Genesis 6… and then some

In about 8 hours, my baby will be getting poked and prodded and fixed (hopefully!). By baby, I mean car, lol. I will probably be up all night anyway. I slacked big time today and didn’t study at all, so I’m about to do it now. While I’m typing this, I’m searching through Grace to You for an explanation on Genesis 6:1 – 2:

When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose.
Genesis 6:1-2 ESV

The ‘sons of God’ could be so many things. In my Reformation Study Bible, it says:

These have been identified as Sethites (the traditional Christian interpretation), as angels (the earliest Jewish interpretation) and as royal tyranncal successors to Lamech who gathered harems (proposed by rabbis of the second century A.D.). All three interpretations can be defended lingustically. On the surface, the first interpretation best fits the immediate preceding context (a contrast of the curse laden line of Cain with the godly line of Seth), but it fails to explain adequately how ‘daughters of man’ refers specifically to Cainite women. The second view has ancient support, but seems to contradict Jesus’ statement that angels do not marry (Mark 12:25) and does not explain why the focus is on mortals (verse 3) and the judgement on them (verses 5 – 7). The third interpretation best explains the phrase ‘any they chose’, but lacks much ancient support. The best solution is probably a combination of the last two. These human offsprint are also the spiritual offspring of satan empowered by demons.

And Matthew Henry says:

The sons of God (that is, the professors of religion, who were called by the name of the Lord, and called upon that name), married the daughters of men, that is, those that were profane, and strangers to God and godliness. The posterity of Seth did not keep by themselves, as they ought to have done, both for the preservation of their own purity and in detestation of the apostasy. They intermingled themselves with the excommunicated race of Cain: They took them wives of all that they chose. But what was amiss in these marriages? (1.) They chose only by the eye: They saw that they were fair, which was all they looked at. (2.) They followed the choice which their own corrupt affections made: they took all that they chose, without advice and consideration. But, (3.) That which proved of such bad consequence to them was that they married strange wives, were unequally yoked with unbelievers, 2Co_6:14. This was forbidden to Israel, Deu_7:3, Deu_7:4. It was the unhappy occasion of Solomon’s apostasy (1Ki_11:1-4), and was of bad consequence to the Jews after their return out of Babylon, Ezr_9:1, Ezr_9:2. Note, Professors of religion, in marrying both themselves and their children, should make conscience of keeping within the bounds of profession. The bad will sooner debauch the good than the good reform the bad. Those that profess themselves the children of God must not marry without his consent, which they have not if they join in affinity with his enemies.

And John Macarthur, in his commentary, says:

The sons of God, identified elsewhere almost exclusively as angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7), saw and took wives of the human race. This produced an unnatural union which violated the God ordained order of human marriage and procreation. Some have argued that the sons of God were the sons of Seth who cohabited with the daughters of Cain; others suggest they were perhaps human kings wanting to build harems. But the passage puts string emphasis on the angelic versus human contrast. The NT places this account in sequence with other Genesis events and identifies it as fallen angels who indwelt men. Matthew 22:30 does not necessarily negate the possibility that angels are capable of procreation, but just that they do not marry. However, to procreate physically, demons had to possess human, male bodies.

I must admit – It is very confusing. And I’m not the type who can just skip over that, so I’m praying for better understanding. I don’t want to eisegete ANYTHING in the Bible (or anywhere else for that matter). I may just go on to chapter 7 and come back to that.

Anyhow, on to studying. If you have insight, PLEASE share. I welcome it. Can we really be sure who the sons of God are in that passage ?

Grace and peace.


One thought on “Genesis 6… and then some

  1. Josh Hicks says:

    I’d go with Henry on this one. It’s very understandable in light of the sons of God, being of the godly line, and the daughters of men being of ungodly line. Just my humble opinion, though.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: