Genesis 6:1-4

By: Timothy Klaver

Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." There were tyrants 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. (Genesis 6:1-4)

Where did the fabulous (something of fables) interpretation of angels co-mingling with women and producing extraordinary offspring come from? Is it another of the grand imaginations of Dispensationalism? Probably not, but they do seem to give the most impetus to it.

The first two verses are pretty straightforward. We may accept them as they stand. לקח אשׁה (to take a wife) is a standing expression through the entire Old Testament for the marriage relationship established by God at creation, and it is never applied to πορνεια or the simple act of physical connection. Any idea of polygamy is also excluded. It merely indicates discriminating selection of beautiful wives, choice from among those who were eligible. The statement of these two verses is sufficient enough in itself to exclude any references to angels. Christ Jesus stated clearly that angels cannot marry (Matt. 22:30; Mark 12:25; cf. Luke 20:34).

The main thing to clarify and get out of the way is the content of verse 3. Some Christians believe and teach that this verse is saying that the age of man will be capped at 120 years, that he will not age beyond that. Given the context of the chapter, this notion is ridiculous. It is correctly understood as God giving a respite of 120 years to those presently living on the Earth. God's sentence was made known to Noah in his 480th year, to be preached by him as "preacher of righeousness" (2 Pet. 2:5). "Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of water came upon the earth" (Gen. 7:6).

So, the first three verses are clear enough to us. There exist no problems with our understanding of these three verses. Where the confusion exists is regarding verse 4, quite frequently ripped from its immediate context and applied with fantastical (something of fantasies) interpretations. So this is where we will focus our examination.

There were tyrants 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. (v. 4)

In the Septuagint, נפלים is rendered as γιγαντες, which is likely where our idea of "giants" is derived. However, how do we know that ancient English translations used "giants" in the manner our modern minds like to conjure up first? (Our modern minds have the same failure when it comes to the words "unicorn" and "dragon," too.)  The term "mighty men . . . of renown" may explain the word "giants," or it may explain the children born to the sons of God. "Mighty," gibbowr, means "powerful, mighty, strong; by implication: warrior, champion, valiant man, hero." "Renown," shem, means "a mark or memorial of individuality; by implication: honor, authority, character, fame, reputation, renown." There are three ways in which we can approach this verse:

1. Giants: Noah Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language defines "giant" as: "n. 1. A man of extraordinary bulk and stature. 2. A person of extraordinary strength or powers, bodily or intellectual. The judge is a giant in his profession." If "mighty men . . . of renown" explains the word "giants," then the second definition seems appropriate, further describing the character and reputation of these men.
    
2. Tyrants: Strong's Exhaustive Concordance defines the Hebrew word nephilim as "fellers: a bully or tyrant." It comes from the Hebrew word naphal, "to fall, to cast down, to fell, to slay, to smite." (See Joshua 11:7.) If "mighty men . . . of renown" explains the children born to the sons of God, it likely points to outstanding good men. They were possibly champions of impeccable character and reputation who stood against the tyrants that were in the Earth in those days. Keil & Delitzsch, in their Commentary on the Old Testament, write: "'The same were mighty men:' this might point back to the Nephilim; but it is a more natural supposition, that it refers to the children born to the sons of God. 'These,' i.e., the sons sprung from those marriages, 'are the heroes, those renowned heroes of old.'"
    
3. Tyrants: The term "mighty men . . . of renown" may explain the word "tyrants," further describing the character and reputation of these men. Martin Luther called them "tyrants," commenting, "Nephilim non dictos a magnitudine corporum, sicut Rabbini putant, sed a tyrannide et oppressione quod vi grassati sint, nulla habita ratione legum aut honestatis, sed simpliciter indulgentes suis voluptatibus et cupiditatibus." That is, "The Nephilim are not named from the size of their bodies, as the Rabbis say, but from tyranny and oppression by violent force, without consideration for laws or honour, but simply indulging in their pleasures and desires." Matthew Poole, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, writes: "Giants; men so called, partly from their high stature, but principally for their great strength and force, whereby they oppressed and tyrannized over others: for this is mentioned as another sin, and cause of the flood; and therefore they seem to be here noted, not for the height of their stature, which is no crime, but for their violence, which also is expressed beneath, ver 11, 13. ... men of renown, i.e. famous in their generations; when indeed they should have been infamous for the abuse of their stature and strength to tyranny and cruelty."

