Mythmaking
that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. Genesis 6:2 NASB
Took wives – So much has been written about this very odd story. We have commentators who view the text as a description of angelic beings, or powerful men, or demons, or symbols of conflict. But perhaps we can make some little bit of progress by considering the role of myth in the time of the exodus. Certainly the children of Israel who came out of Egypt were familiar with the mythical view of the world. The incident with the golden calf (bull) is a prime example of the blurring of mythical views of reality with YHVH’s attempt to reform their worldview. Perhaps this account in Genesis 6 is another example.
In the mythical world, there is no division between the sacred world and the natural world. Oswalt remarks, “If there is any kind of boundary between humans and gods, or between gods and nature, then the rituals will not work [i.e., those practices that attempt to control the divine via human actions], and we humans are left with no way to affect our destinies. This denial of boundaries is especially seen in the sexual domain.”[1]
For a moment imagine that this story is really about recognizing that the worldview of YHVH is not like the mythical view of Egypt. Imagine that this story isn’t about the event of angelic beings coming to earth to have intercourse with human women. Imagine that this story is a way of underlining the separation of the divine from the human world. If the children of Israel grew up in the Egyptian mythology, sexual interaction between gods and humans would have been an expected part of their worldview. Mythology depends on continuity, i.e., the absence of barriers. But YHVH intends to re-educate His people. He will need to demonstrate to them that the supposed continuity is dangerous fiction. To live as if the gods and humans inhabit a continuous scale is to allow tragedy. In fact, it is to destroy the world (the flood follows this account). The story isn’t important in the details about who, how and why. It is important because it establishes that the divine world is not part of the human world. The two are distinct and separate. The other bit of evidence in the Tanakh that emphasizes this separation is the fact that in the biblical world dead people do not affect living people. Ancestors do not haunt our lives. We are not required to placate the dead in order to escape curses they might cast upon us. The dead in Sheol are weak, powerless and ineffective and they cannot return.
The concept of Sheol and the story of the Nephilim are effective re-education tools necessary for Israel to leave Egypt behind.
Topical Index: myth, Nephilim, Genesis 6:2
[1] John Oswalt, The Bible Among the Myths, p. 56.
So this didn’t actually happen? It’s just an educational story?
I have a very similar question about this too. I would love for someone to add and clarify.
Occam’s razor states the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely the thing becomes. In other words, the obvious or the simplest explanation is usually going to fit the best. There is a reason we keep Lord Occam around. I think it is for situations such as this. Why does “sons of God” get distorted here, when we don’t seem to read “nephilim” into the hundreds of other times it gets used and means those who follow God? That’s what I want to know.
Shalom Derek,
Reading Gen 10:6- reveals where the “nephilim” comes from. They are certainly giants, man of reknown, and not “fallen” angels! This topic has captured my interest many years ago. Sharing here what I have shared then.
Gen 10:6 And the sons of Ham; Cush, and MITZRIAM (מִצְרַיִם Mitsrayim-Upper and Lower EGYPT:—Egypt, Egyptians, Mizraim) , and Phut, and Canaan.
Gen 10:8 And Cush begat NIMROD: he began to be a mighty one (Man of REKNOWN) in the earth.
Gen 10:9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.
Gen 10:10 And the beginning of his kingdom was BABEL ……..
Anakim (Hebrew: עֲנָקִים ‘Ǎnāqîm ) were described as a race of giants, descended from ANAK of a Cushite tribe from Babel. Their formidable warlike appearance, as described by the spies sent to search the land, filled the Israelites with terror.
The Philistine giants whom David encountered (2 Samuel 21:15-22 ) were descendants of the Anakim.
Now, we know where those GIANTS come from- Ham, one of the sons of Noach.
Hope that helps. Shalom!
Ester, I’ll bite…why then in Hebrew roots is there an obsession that Nephilim is referring to fallen angles and if you youtube ‘Nephilim Hebrew roots” you can find easily hundreds of hours of teachings. Where are they pulling that belief from?
Shalom Derek, 🙂
Very sad! Too many “Hebrew Roots” movement teachings out there saying the same thing that “Fallen” (from Hebrew naphal) angels, procreating, while they truly cannot, being spirits, having no gender!!!
Bill Cloud’s teachings and humble personality stands above many of those in HR ,
here’s a good link to Giants in the Land-
https://youtu.be/GDN1k2m-lVw Enjoy! You will be blessed.
