,

there is no story in the Old Testament

that describes the fall of Satan.

Peter is very clearly alluding to Genesis 6.

Jude is doing the same thing and it's very obvious

in the book of Jude

because he's talking about people

who are false teachers,

people who are going to deny the faith

and he also appeals to the Old Testament

and shows how God delivered His people in the past

and He will do so in the future.

He also refers to two events.

He refers to angels who abandoned

their proper dwelling place,

their proper home.

He also talks about the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah

and he says, since they,

in the same way as these

committed strange immorality.

Well, in the Greek text,

the they refers to the angels

and the same way as these,

the these refers to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.

So what the story of Genesis 6

has in common with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah

is that there's an abnormal form of sexuality going on.

If God can deliver His people

from even the strangest perversions,

then He will deliver the people

who are listening to Peter

and the people who are listening to Jude.

He will deliver us.

Now, someone might come to me and say,

well, Jesus in the gospels

says that the angels in heaven

neither marry nor are given in marriage.

So it's impossible for an angel

to have physical relations with human women.

Well, they're not reading the gospels accurately

and clearly because Jesus

is saying that when,

in the resurrection, when Jesus returns

at the end of history,

we, who are resurrected,

are not going to marry because we're going to be

like the angels in heaven.

Notice he says the angels in heaven

and Jude says they left

their proper dwelling place.

So there's no contradiction between Jesus and Jude.

In heaven, the angels don't marry.

In Jude, they abandoned their proper dwelling place

and they go to commit strange immorality.

So there's no confusion.

So it seems very clear,

Genesis 6 is telling us

that these are angels who are marrying humans

and Jude and Peter are telling us

that is the correct interpretation.

The next piece is who are the Nephilim.

In verse 4 of Genesis 6, it says,

the Nephilim were on the earth in those days

and also afterward

when the sons of God had relations with human women

and they bore children of them.

End of sentence.

New sentence.

They were the heroes who were from the ancient past,

men of renown.

There's two major sentences there.

First one says, the Nephilim were on the earth

in those days and also afterward.

There are two possible interpretations

of this expression,

they were on the earth in those days and afterward.

What does that mean,

they were there in those days and afterward?

Well, some people think this means that

the Nephilim were the children

that came from the angels who married the women

in Genesis 6:1-3

and that the Nephilim were the product

of these unnatural unions

and they appeal to texts from the 3rd century B.C.

and 2nd century B.C.,

the so-called Enochic traditions,

the traditions about Enoch

where the Nephilim are interpreted as giants.

There's another interpretation that's possible.

When it says the Nephilim were there in those days

and also afterward,

it could mean that

before the angels had sex with the human women,

the Nephilim were there

and they were also there after

the angels had sex with women.

So it could mean that the Nephilim had nothing to do

with the angels marrying the humans.

I think that is the correct interpretation

for two reasons.

First of all, I examined every occurrence

of this expression and also afterward.

I went to the Hebrew Bible,

I looked up every occurrence of this phrase

and I examined how it was used.

And the second interpretation

best fits and suits how this word is used.

So when it says,

they were there in those days and also afterward,

it means the Nephilim were there before angels

cohabited with humans

and they were there after angels cohabited with humans.

There's a second reason why

this is the correct interpretation.

The last sentence says,

they were the heroes who were from the ancient past,

the men of renown.

This sentence does not begin with and.

Now that's very very important.

Almost every sentence in the Hebrew Bible begins with and.

When a sentence does not begin with and,

it does so for two reasons.

It could be because it's beginning

a new section

or secondly, because it's making a comment

on the previous sentence,

what we would call a footnote.

It's very clear that this sentence is not beginning

a new section but it's acting like a footnote

on the previous sentence.

So the previous sentence is saying

that the Nephilim were before,

were there before the angels and the humans cohabited

and they were there after.

And it's making a brief comment

that they were the ancient heroes.

In this case, what Moses is doing

is he's demythologizing

the Nephilim.

You notice one of the things that we should notice is

the text doesn't tell us who the Nephilim were.

What does that mean?

Why doesn't the text tell us

who they were?

Because they were well-known to the first readers

of this text.

The first readers of this text

knew who the Nephilim were

and didn't need that explained to them.

And all Moses is saying is,

look, whoever you think these heroes are

like Gilgamesh, these ancient heroes,

these men of renown,

you've read about them in the ancient mythologies.

Whoever they were, they're not part of this story.

They don't come from the cohabitation

of angels and humans.

And I think that's the correct interpretation.

But the problem is,

this has been a difficult text to interpret

and it has not always been interpreted correctly

down through the centuries.

And in the 3rd century B.C.

and the 2nd century B.C.,

they came to an incorrect interpretation.

They thought that the Nephilim were giants

who were produced by angels cohabiting with humans

and this got into the book of Enoch.

And Paul warns his readers against this

because he says in his letters to Timothy,

Don't argue over endless genealogies

and foolish myths.

This is a direct reference to the book of Enoch

which has a long genealogy of all the angels

until you finally come down to Satan

and then they blame all the evil in the world on Satan.

What they're trying to do is they're trying to

blame chaos and death

and evil in the world on angelic sin

instead of blaming it on human sin

and the Bible clearly puts the blame on humans.

Genesis 3 shows how sin came into the world.

How did we live in a world

that is troubled by chaos, by death,

by evil, by sin, by selfishness,

by all kinds of corruption.

That came about because God made a covenant

with the first humans and they broke that covenant.

They were fickle, they were disloyal,

they were unfaithful, they cheated on God

in the relationship

and they rebelled against Him.

And so when Jude quotes and refers to this material,

he's showing that it's,

the sin is in the world because of human rebellion

not because of angelic sin.

(upbeat music)

- [Narrator] Thanks for watching "Honest Answers."

Don't forget to subscribe.