This verse states clearly that "The [nephilim] were on the Earth in those days, and also after that." So the imaginative notion that the nephilim were the miraculous result of these marriages is outrageous and far fetched. Matthew Poole comments, "After that time there arose a new generation or succession of that sort of men." The verse is likely saying, "In those days, there were tyrants on the Earth, and also after that when the Sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them." Quite possibly the children may have been influenced by the violent, oppressive, wicked men before them and thus rejected the virtue and religion of their ancestors.

There are two substantial problems with the two major views of this verse where "giants" is understood to mean individuals "of extraordinary bulk and stature."

1. The Fallen Angels View: Jesus made it clear that angels cannot marry (Matt. 22:30; Mark 12:25; cf. Luke 20:34). Enough said. If that is not sufficient, then answer these: Do angels, by nature, possess a material corporeality adequate to the contraction of a human marriage? Or, by rebellion against their Creator, can they acquire it? Are there some creatures in heaven and on earth which, through sinful degeneracy, or by sinking into an unnatural state, can become possessed of the power, which they have not by nature, of generating and propagating their species? Another point of consideration; if angels are the villains, then why is God's anger directed against humans?
2. The Sethite View: Scripture says, "Do not be bound together with unbelievers" (2 Cor. 6:14). A believer (the Sons of God) marrying an unbeliever (the daughters of men) will not result in offspring that is physiologically different from their parents. This is the kind of belief that gives rise to the heresy that children of inter-marriages or "unequally yoked" marriages are demonic, in contradiction to Scripture: "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy" (1 Cor. 7:14).

Given the context, what seems to be the more likely interpretation of verse 4? Clearly not the two views above if "men of extraordinary bulk and stature" is understood. Every other place that "giants" appears in the Old Testament, the Hebrew word רפא (rapha) is used. Nephilim only appears in two verses in the Old Testament: Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33. Concerning the passage in Numbers, a footnote in Keil & Delitzsch's Commentary on the Old Testament reads, "the term Nephilim cannot signify giants, since the spies not only mention them especially along with the inhabitants of the land, who are described as people of great statue, but single out only a portion of the Nephilim as 'sons of Anak'."

The union of the Sons of God and the daughters of men is not what provoked God. God's annoyance is not with their nuptial arrangement. The Bible tells believers not to be unequally yoked with unbelievers (2 Cor. 6:14), but God does not condemn such marriages (1 Cor. 7:12-14). Children are considered holy if even one parent is a believer. Some people point out that God's displeasure comes chronologically before the Nephilim, and therefore He is provoked with their illicit nuptial unions. This concept has its problems as the Law regarding unequally yoked marriages had not yet been instituted. What provoked God was the violence and oppression impressed upon their fellow man by these tyrants. This is verified by the contents of verses 11 and 13: "Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence. ... Then God said to Noah, 'The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth.'" God was not destroying the Earth because of their marriage partners. He would have said as much to Noah otherwise.

Based on the information we have just looked at, here are two verses that help put things in perspective:

"These four were born to the giant (rapha, רפא) in Gath, and they fell (naphal, נפל—from where Nephilim, נפלים comes from) by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants" (2 Sam. 21:22).
"These were descended from the giants (rapha, רפא) in Gath, and they fell (naphal, נפל—from where Nephilim, נפלים comes from) by the hand of David and by the hand of his servants" (1 Chron. 20:8).

When you eliminate the illogical and nonsensical, whatever remains is likely closer to the truth than the fantastical and fabulous imaginations you had prior. Examine the context, interpret Scripture with Scripture, and consult the whole counsel of the Word of God. Be responsible students of God's Word, having great reverence and respect for it.

