The Nephilim
Notes
Transcript
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 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.
In additional to Genesis 6, there are several other places in the Old Testament where the phrase “sons of God” (בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים, beney ha'elohim) are mentioned. Those scripture references are provided below. Look up each scripture and identify who is being referred to as the “sons of God” in the passage and whether they are human or divine.
Deuteronomy 32:7-8
“Remember the days of old,
Consider the years of many generations.
Ask your father, and he will show you;
Your elders, and they will tell you:
When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations,
When He separated the sons of Adam,
He set the boundaries of the peoples
According to the number of the children of Israel.
Remember the days of old;
consider the years of many generations;
ask your father, and he will show you,
your elders, and they will tell you.
When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of God.
🔹 Bible Versions that say "sons of God"
🔹 Bible Versions that say "sons of God"
These versions are based on the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) and the Septuagint (LXX), which are considered older and more original than the Masoretic Text (MT):
ESV (English Standard Version) "...he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God."
NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) "...according to the number of the gods."
NRSVUE (Updated Edition) "...according to the number of the heavenly beings."
NET (New English Translation) "...according to the number of the heavenly assembly."
(with a footnote explaining that the Hebrew likely originally read “sons of God”)
Lexham English Bible (LEB) "...according to the number of the sons of God."
Dead Sea Scrolls Bible (translating directly from DSS) "...according to the number of the sons of God."
Septuagint (Greek OT) – various English translations "...according to the number of the angels of God." or "angels of God."
🔹 Bible Versions that say "sons of Israel"
🔹 Bible Versions that say "sons of Israel"
These follow the Masoretic Text, which was the standard Hebrew text from around the 10th century AD:
KJV (King James Version) "...according to the number of the children of Israel."
NKJV (New King James Version) "...children of Israel."
NIV (New International Version) "...according to the number of the sons of Israel."
NASB (New American Standard Bible) "...sons of Israel."
CSB (Christian Standard Bible) "...number of the people of Israel."
Who are the “sons of God?”: trick question! The Bible reads “sons of Israel,” but most scholars agree with the original Masoretic text says “sons of God” (bene elohim).
1. Masoretic Text (MT) – “Sons of Israel”
The MT is the traditional Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible, compiled and standardized around the 7th to 10th centuries CE.
MT Reading: “When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.” (Deuteronomy 32:8, MT)
Problem with MT Reading: The “sons of Israel” (בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל) reading seems anachronistic because Israel as a nation did not exist yet when God divided the nations in Genesis 10–11.
It raises the question: how could God divide nations according to the number of the Israelites if Israel had not been formed yet?
2. Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) – “Sons of God”
The DSS, particularly 4QDeutj, a Hebrew manuscript fragment from Qumran dated to ~2nd century BCE, preserves a much older reading.
DSS Reading: “...according to the number of the sons of God (בְּנֵי אֵלִים or בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים)”
This reading supports the notion of a divine council—a heavenly host of spiritual beings over which Yahweh rules.
Most modern textual scholars and critical editions (e.g., NRSV, ESV, NET) now favor this reading due to its greater coherence with the context and earlier attestation.
3. Septuagint (LXX) – “Angels of God”
The Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible made in the 3rd–2nd centuries BCE by Jewish scholars in Alexandria, reflects a similar idea but with its own interpretive spin.
LXX Reading: “...according to the number of the angels of God.” (ἀγγέλων θεοῦ)
This suggests an angelic administration over the nations and anticipates later intertestamental and early Christian traditions (e.g., Daniel 10, Revelation).
While not identical to the DSS reading, the LXX preserves the supernatural worldview and supports the notion of heavenly beings being assigned over nations.
Are they divine or human?: most likely interpretation is divine.
Job 1:6
Who are the “sons of God?”: angels | divine beings | the divine council
Are they divine or human?: divine
Job 2:1
Who are the “sons of God?”: angels
Are they divine or human?: divine
Job 38:7
Who are the “sons of God?”: angels
Are they divine or human?: divine
There are four (4) main views on the identity of the “sons of God.” They are listed below along with the identity of the “sons of God” and “daughters of men” in each view. List some of the strengths and weaknesses of each view.
Sethite View
Who are the “sons of God”: descendants of Seth
Who are the “daughters of men”: descendants of Cain
Strengths:
This view aligns with the broader biblical theme of the intermarriage between the righteous and unrighteous leading to corruption (e.g., Ezra 9, Nehemiah 13).
