The Sons Of God In Genesis Chapter 6
The beginning of Genesis chapter six has been a debate that has been going on
for some time. In verse 2 we have the term “sons of God”. There are two
different views for this term. It can either mean godly men from Seth’s line, or
it could mean angels that have fallen.
The writer Philastrius could claim that for anyone to think that these “sons of
God” in Genesis 6 were angels was committing heresy. And people still today will
laugh at the thought or the person who thinks that Genesis chapter 6 is speaking
about Fallen angels and will not even discuss the topic.
Genesis 6: 1 ¶ And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of
the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
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.
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.
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.
I have heard all my life that “the sons of God” were just men, but my own
personal study has led me to believe that “the sons of God” were angels. As far
as the claim that it’s not important enough to discuss is concerned, I disagree.
It’s in God’s Word and, therefore, is worthy of discussion.
NON- ANGELS POINT OF VIEW
GENDER FEATURES
People will say that Angels are not male or female so therefore cannot fill this
space in bearing offspring. Some will use the scripture:
Mt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage,
but are as the angels of God in heaven.
Some would attempt to use this to show that angels have no part in relationships
as humans do. You will hear statements in the world today of how angels are
neither male nor female.
SETH AND FAMILY -- FAMILY OF GOD
Others will attempt to say that “the sons of God” mentioned here is speaking
about the lineage of Seth. All of his descendants were “the sons of God,” one
reason being:
Genesis 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his
name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.
People will use this verse to say that the line of Seth was “the sons of God,”
because they were the first to worship God. Genesis chapter 4 gives the lineage
of Cain, and then Chapter 5 gives the lineage of Seth, and then the writer of
Genesis combines the two together and introduces the topic concerning the sin of
Seth’s line with the line of Cain.
PUNISHMENT:
When the men of Seth’s line would marry the daughters of Cain’s line, God judged
them by having their children become giants.
SETH AND CAIN -- THE BETTER HALF
They would also claim that the term “daughters of men” simply refers to the
nature of Cain’s line – sinful.
SONS OF GOD = MERE MEN
People that hold the view that “the sons of God” were just men will give
scripture to show how the term “sons of God” can be referred to men and not
angels. They would claim this gives proof and reliable evidence to show that
there is no weight to the other side of the argument. Some of the verses are:
DEUTERONOMY CHAPTER 14
Deuteronomy 14: 1 ¶ Ye are the children* of the LORD your God: ye shall not cut
yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.
2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen
thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon
the earth.
*sons
They claim this verse shows evidence that “the sons of God” could be mere men in
Genesis chapter 6.
PSALMS CHAPTER 82
Psalms 82:6 ¶ I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most
High.
Again, here is another cut and dried verse that seems to be indicating that mere
man can be also given the term “sons/children of God.”
HOSEA 1:10
Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the
sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in
the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be
said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.
ANGELS POINT OF VIEW
GENDER FEATURES:
Nowhere in the Bible does it clearly state that Angels are genderless. The
scripture given in defense of genderless angels falls short of proving helpful.
The only reference we have is to the fact that there will be no relationships in
heaven. So, no worries for men and women who have had a previous spouse because
we will be like the angels -- no relations.
There are many scriptures given to reinforce the fact that Angels do have a
gender.
Some places could be given. One place being Genesis chapter 19. The angels that
appeared unto Lot were obviously attractive and appealing to the homosexual
tendencies of the men of that City (Sodom and Gomorrah).
The Archangel Michael could be given a gender:
Jude 1:9
Revelations 12: …Michael and his angels….
Gabriel:
Luke 1: 11 And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the
right side of the altar of incense.
12 And when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled, and fear fell upon him…..19 And
the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of
God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.
SETH AND FAMILY -- FAMILY OF GOD
Genesis 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his
name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.
This verse is stating that, with the line of Seth, man began to worship Jehovah.
Something we do not have record of Cain’s line doing.
To suddenly take this claim and put it with the claim in chapter 6 is an attempt
to get rid of the thought that the supernatural world is more powerful than we
are willing to accept.
If God wished for us to understand chapter 6 to be concerning Seth, why would He
not mention Seth?
The line of Seth and Cain both started at the beginning. Both married one of
their sisters and then each group took a different path. -- One serving God.
God does not give Seth’s descendants the title of being “sons of God” but gives
them the recognition of being the ones to serve God.
People will attempt to show that Cain’s lineage had a representation of God in
it as well with the one named Methusael which means “man of God.”
But overall, Seth’s line is the line we are given to show the beginning of men
who worshipped God.
So, the next question arises: If “the sons of God” were actually the sons of
Seth, why did God choose the punishment for the sin of marrying an unbeliever to
have the child to be a Giant?
PUNISHMENT:
The claim that the offspring being giants shows God’s judgment upon man for
their sinful acts, once again shows the attempt to discredit the other argument
of the “sons of God” being angels. Read the verse again carefully:
Genesis 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.
Does that seriously sound like a punishment? These offspring were not giants
that were so bent out of shape they couldn’t pick up an axe and swing it. No.
These were mighty men. They were powerful and known to many for their ability.
SETH AND CAIN -- THE BETTER HALF
To say that Seth and his line were “the sons of God” mentioned here and that
Cain’s line was just “of men” would be setting Seth a bit higher than he should
be. The terminology in verse 2 about “the daughters of men” is referring to
mankind. Were Seth and his line not part of mankind?
And, if Seth’s lineage was so much greater than Cain’s, why were there not more
than 8 people to get into the Ark?