WHAT A KISS MEANS

"Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth! For your love is better than wine" 

(Song of Solomon 1:2, ESV).

Notice here first that the bride says "let him kiss me." There is no mention of her initiating the kissing. She is the one being pursued, not her pursuing him. It would have been overbearing and unlady like for her to kiss him. "We love him, because he first loved us." (1 John 4:19, KJV). The truth is, it is God who pursues us. How can a sinner who hates God pursue Him? Second, we read in the text above about the Shulammite woman's desire for her lover's kisses. To her, his love is better than wine. The meaning here is simple. The young Shulammite bride is saying her groom's affectionate kisses are better than earthly pleasure. This truth is further brought out in verse 4: "We will rejoice in you and be glad; We will extol your love more than wine. Rightly do they love you." Here we see three actions the daughters of Jerusalem did. First, they "rejoiced" in the King's person; Second, they "extolled" [praised, exulted] the King's great love more than earthly pleasure; Third, they "rightly" love the King. They are commended for loving the King. His reputation won the respect, affection, and admiration of the Shulammite and the virgins. 

From verses 1 to 4 we are given the reasons why the Shulammite Bride and maidens love the King. 

1. The King's "love" is genuine, not FALSE. A love that brings security to the one loved.

2. The King's "oils" carry a bad smell, but a pleasing FRAGRANCE (see Song 4:10; John 12:3). There is nothing displeasing about his character. Is not Christ fragrant in His person? We read in John 12:3 that not only was the sinful woman’s worship costly, its fragrance was pleasing to the Lord Jesus as well. Yet, here we read in Song 4:10 of the fragrance of the king’s oils. His oils are also costly. So costly, that it cost God the Father to send His only beloved Son to die for our sins. The Father could say of the Son’s earthly life, "This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!" (Matt. 17:5, NASB). Is He not worth worshipping?

3. The King's "name" is not soiled, but is like oil FILTERED (see Eccl. 7:1; Prov. 22:1). The King was known for his good reputation. Neither fine oils or riches can ever compare to a good name. A reputation not soiled by deceit or corruption.

LEARNING ABOUT MY GRACIOUS GOD

"So he got up and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion for him, and ran and embraced him and kissed him.” 

(Luke 15:20, NASB).  

I remember a number of years ago, when I went through a dark period in my walk with Christ, I fell into deep depression and rebellion. It was a period I would rather not recount. However, even when we are at our worse, the Lord is always at His best. Anyway, I had left the local Church I was a part of for awhile. During this dark time, I frequented some of the bars with some friends. During this period, God had shown glimpses of Himself to me. Reminders that He had not forgotten me and that I was still his child. I had once again drunk from the putrid waters of pleasure from a world I was redeemed from. I fed off the husks of the world, and experienced the emptiness and dissatisfaction, when my Father had the fatted calf, the signet ring, and robe in waiting.  Here I was, a child of the King wallowing in the pigpen of the world. Yet, the moment came, when I came to my senses. One night while returning home, I turned aside from the sidewalk I was on, and found a quiet dark corner in between a building. There I met with my heavenly Father, wept, and repented of my sin and rebellion. I had expected God to really come down on me hard with the discipline of His judgment, instead, I was met with the discipline of His Grace!  Like the father who lovingly welcomed back his rebellious son, so the Lord welcomed me back. I cannot change the past, but I sure can change the present with the Lord’s help, which in turn will change my future for the better for God’s glory! So what was the Lord teaching me through all this? He was purging me of the unbeliever’s version of God. A god created from the clay of the unbeliever’s vain imaginings and misconceptions of who God really is. Wherein I thought to be met with an angry and vengeful God for the wrong I did, I was met instead by a gracious and loving Father. Now that’s grace! Amazing GRACE!

Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found;
Was blind, but now I see.

-John Newton.

Beloved Lord, indeed, your grace astounds me! Yes, how slow we are to grasp the truth that You are not a tyrant ready to beat us over the head the moment we slip up and get out of line. You are much gracious than that! Even though we deserve Your judgment, You instead entreat us with Your kind grace. What an awesome God we serve! Amen!

