2 questions about Genesis

[Guest]

In Genesis 6, there is mention of a race of people or species called the Nephilim. What's curious about this to me is that it says "the Nephilim were on the earth in those days." As opposed to where? I'll plead a degree of ignorance since I haven't checked a Greek text.

Additionally, where did Cain's wife come from? Was there perhaps another lineage created by God and the Bible only speaks of Adam and Eve because they were the beginning of God's plan of salvation?

[Guest]

Hi XCALVINX.

Although answers to your questions will be at best speculative, I'll try the best I can. Hopefully Steve will also weigh in with his take as well.

Dealing with the question of the Nephilim has the potential of getting a lot of people twisted, because it touches on some very sensitive issues. So for anyone who reads this, please keep that in mind. If my opinions bother you, feel free to reply with your own, but remember that this is NOT a salvation issue.

I'll need to preface with a little background. Man was cast out of the Garden of Eden and denied eternal life because of sin. According to Genesis 3:15, the Messianic descendant of Eve would crush the head of the serpent - the Evil One. (I can deal with why the serpent should be understood as the Evil One in another post, for those who care to discuss that issue.) After giving this prophecy, God also cursed the ground and sentenced man to hard labor in order to meet his physical needs. Genesis 5 winds up with the statement that Noah, the tenth descendant from Adam and Eve, would give man "rest" from his labors to bring forth food from the ground that God had cursed. In other words, Noah was a type of the Messiah who would draw mankind back to God.

With me so far?

The wording of the first few verses of Genesis 6 make it clear that something very unusual is going on here. Note that the subject is once again lineage. Let me quote the verses here and correct a bad translation so we'll all be on the same page:

"When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them that they chose. Then the LORD said, 'My Spirit will not always contend with man in his sinfulness; he is mortal and his days will be a hundred and twenty years.'"

Now here's a curious statement. Why would God suddenly say, out of the blue, "My Spirit will not always contend with man in his sinfulness"?

The reason why is because man was trying to find a way to get eternal life in his sinful state, apart from God's Plan! What man was attempting to do was to intermarry with immortal angels and thereby achieve immortality himself!

But God knew what man was trying to do, and He declared that it wouldn't work. Not only would it not work, but human lifespans would be shortened from roughly 1000 years to a mere one hundred twenty!

This was basically a Satanic attempt to give man an alternative to God's Plan of Salvation. Noah was apparently called to preach concerning the "rest" of God. One symbolic aspect of "rest" has to do with being in a state of peace with one another. But the earth, far from being at peace, was filled with violence and bloodshed to such a degree that God determined to wipe almost all of mankind from the face of the earth. Since man wasn't ready to accept God's message of "rest" and peace through Noah and moreover was looking for a Satanic alternative, they were being condemned to destruction by the Flood.

I have no doubt that this interpretation will twist a lot of people, if for no more reason than that it seems so far-fetched and even abhorrent that angels could have sexual intercourse with women. But consider that God gave man the capability to greatly abuse all of the blessings and gifts that they had been given - including sexuality - if he so chose. Why shouldn't God give angels that same capability? Where in the bible do we read anything that would indicate otherwise?

People have pointed me to Matthew 22:30 which says that angels don't marry. They assume that it means that they don't have sexual intercourse either, but that's not what the text says. Also, why wouldn't angels marry? How about because marriage would have a completely different meaning apart from death, without the "till death to us part" clause? This passage in Matthew is simply a description of the state of affairs in heaven, but one which doesn't tell us whether it's because marriage isn't practiced (but only by the angels which haven't fallen, of course!) or because marriage is impossible because sexual relations between angels are impossible.)

People also point out to me that fallen angels can't appear in physical form, according to Luke 24:39. But this passage is more likely referring to Jesus' spirit - Jesus' ghost, that is - not an "unclean spirit" or fallen angel!

To the contrary, Jude 6-7 seems to equate the behavior of fallen angels with that of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah who "went after foreign flesh" to fornicate with. What flesh could be foreign to angels, but that of physical women? And yes, these verses could also be referring to their common fate - that of being in chains of darkness until the day of judgment. However, Jude's quoting of Enoch would tend to tip the balance towards the former interpretation since the book of Enoch explicitly describes fallen angels having relations with women.

By the way, I do believe that the reference to the "sons of God taking to themselves the daughters of men" in Genesis 6:2 can be correctly interpreted in more than one way. It can not only refer to angels and women, but can also refer to Godly men marrying carnal women. The same principle applies regardless: we shouldn't be "unequally yoked together" with those who are not of the faith (2 Cor. 6:14).

As far as Cain's wife goes, we aren't told where she came from. However, there was nothing wrong with Abraham marrying his half-sister Sarah (Gen. 20:1-12), so there would be nothing wrong with Cain marrying a sister. There's no need to postulate him marrying a woman from some other humanoid race.

Are you suggesting that perhaps he married a fallen angel?

Damon

[Guest]

No, not suggesting a fallen angel. Just plain old curiosity. I was more wondering if it weren't possible that God created more than one family
"in the beginning" and that only the lineage of Adam and Eve was mentioned because it is the only one of significance with respect to our salvation.

I was suggesting however that possibly the Nephilim were not human and do not currently (nor at the time of the writing of Genesis) reside on the earth. I know that might seem weird but that wording seemed odd to me when the rest of the Bible isn't like that.

Thanks for that description. I know it's not a salvation topic but unanswered questions could reinforce doubt among unbelievers and sceptics. I did assume that it would be speculative but I couldn't stand having that question bottled up any longer.

[Guest]

No, not suggesting a fallen angel. Just plain old curiosity. I was more wondering if it weren't possible that God created more than one family
"in the beginning" and that only the lineage of Adam and Eve was mentioned because it is the only one of significance with respect to our salvation.