If a Christian today marries an unsaved person, are they frowned upon because
that unsaved person is not as good as the Christian? Because that Christian is
much better than that other person is? No, not at all. The simple fact is that
one has received Salvation and, therefore, communion between the two with
regards to God is hindered over the fact that one has received a gift and the
other has not. And, since God deserves all the glory and a believer should be
giving glory to God, they, therefore, are to marry another Christian.
Some people may like to think that a Christian is better, but, unfortunately, we
are still sinners. We still die and decay like everyone else. The difference in
us has nothing to do with what we have done, but simply what Christ has done for
us.
So, to claim that the “daughters of men” is only speaking of Cain’s line is
completely unscriptural and unsupported. Seth’s line was as much human as Cain’s
was and as prone to sin, as we can obviously see from the fact that only Noah’s
family was on the Ark.
SONS OF GOD = MERE MEN -- OR DOES IT?
An important fact should be mentioned about the term son. This term is something
that is given to someone who is a result of someone else -- the father. Or, a
title directly given to someone or a group to show their close relationship with
God.
DEUTERONOMY CHAPTER 14
Deuteronomy 14: 1 ¶ Ye are the children of the LORD your God: ye shall not cut
yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.
2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen
thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon
the earth.
By the time this chapter had come along, God had chosen Himself a nation, and
given them a set of laws by which to govern themselves. The Jews were surrounded
by other nations who did not worship God.
So, as God instructed them in the ways He wanted, He informed them that He had
chosen them. They had become the children of God, chosen above every nation.
God had appointed the title to this nation. The fact that Seth’s lineage was the
first to worship God is exactly what it is saying. They were the first to do
this. At the time of the birth of Enos, praise and worship began to rise to God.
The act of God appointing a nation in Deuteronomy to be the “children of the
LORD your God” does not indicate that Seth’s line received the title of “sons of
God” because worship began after the birth of Enos.
PSALMS CHAPTER 82
Psalms 82:6 ¶ I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most
High.
People will quickly go: “There! See! Evidence, the “sons of God” in Genesis
could have easily been mere men.”
One thing should be noticed about this psalm. This title “children of the most
High” or “sons of God” was once again an appointment by God. This psalm is
dealing with the action and responsibility of Judges.
HOSEA 1:10 (ref. Romans 9:25,26)
Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the
sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in
the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be
said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.
Once again, you see this as a title distinctly given to a group of people by
God. One other thing is that this was a prophecy, a title given to a group of
people by God that hadn’t yet come to pass.
Many believe that it has come to pass now. They believe that people are called
the “sons/children of God” because of Christ’s finished work.
So, we see here again, something God has done to allow us to be called His
children.
NOTE: In Genesis 6 you do not see the association of the title with some group
of people. The title is just given in a manner where the writer is expecting you
to take the common meaning of the term without it being explained.
SONS OF GOD = ANGELS
Something needs to be said about the bottom two verses. It is this. Where God
speaks about “the sons of God” in these verses, He is not taking the time to
speak to a group of people when doing so. They are spoken of in a way that we
are to understand what it means -- what it obviously means -- Angels. A similar
practice as seen in Genesis chapter 6. God doesn’t relate “sons of God” to a
group of men, but even clearly states in Genesis 6: 2 that “the sons of God”
could look upon mankind.
Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves
before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted
for joy?
Da 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of
the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of
God.
Nebuchadnezzar could even use the term to refer to something that was not just a
mere man.
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE ANGEL THOUGHT IN GENESIS 6 FROM SCRIPTURE:
Jude 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own
habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the
judgment of the great day.
7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving
themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for
an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
In verse 6, we see the Angels leaving something that they should not have left
and sinning against God. Because of this, they are judged.
Notice verse 7 though: “Even as….” The writer seems to be referring to the fall
of the Angels to be in common with the fall of Sodom and Gomorrha. The angels
did as the people of that city did -- went after strange flesh.
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE ANGEL THOUGHT IN
THE APOCRYPHA
Before you scoff this section off, take a minute to consider a couple of things.
Even though the books may not be inspired works of God, they were used as
resource material by a wide variety of people. The book I will mention was found
amongst the famous Dead Sea scrolls. The Jews kept them and Jude also took the
time to refer a couple of times to the Book of Enoch for his writing.
In the book of the Genesis Apocryphon there is a writing by Lamech, who clearly
affirms the thoughts of it being Angels during that time.
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT OUTSIDE OF SCRIPTURE OR THE APOCRYPHA
W.F. Allbright, a Jewish historian, could clearly claim this to be intercourse
between angels and women.
Philo of Alexandria, who was born 20 B.C., also firmly acknowledged the account
of Genesis chapter 6 to be Angels.
The list could go on and on about ancient references to this. The thought that
the “sons of God’ were to refer to men did not come into existence until after
5th century A.D.
CONCLUSION:
Basing my thoughts solely on God’s Holy Word, my final conclusion to this
article is simply that there is no evidence whatsoever to the fact that the
“sons of God” could refer to man.
The term “sons of God” could be given to people in the Old Testament as direct
titles given by God. The only time that it was not given as a title was when God
was speaking about angels. In Genesis 6 it is not given as a title to any group,
even though people will try to say so. Manmade thoughts have resulted in
twisting and confusing the thoughts of God’s Word. The light of the scripture is
weighing in favour that Genesis chapter 6 is speaking of fallen angels.
So let us take God’s word for what it says.
Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;
HOME