THE ORIGINAL ROOT OF EVIL IN MAN

"Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." 

(Romans 7:13, KJV).

Modern Christianity talks a lot about the fruit of evil almost to the exclusion of the root of evil. Sure, the Church may talk about Satan, the fall, sin, evil, etc. But it is mostly surface stuff, and like I said, most of the focus is on the fruit of evil as opposed to the root of evil. More focus needs to be put into a better understanding of the root of evil. For it is only when we gain a better understanding of the root of evil, will we begin to gain a greater understanding and awareness of how bad evil truly is. It is hard to meet and fight an enemy on the battlefield, if we are ignorant of his motives and strategy of warfare he wages against us. FIRST, God's law from His Word like an x-ray reveals to us our sinfulness.  "For through the Law comes the knowledge of sin." (Rom. 3:20, NASB). SECOND, another way of gaining a better understanding of our own sinfulness is to get into the presence of God. There we will experience His holiness, which in turn, the light of His holiness will expose the sin and evil in our own hearts. For he who is intouch with the evil in his own heart will be intouch with the evil in his neighbor's heart. Peter received a revelation of his own sinfulness, when he confessed: “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” (Luke 5:8, ESV). In the Old Testament, Job also got a revelation of his own sinfulness before God and said: "therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes.” (Job 42:6, ESV). The Prophet Isaiah, when he saw the Lord of Glory, cried out: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!” (Isa. 6:5, ESV).

A lot of people balk at the idea of God judging sin so severely, they contend what the big deal is about sin and evil, and why does God's judgement on sin have to be so harsh? Especially when the subject of hell is brought up, which reveals their lack of understanding the evil nature of sin. Such people do not understand God's holiness, justice, and judgment. Until they understand the pernicious nature of sin, only then will such a person comprehend the evil nature of sin and the harm it does, and why God must judge those who are unrepentant of their sinfulness. Of course, the exceeding sinfulness of our sin cannot be understood, let alone comprehended until God reveals it to us. This indeed, is a kindness of God, since we are dead in our trespasses and sins (see Eph. 2:1). It is only when we are awakened to face the dreadfulness of our sin will we be ready to seek for a remedy for our sin problem. This is where Christ comes in and the value of His sacrifice on the Cross for our sin.

O Lord, give us a keen sense of our sinfulness, lest we boast in our self-righteousness; give us an awareness of Your holiness, lest we lose our reverence and awe of You; give us a sense of our own emptiness apart from You, lest we be full of our sinful selves, when we should be filled with Your holy presence. In Christ Jesus name we ask, Amen.

A 20 POINT OUTLINE FROM "THE ALMOST CHRISTIAN DISCOVERED"

By Matthew Mead 

"You almost persuade me to become a Christian!" Acts 26:28 

How far a man may go in the way to heaven--and yet be but almost a Christian? This shown in twenty various steps:

1. A man may have much knowledge--and yet be but almost a Christian.

2. A man may have great and eminent spiritual gifts--and yet be but almost a Christian.

3. A man may have a high profession of religion, be much in external duties of godliness--and yet be but almost a Christian.

4. A man may go far in opposing his sin--and yet be but almost a Christian.

5. A man may hate sin--and yet be but almost a Christian.

6. A man may make great vows and promises, strong purposes and resolutions against sin--and yet be but an almost Christian.

7. A man may maintain a strife and combat against sin--and yet be but almost a Christian.

8. A man may be a member of a Christian church--and yet be but almost a Christian.

9. A man may have great hopes of Heaven--and yet be but almost a Christian.

10. A man may be under visible changes--and yet be but almost a Christian.

11. A man may be very zealous in matters of religion--and yet be but almost a Christian.

12. A man may be much in prayer--and yet be but almost a Christian.

13. A man may suffer for Christ--and yet be but almost a Christian.

14. A man may be called by God and embrace his call--and yet be but an almost Christian.

15. A man may have the Spirit of God--and yet be but almost a Christian.

16. A man may have faith--and yet be but almost a Christian.

17. A man may have a love to the people of God--and yet be but almost a Christian.

18. A man may obey the commands of God--and yet be but almost a Christian.

19. A man may be sanctified--and yet be but almost a Christian.

20. A man may do all the external duties and worship which a true Christian can--and yet be but almost a Christian.

HOOK UP CULTURE AND THE CHRISTIAN

“Now flee from youthful lusts…” 

(2 Timothy 2:22, NASB).