I know that what I’ve heard before also is about, “ask the right question”. Like things aren’t meant to be taken literal. Exp: Jonah and the fish. The point of the story isn’t about how he was swallowed by a fish, that question doesn’t bother the author. The question that the book was solving for was, “Why does Jonah run?”. It kind of messes with my head because it turns into even the age of men in the bible. “xyz lived for 800 years”. I don’t think that we are supposed to be bothered by that, but for whatever reason it drives me nuts hahah.
If it happens so many times that you say, “Ya right” eventually I can’t help it feel like it’s something that I can’t hang my hat on as, ‘truth’ other than maybe that the ‘truth’ is about the experience – not exactly about the time frame or event that happened…. maybe?
A topic of myth indeed, though Intriguing- a biblical race of giants present in the land of Canaan, supposed to be demigods, of “fallen angels” mating with humankind- women?!
“Nephilim”, a word meaning the ‘fallen ones’, or ‘those who have fallen’, was the original name given by the Israelites to the fallen angels.
Strange confirmation of this suggestion comes from rereading Genesis 6: 2 of the Sons of God coming unto the Daughters of Men, whereas verse 4 states firmly that: ‘The Nephilim WERE in the earth in those days, and also AFTER that (the Flood), when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men.’
If these were the corrupt half-humans that were to be destroyed at the flood, why would they still be around AFTER the flood, at the time of Joshua? They therefore played no part in the corruption of mankind, as believed by some.
Some confuse the nephilîm WITH the sons of God, attempting to link the root word for the nephilîm with the Hebrew word of נפל (nāphal) meaning ‘to fall’ or ‘to fall in battle, by the sword’, ‘to be killed’, ‘to be fallen’ and also ‘to fall unto/upon’; all of these definitions display characteristics not held by the nephilîm nor, the sons of God.
The biggest clues to the identification of the nephilîm will come from Numbers 13:33 :-
And there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, who come of the Nephilim; and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.
When the Old Testament was first translated to the Greek language, the word for nephilîm read γίγαντες (gigantes), the Greek word for GIANTS. This is confirmed in Numbers 13:33 [6] with the description of the Israelites when compared to the race of giants.
It is extremely important for us to understand that in Hebrew grammar the singular nāphal cannot form the plural nephilîm. If we were to follow grammatical rules within the language we would end up with the plural nōphelîm.
In the Masoretic Texts (MT), the word nephilîm is used twice in this verse, but oddly enough is spelled differently. Many have wondered what this could mean. In the first occurrence we find:
נפילים NFYLYM (נפלים NFLYM This is without the extra yod.)
The spelling comes with the matres lectiones (mother of words- to preserve the proper pronunciation of words) throwing in an extra י (yod) to give us a proper pronunciation of the word nef-ee-leem.
Oddly enough all three occurrences of the nephilîm in the Samaritan Pentateuch preserve only the latter form of spelling.
We can see how the Greek Septuagint (LXX) labeled these nephilîm as GIANTS and why they were constantly described as giants in Numbers 13:33 and their Post-Exilic references.
Numbers 13:33 is a lot clearer with this understanding because we can now see how a race of giants (nephilîm ) gave birth to another race of giants (Anakim) followed by the birth of a third race of giants (nephîlîm), who towered over the Israelites.
To review, the nephilîm (simply giants, NOT fallen angels) were a product of the sons of God (those who walked with God) and the daughters of men (those who did not walk with God)
Breaking the last part of this verse (Genesis 6:4) down even further, and studying the grammar, we find that it literally translates to the following:
הגברים אשׁר םעולם אנשׁי השׁם …the mighty ones who from old, men [of] name.
These nephilîm are clearly spoken of with great honor, of great reknown.
” It is important because it establishes that the divine world is not part of the human world. The two are distinct and separate.” -Skip
Ester, I think I need to quote your very scholarly treatment of the translation to a lot of people around me who have been confused about this. People love sensationalism, I think, and tend to believe things they read in novels written about Biblical themes. Thank you and Skip, both!
Skip, can I quote you “the divine world is not part of the human world. The two are distinct and separate.”? I cannot find a single false religion that does not blur these lines! I wish you could write more on this subject, which is the cause of so much confusion. Thank you, again.
Completely agree with your conclusion, Ester. These were not, “fallen Angels”. Angels don’t have sex with humans and produce offspring. That’s complete and utter non-sense.
Thanks for the detailed comment.
Question, though. Didn’t that all come from Petros Koutoupis’s book “The Nephilim: Their Origins and Evolution”?
It seems to be almost word for word.
Dear Mark, Perhaps an “EDIT” button would be great here, hehe more work for you.
That topic on Nephilim has been of keen interest to me for many years now, many Hebrew Roots “teachers” (I can name a few off hand) have taught on that topic, and I have stood against their teachings, declaring as you did that it is utter nonsense! And for the same reasons -that spirits cannot mate with humans nor were they created to procreate!
