What is meant in Gen.6:2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nicolette_Webb
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nicolette_Webb

Guest
“The Sons of God seeing the daughters of men, that they were fair, took to themselves wives of all which they chose” (Douay-Rheims)
What does this mean?
 
From the commentary on the same Bible:

The sons of God. The descendants of Seth and Enos are called here sons of God for their religion and piety: whereas the ungodly race of Cain, who by their carnal affections lay grovelling upon the earth are called the children of men. The unhappy consequence of the former marrying with the latter, ought to be a warning to Christians to be very circumspect in their marriages; and not to suffer themselves to be determined in their voice by their carnal pasion, to the prejudice of virtue or religion.
 
The title “Sons of God” has not the same meaning in the Old Testament that it has in the New. In the New Testament it applies to those who have become the “Sons of God” by the New Birth. Joh 1:12; Ro 8:14-16; Ga 4:6; 1Jo 3:1-2.

In the Old Testament it applies to the angels, and is so used five times. Twice in Genesis (Ge 6:2-4) and three times in Job. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. A “Son of God” denotes a being brought into existence by a creative act of God. Such were the angels, and such was Adam, and he is so called in Lu 3:38. But Adam’s natural descendants are not the special creation of God. Adam was created in the “likeness of God” (Ge 5:1), but his descendants were born in his likeness, for we read in Ge 5:3, that Adam “BEGAT a son in his own likeness, after his image.” Therefore all men born of Adam and his descendants by natural generation are the “SONS OF MEN,” and it is only by being “BORN AGAIN” (Joh 3:3-7), which is a “NEW CREATION,” that they can become the “SONS OF GOD” in the New Testament sense.
From this we see that the “Sons of GOD” of Ge 6:2-4 could not be the “Sons of Seth,” for they were only unregenerate MEN, while the “Sons of GOD” were of a superior race, in other words ANGELS. To this, however, objection is made that the Angels do not marry nor are given in marriage (Lu 20:27-36), therefore they must be “sexless” and could not cohabit with either themselves or human beings. But this does not necessarily follow. The Angels are created beings and do not die, therefore there is no need for marriage to prevent their extermination, but this does not imply that they are “sexless” and do not have the power of procreation. We must not forget that Angels can assume the form of MEN and eat and drink (Ge 18:1-8), and the whole difficulty vanishes when we see that it was AS MEN that the “Sons of God” (Angels) married the “Daughters of Men.”
We have only to turn to the Epistles of Peter and Jude for confirmation of this. In 2Pe 2:4-9 we are told of the “Angels that SINNED,” and in Jude 1:6-7 of the Angels that “KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE,” but “LEFT THEIR OWN HABITATION,” and are now “RESERVED IN EVERLASTING CHAINS UNDER DARKNESS” unto the “Judgment of the Great Day,” the “Great White Throne Judgment.” These Angels are not Satan’s Angels, for his angels are free. They must therefore be a “special class” of angels who have been imprisoned for some particular sin, and we are told what that sin was, it was “FORNICATION” and “going after STRANGE FLESH.” Jude 1:7. And the time of the commission of the sin is given as just BEFORE THE FLOOD. 2Pe 2:4-5. This proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the “Sons of God” of Ge 6:2-4 were Angels.
As further confirmation of this view we have the fact that the “offspring” of the union of the “Sons of God” and the “Daughters of Men,” were a race of “GIANTS,” “MIGHTY MEN,” “MEN OF RENOWN.” Ge 6:4. Now the godly descendants of men have married ungodly women, but their offspring have never been such “MONSTROSITIES” as the offspring of the “Sons of God” and the “Daughters of Men” of Noah’s day, therefore that union must have been of an unnatural character as is evidenced by the term “Strange Flesh.” God could not permit such an abnormal race as the “progeny” of the union of angels and human beings to exist on the earth, so the outcome of this “Invasion” of the earth by the “Denizens of the Air” was the Flood, by which the contour and elevation of the Ante-diluvian Earth were changed, thus wiping out the “Garden of Eden,” and diminishing the length of human life on the earth.
“Rightly Dividing the Word”
 
Hi all!

Please allow me to add a[n orthodox] Jewish point-of-view. First, there is no tradition whatsoever in Judaism of angels mating en masse with human beings; this is not a Jewish perspective.