“Flee from sexual immorality…” 

(1 Cor. 6:18, ESV).

Can a man take fire in his bosom And his clothes not be burned?
(Prov. 6:27, NASB).

In today’s culture hardly anyone anymore bats an eye at sexual immorality such as adultery, fornication, or homosexuality. Many people’s conscience is deadened to such sins. It is no longer a big deal to a lot of people. Sadder still is the fact that “Hook-up culture” is not only thriving, but such sexual vices are approved of (or celebrated) as well (see Rom. 1:32). However, what you never hear talked about from this sub-culture of vice are the consequences associated with such sinful practices. So what are these consequences? (1.) The danger of contracting an STD or the HIV virus that causes AIDS and passing it on to others; (2.) Then there is pregnancy out of wedlock; (3.) Then there is the “comparison of one’s current lover to the last sexual partner” game that never seems to end well; (4.) Addiction to sexual sin. (5.) Multiple sexual partners makes sexual intimacy and bonding with a life’s partner much more difficult; (6.) Contributes to marital unfaithfulness. (7.) Men are less likely to respect or want to marry women who are promiscuous. (8.) Need I say that sexual immorality is sin before God (see 1 Cor. 6:18). This is why Paul warned Timothy to "flee from youthful lusts" (2 Tim. 2:22); and again, The Apostle warns the Church at Corinth to "flee from sexual immorality" (1 Cor. 6:18). Dear friend and fellow Christian, are you struggling with youthful lusts, are you tempted by what Hook-up Culture has to offer? Remember, the consequences I listed earlier. Take heart, the Lord knows all about your struggles and is able to deliver you from them. "No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it." (1 Cor. 10:13, ESV).

Lord, this world takes such wonderful gifts as sex and corrupts it into something you never intended to be. I’m sure this world that practices sexual immorality grieves your heart, and so it should. Dear Lord, it’s not just the act of sexual immorality that displeases you, it is the very thought of it that took root in the human heart that began the downward fall into sexual sin. O God, search our hearts and see if there be any impure sexual thoughts and forgive us of such sins, and wash us of all such sexually sinful thoughts in Jesus name we pray, Amen.

CAN GOD FORGIVE SINS APART FROM HIS SACRIFICE?

"And without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness."

(Hebrews 9:22, NASB)

A friend had recently challenged me with this question: “Since Jesus is God, why can’t He just forgive us of our sins without the need to die for our sins on the Cross? Since He is God, this shouldn’t be a problem for Him. His dying on the Cross was unnecessary to forgive us of our sins. So why bother?” Great question. First, without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins (see Heb. 9:22). Second, because sin had brought death to man, another had to die in man’s place, one without sin in order to redeem man back to God. Since sin brought death to man, a Man was required to bring death to sin, so that man may have the opportunity to have life once again (see Rom. 5:12; Eph. 2:1, 5; 1:7). Third, also His ways are not our ways, nor are His thoughts our thoughts (see Isa. 55:8). God doesn't need our permission to run the universe, nor does He do things the way we want Him to. He is God, we are not. So can sinners be forgiven apart from Jesus' sacrifice? No! Why? Because "without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" for our sins. (see text).

Dear Lord, how thankful We are that forgiveness is found in Christ. Nothing can wash away our sin, except the blood of Jesus. O how precious is His blood to His redeemed children! There are those who believe your death, burial, and resurrection was unnecessary. However, your children who have been forgiven know better. We know how wonderful it is to drop our burden of sin and guilt at the foot of the Cross and by faith found forgiveness in the Lord Jesus Christ. O bless His Holy Name! Amen.