It avoids the supernatural elements of the angelic view.
The context of Genesis 4-5 highlights two distinct lines: Seth's line (godly) and Cain's line (ungodly).
Weaknesses:
The phrase "sons of God" is not explicitly used in the Old Testament to refer to human believers until later texts.
This view struggles to explain the Nephilim as a consequence of this union.
Royalty View
Who are the “sons of God”: powerful kings or rulers
Who are the “daughters of men”: ordinary women or concubines
Strengths:
Ancient Near Eastern texts often portray kings as divine or semi-divine.
The practice of polygamy and the abuse of power by rulers fits the context of escalating wickedness in Genesis 6.
Weaknesses:
This interpretation does not clearly explain the emergence of the Nephilim as mighty men or giants.
The term "sons of God" more naturally refers to divine beings than to kings.
Fallen Angel View
Who are the “sons of God”: fallen angels
Who are the “daughters of men”: human women
Strengths:
The term "sons of God" (Hebrew: bene Elohim) is used elsewhere in the Bible (e.g., Job 1:6, 2:1) to refer to angels.
Ancient Jewish and early Christian traditions, such as the Book of Enoch, support this interpretation.
Jude 6-7 and 2 Peter 2:4 are sometimes linked to this view, describing angels who sinned.
Weaknesses:
This interpretation raises questions about how spiritual beings could physically reproduce with humans.
The idea of angelic beings marrying humans is seen by some as inconsistent with Jesus’ statement in Matthew 22:30 that angels do not marry.
Demon-possessed Human View (variation of the Fallen Angel View)
Who are the “sons of God”: men possessed by fallen angels
Who are the “daughters of men”: human women
Strengths:
This view avoids the biological difficulties of angels physically reproducing with humans.
It aligns with biblical examples of demons influencing human behavior (e.g., demonic possession in the Gospels).
It maintains the supernatural element of the text while staying within the boundaries of human reproduction.
Weaknesses:
The term "sons of God" (bene Elohim) is most commonly used in the Bible to refer to divine or angelic beings, not demon-possessed humans.
It lacks direct biblical evidence linking demon possession to the actions described in Genesis 6.
This view still faces challenges in explaining why the offspring of these unions were the Nephilim, described as mighty men or giants, suggesting a genetic anomaly.
Read 2 Peter 2:4 and answer the following questions:
What was God’s punishment on these fallen angels?
God did not spare the angels when they sinned. Instead:
He cast them into hell – The Greek word used here is "Tartarus", a term from Greek mythology that Peter uses to describe a deep, gloomy place of confinement.
He committed them to chains of gloomy darkness – This implies a restrained, imprisoned state, awaiting future judgment.
They are being kept there – This means they are not currently roaming free but are in a temporary holding place for punishment.
What is the judgment referred to in this verse and when will this judgment occur?
The judgment referred to is the final judgment, also known as the Day of Judgment.
This will occur at the end of the age, when God will judge all beings—humans and fallen angels alike.
These angels are currently awaiting that final judgment while in chains, suggesting that their ultimate punishment has not yet been fully carried out, but is certain and forthcoming.
Read Jude 6-7 and answer the following questions:
What does it mean that these angels “left their proper domain?”
It means that they:
abandoned the place, role, or realm God assigned to them—stepping outside the spiritual boundaries of their heavenly nature to commit sin, possibly by taking on human form or interacting with humanity in ways God had forbidden.
“Proper domain” refers to the sphere of authority or dwelling God had ordained for angels.
By leaving it, they rebelled against God’s order, much like how Satan did.
This language implies a willful departure from their God-given limits.
What in this passage possibly connects these fallen angels to the “sons of God” in Genesis 6?
Context of sexual immorality (v.7):
Jude draws a comparison between the angels’ sin and the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, which is described as indulging in sexual immorality and unnatural desire. The Greek word for “likewise” (ὁμοίως) shows that the angels committed a similar kind of sin—implying it involved unnatural or unlawful sexual relations.
Genesis 6 background:
In Genesis 6:1–4, the “sons of God” are described as taking human women as wives and producing offspring (the Nephilim). One interpretation—held by many early Jewish and Christian writers—is that these “sons of God” were fallen angels who crossed heavenly boundaries to engage in forbidden relations with humans.