The (original Hebrew) word for “God” (as in “sons of God”) used in Genesis 6:1-4 is Elokim; in our traditions, Elokim is not so much a name of God as it is a title denoting His might and power.

Elokim is used in Exodus 21:6, 22:8 and 22:28 in reference to human beings, i.e. judges. In each of these instances, we believe that the correct translation/understanding of the Hebrew elokim is “judges.” Here it is used to denote mighty & powerful people, in these 3 cases, judges.

We understand the usage of *bnei *(“sons of”) *elokim *in Genesis 6:1-4 as also referring to the sons of mighty & powerful people, i.e. rulers, aristocrats, lords, etc., and understand the passage to mean that the sons of wealthy & powerful families were arrogantly & violently seizing women from the lower classes according to their whims & urges.

Howzat?

Be well!

ssv 👋
 
40.png
hungry:
The title “Sons of God” has not the same meaning in the Old Testament that it has in the New. In the New Testament it applies to those who have become the “Sons of God” by the New Birth. Joh 1:12; Ro 8:14-16; Ga 4:6; 1Jo 3:1-2.

In the Old Testament it applies to the angels, and is so used five times. Twice in Genesis (Ge 6:2-4) and three times in Job. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. A “Son of God” denotes a being brought into existence by a creative act of God. Such were the angels, and such was Adam, and he is so called in Lu 3:38. But Adam’s natural descendants are not the special creation of God. Adam was created in the “likeness of God” (Ge 5:1), but his descendants were born in his likeness, for we read in Ge 5:3, that Adam “BEGAT a son in his own likeness, after his image.” Therefore all men born of Adam and his descendants by natural generation are the “SONS OF MEN,” and it is only by being “BORN AGAIN” (Joh 3:3-7), which is a “NEW CREATION,” that they can become the “SONS OF GOD” in the New Testament sense.
From this we see that the “Sons of GOD” of Ge 6:2-4 could not be the “Sons of Seth,” for they were only unregenerate MEN, while the “Sons of GOD” were of a superior race, in other words ANGELS. To this, however, objection is made that the Angels do not marry nor are given in marriage (Lu 20:27-36), therefore they must be “sexless” and could not cohabit with either themselves or human beings. But this does not necessarily follow. The Angels are created beings and do not die, therefore there is no need for marriage to prevent their extermination, but this does not imply that they are “sexless” and do not have the power of procreation. We must not forget that Angels can assume the form of MEN and eat and drink (Ge 18:1-8), and the whole difficulty vanishes when we see that it was AS MEN that the “Sons of God” (Angels) married the “Daughters of Men.”
We have only to turn to the Epistles of Peter and Jude for confirmation of this. In 2Pe 2:4-9 we are told of the “Angels that SINNED,” and in Jude 1:6-7 of the Angels that “KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE,” but “LEFT THEIR OWN HABITATION,” and are now “RESERVED IN EVERLASTING CHAINS UNDER DARKNESS” unto the “Judgment of the Great Day,” the “Great White Throne Judgment.” These Angels are not Satan’s Angels, for his angels are free. They must therefore be a “special class” of angels who have been imprisoned for some particular sin, and we are told what that sin was, it was “FORNICATION” and “going after STRANGE FLESH.” Jude 1:7. And the time of the commission of the sin is given as just BEFORE THE FLOOD. 2Pe 2:4-5. This proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the “Sons of God” of Ge 6:2-4 were Angels.
As further confirmation of this view we have the fact that the “offspring” of the union of the “Sons of God” and the “Daughters of Men,” were a race of “GIANTS,” “MIGHTY MEN,” “MEN OF RENOWN.” Ge 6:4. Now the godly descendants of men have married ungodly women, but their offspring have never been such “MONSTROSITIES” as the offspring of the “Sons of God” and the “Daughters of Men” of Noah’s day, therefore that union must have been of an unnatural character as is evidenced by the term “Strange Flesh.” God could not permit such an abnormal race as the “progeny” of the union of angels and human beings to exist on the earth, so the outcome of this “Invasion” of the earth by the “Denizens of the Air” was the Flood, by which the contour and elevation of the Ante-diluvian Earth were changed, thus wiping out the “Garden of Eden,” and diminishing the length of human life on the earth.
“Rightly Dividing the Word”
Click to expand...
I don’t know what “hungry” did to get himself suspended, but my three decade review of Scripture convinces me that he is correct in his analysis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top