I have heard “testimonies” of women being molested by demons whilst they slept, and I have challenged them if they became pregnant? They said NO.
I have heard of “Unclean” houses where folks have been murdered, and one can sense the heavy gloom that blanketed the places. I wouldn’t go to such places!!
I neglected to add in Adapted from….at that early hour, but couldn’t resist commenting on this Topic.
I copied the technical better explanations to make a clearer post, as I do with the lengthy posts I do here. I don’t usually Comment right away after reading TWs, but ponder over it first, do some searching and digging before posting.
Shalom to you! Hope you have found a good job.
Ester, Ester, Ester….our first disagreements. May it be one of many, i mean few. I think it was General Patton who said if everyone is thinking alike, then someone is not thinking .
HOWEVER, Scripture does imply that the Holy Spirit leads in the same direction. So there that.
Wait…do you ascribe to a Holy Spirit? 😉
Well, bcp, I do not in the least object to your disagreement, hopefully, singular.
You are first of all respectful and non ‘aggressive’, as in pushy attitude. (smile)
Your love comes through with how you write.
I certainly do, it will be the Ruach of YHWH, and therefore would be a HOLY Spirit that would lead us to ALL truth, IF and WHEN we seek. ABBA bless and keep you! Shalom!
bcp, just sharing this video with you, he is a favourite Hebrew Roots teacher when I first started on this journey, many years ago, and the only one who makes sense. Please watch IF you like…https://www dot.youtube dot .com/watch?v=GDN1k2m-lVw
I am sure you will be so blessed. Shalom and love to you.
My mistake in forgetting to add in “Adapted from….” in some technical paragraphs, from Graham Hancock. I realised that after posting, but there is no editing available here. My apologies!
You can edit your own comments for up to 15 minutes after they’re posted.
My question in regards to where those comments came from, was because it seems about 90% of it was a copy and paste directly from the book link I gave.
Sometimes sources that are used even originate themselves from someone else that didn’t acknowledge it too.
Using sources is always a good thing. But I guess I’m just not a big fan of copy and paste replies.
Shavua Tov Ester.
Mark,
Noted. Henceforth i shall quote from obscure and non-computer searchable sources AND i will edit my posts mercilessly for 15 minutes…so, does that 15 minutes renew w/each edit, or is it static from the first post.
i PROMISE you, this is vital information for someone who panics after each post. (i know you don’t believe that, but it is true).
Also…how does one edit the font to reflect italics, bolding, etc.? i have tried EVERYTHING, to no avail. thanks!
You add those elements by using HTML markup . This link may help Adding HTML tags to Wp Comments. Just make sure to add a closing bracket after the markup.
Oh, and, I’m one of those weirdo’s that like quotes to be searchable. Because then I can see where they came from as well. I like verifiable quotes.
Hey Mark,
Is there a way you can make hyperlinking work in the comments section here (the <a href=…)? When I quote from a book, I sometimes like to link the book an Amazon or some other site.
Following are instructions to indent a quote (blockquote), bold, or italicize. Just use the following html command words/letters:
With each, the functions are opened and closed using the left and right arrow keys (below the “K” and “L” on the keyboard). Open with the left arrow key, followed by the command (“blockquote”, “b”, or “i”), then the right arrow. Then input your text. Close the selected text by using the left arrow key, followed by a forward slash ( / ), the command once again, then right arrow key. Since these left and right arrow keys and backslash will disappear if used correctly, I’ll illustrate below by using brackets. So, just substitute the left or right arrow keys for the brackets below, and you’ll get the desired effect:
[b]This is how to bold[/b]
[i]This is how to italicize[/i]
You may combine any or all of these; that is, for example, you can also bold and/or italicize text within a blockquote. There are more html commands, but these are the most common and the only ones I’ve found work here on Skip’s site (I tried hyperlinking, which does not work).
Hyperlinking does work if you use the correct markup, as I did in my first response to bcp. I added a link for her to go to.
Sorry Craig. You are correct if you’re talking about linking to different elements within your comment. But, you can use external links.
However, I discourage adding links. If and when links go dead, it takes away from the websites SEO scores. It’s better to just say where and what it is.
If and when links go dead, it takes away from the websites SEO scores. It’s better to just say where and what it is.
I had no idea that dead links negatively affected SEO. Learn something new every day!
When I made this new site, it took me over two weeks to go through the 46,000 comments and 6,000 posts to fix the hundreds of dead links.
Oh, and I’ll go ahead and delete the 2 comments you used while link testing. Just so you know.
No problem on that; I was going to suggest you do that.