I used to wonder the same thing, but now appeal to this passage to show that we all descended from Adam and Eve:

Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.

They lived almost 1,000 years so they had many many children.

As far as the "sons of God" being fallen angels, Damon has made those points, and I have leaned both ways at times. I tend to think that angels don't procreate physically but who knows for sure? Anyway, 1-3 Enoch if accepted certainly do end the discussion. If only Jude would not have quoted Enoch which is not considered canonical.

I could see it either way, angels or men.

One possibility is that Nephilim does not even speak of offspring of the sons of God and daughters of men. It could be just stating that Nephilim were there at that time and also afterward. (Numbers 13:33)
Nephilim could be dinosaurs. That's what could have frieghtened those who spied out the land in Numbers 13 and said they were like grasshoppers in thier midst. I know if I saw huge T-Rex's roaming around I would be scared too.

Just a possibility. Since if Nephilim were the product of angels and woman then the flood came and the angels that sinned were cast into tartarus (hell) as 2 Peter 2:4+ states, it seems as if these angels have already been taken care of, so how did we get more Nephilim in Numbers 13:33?

[Guest]

Hi,

Gen 6:4 (NKJV)
”There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”

I don't think the Nephilim can possibly be dinosaurs (unlike what is mentioned in Steve's tapes on Genesis) because Gen 6:4 identifies them as men rather than animals. Similarly, because they are identified as men, I think it is unlikely that the Nephilim are a mixed angel-human breed. [Of course, depending on how the passage is understood, the Nephilim may or may not be the offspring of the sons of God and daughters of men.]

NKJV and KJV translates the Hebrew word "Nephilim" as giants (rather than simply transliterating the Hebrew word into English). I think this is right as "Nephilim" could just be a generic word for giants, hence the Nephilim/giants re-appear in Numbers 13:33. Here the Nephilim are identified with the Anakim. Elsewhere the Anakim are also refered to as Rephaim. Rephaim is another Hebrew word for giants, and the Emim (Deut 2:10-11) and Zamzummin (Deut 2:20) are in this same category of Rephaim/giants.

I don't think these races of giants refer to a separate species from humans. I think they are just humans of gigantic stature. Just as today we have the pygmy race but they are not a separate species from homo sapiens. The genes for giant stature were encoded somewhere in Adam’s and Noah’s DNA. Hence the appearance of giant people both before and after the flood.

[Guest]

Hi,

Gen 6:4 (NKJV)
”There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”

I don't think the Nephilim can possibly be dinosaurs (unlike what is mentioned in Steve's tapes on Genesis) because Gen 6:4 identifies them as men rather than animals. Similarly, because they are identified as men, I think it is unlikely that the Nephilim are a mixed angel-human breed. [Of course, depending on how the passage is understood, the Nephilim may or may not be the offspring of the sons of God and daughters of men.]

NKJV and KJV translates the Hebrew word "Nephilim" as giants (rather than simply transliterating the Hebrew word into English). I think this is right as "Nephilim" could just be a generic word for giants, hence the Nephilim/giants re-appear in Numbers 13:33. Here the Nephilim are identified with the Anakim. Elsewhere the Anakim are also refered to as Rephaim. Rephaim is another Hebrew word for giants, and the Emim (Deut 2:10-11) and Zamzummin (Deut 2:20) are in this same category of Rephaim/giants.

I don't think these races of giants refer to a separate species from humans. I think they are just humans of gigantic stature. Just as today we have the pygmy race but they are not a separate species from homo sapiens. The genes for giant stature were encoded somewhere in Adam’s and Noah’s DNA. Hence the appearance of giant people both before and after the flood.

I don't disagree with what you have said. But just to point out that Gen 6:4 can be read this way:
[A statement about observation is made]”There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, [observation ends] [new subject begins] when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those [meaning the children that were bore, not the nephilim] were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”

In other words, the statement could be that there were Nephilim around at the same time as the "mighty men", not that they are one in the same.

Just a possibility. Which raises the question, if this just happened, leading to the "Giants" being born, why are they called "of old" and "renown"? This apparently just started happening and ended with the flood.

I do however see it more likely that the Nephilim are giant men. Of course Enoch is banging on the door.

[Guest]

In regards to Cain's wife...I'd say the most simple and likely answer is that he married his sister

[Guest]

I don't disagree with what you have said. But just to point out that Gen 6:4 can be read this way:
[A statement about observation is made]”There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, [observation ends] [new subject begins] when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those [meaning the children that were bore, not the nephilim] were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”

Hi Sean,

Agreed. I was looking at the verse again in church today and realised that it could be read the way you mentioned.

[Guest]

Gen 6:4 can be read this way:
[A statement about observation is made]”There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, [observation ends] [new subject begins] when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those [meaning the children that were bore, not the nephilim] were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”

In other words, the statement could be that there were Nephilim around at the same time as the "mighty men", not that they are one in the same.

I know I am coming to the conversation late, but want to offer a couple of thoughts. First, if the phrase that refers to the sons of God does not refer to the nephilim, why throw in a off-topic comment about giants? Also, why does the text seem to contrast this corrupted bloodline with that of Noah, who was "perfect in his generations"? Finally, when you go back and study the mythology of the "mighty men of old", don't you find that they are often recorded as the offspring of supernatural beings, "gods" as it were? I think that when one studies the war campaigns of the Israelites, in the places where God tells them to go in an kill all the men, women, and children, it is in those areas where you find the decendants of the "nephilim" or giants. In other words, I think a case can me made that both the flood and the campaigns of the Israelites were purifying the human bloodline from the corruption of the "sons of God".
D.