(Receive our blog posts in your email by clicking here. If the author links in this post are broken, please visit our Free PDF Library and click on the author’s page directly.)
A verse of Scripture that many have wrestled with over the years is that from Genesis 6:1-4:
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. 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. 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.
So, who are “the sons of God” and “the daughters of men”? Are angels or demigods meant by “sons of God”? Was there some sort of superior race of beings that was the fruit of the union between the “sons of God” and the “daughters of men”?
There have been many fanciful ideas put forth regarding these matters, dating back to, perhaps, the non-canonical Book of Enoch. The idea of angels marrying human females and producing a race of Nephilim has an appeal to many. But this idea is examined by Professor William Henry Green of Princeton in The Presbyterian and Reformed Review (Oct. 1894) and is thoroughly refuted.
Sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct one. As Green explains, Nephilim were clearly present before and after the intermarrying that took place, so they could not be the fruit of the union that is described. And the context of this passage in connection with the description of the flood which follows (and the reasons given for the flood), show that the text under consideration is meant to provide a reason for the punishment of the wicked. Although “sons of God” does mean angels in a few places in Scripture, it is also more broadly a term for God’s chosen people, that is, the godly on earth. Elsewhere, we are explicitly told that angels do not and cannot marry. Green: “There is no suggestion that angels are married or are given in marriage; the contrary is expressly declared (Matt. xxii. 30).” Our author, after analyzing these points, and in consideration of the context, shows that it is the intermarrying of the godly with the wicked that brings on the flood later in the chapter.
Green also tackles another idea that some have put forth suggesting that “sons of God” means persons of high rank, while “daughters of men” are those of inferior rank. Green: “But no such contrast is suggested here; and the intermarriage of different classes in society is nowhere represented as displeasing to God or provoking the divine judgment.”
The mythological and other erroneous ideas about this passage have led many astray, but the simple explanation, which is consistent with rest of Scripture, is that the godly intermarried with the wicked and, as a result, brought about a punishment “of Biblical proportions.”
Take time to read Green for yourself and work through the arguments presented. It is short (7 pages) but filled with solid exegesis. It will help to anchor your understanding of this passage to the rest of Scripture.