Here we go, bcp, I AGREE on this! LOL.
And, to Mark, I wasn’t quoting, I was adapting….
Mark, I do copy and paste a lot as it’s easier than for me to express exactly what I want to say, though, it must agree with my perspective, meaning, I already have knowledge of most of what I copy and paste. Less time consuming, that’s all; than having to find Hebrew words, and their precise meanings to copy, when it’s all there in one article. I don’t have Hebrew font on my laptop.
If, you have noticed, there’s always an “EXCERPT” or, “ADAPTED from” at the end of my lengthy comments. Look for them?
Just trying to explain… Shalom.
Ester, I love how you just slipped this phrase in: “the nephilim were…a product of the sons of God (those who walked with God) and the daughters of men (those who did not walk with God). That, my friend, was a silent bomb and I thank you for dropping it.
Utter nonsense? So one can believe in ex nihilo creation, a nahash speaking to a woman, Eden, sea becoming dry land, the first born of Egypt dying but Israelite children being spared by lambs blood, manna, ( on and on I could go – and I do believe all those things to be true BTW), yet angels or fallen elohim co mingling with men is utter nonsense? On what basis? That its hard to fathom? It challenges my box? It doesn’t fit what I think I know? Actually for me it brings clarity to several “difficult” passages when this story is allowed to say just what it says.
Craig, please explain what you view as an angel. The scripture tells me they are spirits sent out for service… Men or prophets of God seem to be the implication.
As servants of God don’t we all find the daughters of men worthwhile. Solomon did and where did that end…
Should we not let this verse explain later records of how we fall when serving God. Be it women, fashion, financial freedom, or even our ability to research history…
How do we consult and trust in these, instead of what Skip said a few tws ago… Should we not rather rely and trust on the strength and right hand of God?
the text says “sons of Elohim.” Seems to be the same “group” as Job 1. Psalm 82. Genesis 1:26. I Kinigs 22:19…I could make this long but my point is that to believe that the unseen is less real than what we see with our human eyes is not part of my world view formulated by scripture…. We are at war and it is not with flesh and blood….and to believe the unseen cannot leave their proper realm and interact with humans is not how I read the scriptures…but thats just where I am….TEST EVERYTHING
Shalom
Thank you, wrestle against principalities etc in high places… If an angle teach you a different gospel let him be accursed…
Craig Borden, we agree we need to satisfy our own understanding not another persons view. Short and concise response you provided leaves lot of room for self reflection. Till next time keep well and shalom… Or as Skip once reminded Rejoice as the kingdom is at hand.
POINT! Yes, i different understanding of Genesis 6 would answer SO many questions, fit SO MANY puzzle pieced together. Bless Steve Quayle and Tom Horn.
I know, the company i keep is questionable, at best, but they said that of Messiah, so I try to work with it best i can.
Following is adapted from a comment I made a few years ago on this subject.
From the Beale/Carson Commentary of The New Testament Use of the Old Testament, D. A. Carson notes that there are three main understandings of Gen 6:1-4:
1) the “sons of God” really were fallen angels who mated with human women
2) the “sons of God” were kings, judges, etc. who indulged in polygamy, taking many women as they wanted, abusing their power
3) they were from the line of Seth who married ungodly women [p 1070]
There is no doubt much support for #1; however, Jesus Himself said that angels do not marry. And while angels are certainly portrayed as males in Scripture, undoubtedly they are not actually sexual beings.
I think a better explanation, though this is admittedly relatively new and in the minority at present, follows:
Carson notes that the understanding of the Nephilim of Gen 6:1-4 as the mating of fallen angels with humankind ends up shifting the blame for the Flood from humans to demonic entities [p 1072]. With that in mind, the position that certain men willingly allowed themselves to be demon possessed seems better theologically.
For the record, Craig and i seem to ALMOST be in agreement here. 😉
You left out option 4: that they are fallen elohim. Obviously they are capable of mating with women
I was quoting the above-referenced work, which specifically states that those are the three most popular interpretations. But, I’m not quite sure exactly what you mean by “fallen elohim” here. Do you mean fallen kings or rulers, which are known as “gods” as in Psalm 82:6? If so, what exactly do you mean by “fallen”?
Fallen elohim. Lesser elohim, created by THE supreme Elohim YHVH. I believe that scripture bears out that YHVH created not only mankind, angels (malakim), etc but that He also created lesser elohim, His divine council. The “Us” of Genesis 1:26, 3:22. The “sons of Elohim” of Job 1, Genesis 6, Daniel 3:25..Any honest reading of Psalm 82 states that El (YHVH) stands in the congregation of (other) el. Only theological gyrations can interpret this to be anything other than other elohim, lesser elohim. I posit that
some rebelled. They rule the nations. They deceive. They seek worship. They are fallen rulers but not human. Part of their judgement, in Psalm 82, is that they will die like men…..
But, Craig, to mix the human with the divine is to muddle the rest. If you read into the text that divinity is a sliding scale, then all the claims of the heathen could be what they say they are, too. There is then no demonstrable difference between the pantheon of the Bible (one and only God Who possesses divinity (what is to be worshiped)) and the pantheon of anybody and everybody else. We are commanded to worship only Him, but divinity MEANS what is to be worshiped. The confusion starts here, but it extends to the rest. To say there is no clear line between the created and the divine is to say that there is no clear difference between YHVH and His creation. At that point the difference disappears, and you might as well be reading another Greek or Egyptian text as reading the Bible, because at that point, they will all be saying just about the same thing. Either YHVH is distinct from His creation, or He is not. That distinction is what makes Him divine: Other. No creature shares that attribute. Except if you are pagan or heathen, that is. A false god is defined by whatever (or whoever) claims the divinity (what is to be worshiped) that is due the Creator ALONE. That is what One means. That distinction disappears if you try to read it any other way. For me, anyway.
HI Craig Borden,
There’s so much we don’t really know about Fallen Angels aka. demon spirits.
HOW and WHY they were cast out of Heaven; we sort of “know” that they, being spirits have NO Free will like humankind nor created to procreate.
Still digging…. into Ancient pathways….S
Shalom!
Same as bcp’s response!
Though not with “willingly”. Demon possession comes when folks fall into deception, a sad state of being.
Just adding my bit- shifting blame to demonic beings, “the devil made me do it” , as if ha-satan has been given such authority over our lives and over YHWH’s Kingdom, is not the scenario in this event as there were nephilim before and after the Flood. They were NOT wiped out, as supposedly the main cause for the Flood.
They either survived the flood or repeated the actions of Genesis 6 post flood….and Israel was tasked again with wiping them out via conquering the promised land…yet did not
I personally believe that it’s one of those small tid-bits of the story that wasn’t the point of the story. Most of the time we read the Noah’s account and think that Nephilim made it corrupt. But when you read the account of the flood, people are secondary earth became corrupt:
[blockquote]11 Now the ]earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. [/blockquote]
“Earth” is mentioned 5 times here in three verses. The Earth was corrupt, the implications are interesting, God didn’t want to rebuild because of people rather the Earth. He was saying more or less that the earth needed to be built it was just the fact that people would have no place to live during this, ‘renovating’ time period that God had set out. But it changes the subject from Nephilim to Earth.
Shalom Derek,
“.. for the earth is filled with violence because of them.” The Earth became corrupt because men corrupted it. Reason why we can and are called to redeem earth through our right attitudes and walk with God Almighty-ALL creation longs for that deliverance through the revealing of the SONS (both genders) of YHWH.
Nephilim /giants, from the genealogies of Nimrod, are rebellious against YHWH, and therefore evil and wicked, that must be destroyed.
That is what it meant the nephilim were there before and AFTER the Flood, it’s to do with the HUMAN Nature that rejects transformation from yetza haRa to yetza haTov.
Ester
Your comment to Derick refers…
Nephilim implying the REKNOWN.
This is very interesting indeed as we read of seven deadly sins, then the overcoming of the world in the NT. All referring to the greatness within ourselves how we become so caught up in our talents that we start believing we are more important and “God sent” than others. Then instead of using our talent to benefit all we start using our talents to benefit ourselves… Then we become these great people that some begin to worship and follow, and this is what Yeshua warns us about – there is only one Master or Teacher or Shepherd and we are all but servants of this ONE – YHVH.
And it is when we expect a reward in this life for being what God created us for we cannot gain entrance into His kingdom even though we guide others into it.
As the Teacher said want does it benefit a man if he begot 100 children (Reknown person) but cannot save his own soul – a still-birth is better than he.
Thank you for adding this change in my perspective and thoughts concerning Nephilim.
Shalom Seeker,
“Then instead of using our talent to benefit all we start using our talents to benefit ourselves… Then we become these great people that some begin to worship and follow..”
Agree!
” there is only one Master or Teacher or Shepherd and we are all but servants of this ONE – YHVH.” LIKE!!!
“Reknown” means mighty beings- HUMANS of great stature, known for their wickedness and and rebellious ways, e.g. Nimrod, a “great warrior”. And I have read somewhere, for having bigger brains, were more intellectual too. Though that does NOT mean wiser, when they went against YHWH’s ways.
ABBA bless and keep you!