Jude’s connection to ancient Jewish tradition:
Jude appears to draw from 1 Enoch, an ancient Jewish text that expands on Genesis 6 and directly links these fallen angels to the events described there. Jude even quotes 1 Enoch later in verse 14. This shows Jude was likely referencing this tradition when describing these angels.
Read 1 Peter 3:19-20 and answer the following questions:
What in this passages connects back to 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6-7 and ties them together?
“Spirits in prison”
This echoes 2 Peter 2:4, where God cast sinful angels into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness.
It also matches Jude 6, where the angels are kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness awaiting judgment.
So, all three passages describe disobedient spiritual beings who are now imprisoned and awaiting final judgment.
“They formerly did not obey… in the days of Noah”
This connects the imprisoned spirits specifically to the time of Noah, just as Jude and 2 Peter both associate fallen angels with early, pre-flood rebellion.
It shows the timing and context of their sin, tying all three passages to Genesis 6.
Divine judgment after rebellion
All passages show that God did not spare rebellious beings, especially when their sin corrupted humanity.
1 Peter adds that Christ proclaimed something to these spirits, which shows God's continued authority over them.
What in this passage possibly connects these fallen angels to the “sons of God” in Genesis 6?
Reference to the “days of Noah” and disobedience
Genesis 6:1–4 describes the “sons of God” taking human women as wives just before the flood.
The “spirits” mentioned here are described as being disobedient during that time, which matches the timing and rebellion of Genesis 6.
The term “spirits” (Greek: pneumata)
While “spirits” can refer to humans, in this context it is more often associated with spiritual beings, especially in prison.
Combined with 2 Peter and Jude, this suggests these are angelic beings—specifically the sons of God from Genesis 6 who sinned.
God’s judgment and the flood
Just as the disobedience of the sons of God in Genesis 6 led to God’s decision to send the flood, here too, these spirits are connected to the flood narrative and divine judgment.
Read Matthew 22:30 and answer the following questions:
What is the context of this verse? What question is Jesus answering?
Context:
The Sadducees, who did not believe in the resurrection, came to trap Jesus with a hypothetical question.
They asked about a woman who had been married to seven brothers (one after another, as each died). Their question: “In the resurrection, whose wife will she be?” (Matthew 22:23–28).
Jesus is answering this question:
If there is a resurrection, how will earthly relationships—like marriage—carry over into that life?
Jesus responds by correcting their misunderstanding. He says that in the resurrection:
There will be no marriage.
People will be “like angels in heaven”, meaning immortal, and not engaging in marriage or procreation as on earth.
He also rebukes them for not knowing the Scriptures or the power of God (v. 29).
Is Jesus referring to holy angels or fallen angels?
Jesus is clearly referring to holy angels:
He says people will be like angels in heaven—those who are in God’s presence, not the fallen or rebellious ones.
The fallen angels are not in heaven, and are never used in Scripture as a model for post-resurrection life.
His point is about the purity, immortality, and non-marital nature of angels who dwell in heaven.
Can angels take on physical form? If so, where do we find examples of this in scripture?
Yes, angels can take on physical form in Scripture. Several passages show this:
Old Testament Examples:
Genesis 18–19
Angels appear to Abraham and Lot as men.
Abraham offers them food, and they eat (Gen. 18:1–8).
The men of Sodom see them as men and even try to assault them (Gen. 19:1–5), showing they had a tangible, visible presence.
Genesis 32:24–30
Jacob wrestles with a man, who is later revealed to be a divine being—some say the Angel of the Lord or a theophany (appearance of God).
Judges 13
The angel of the Lord appears to Manoah and his wife (parents of Samson) in human form.
New Testament Examples:
Hebrews 13:2
“Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.”
Suggests that angels sometimes appear as people—so much so that humans don’t realize it.
Matthew 28:2–3
An angel rolls back the stone at Jesus’ tomb. His appearance is supernatural, but he is also seen and speaks to the women.
Regardless of which view we take on this passage, what is Satan trying to accomplish through these unholy marriages?
1. To Corrupt the Human Bloodline and Prevent the Coming of the Messiah
Genesis 3:15 contains God’s promise that the “seed of the woman” would one day crush the serpent’s head.
Satan, knowing that a deliverer would come through human lineage, likely sought to pollute, corrupt, or destroy that line to prevent the Messiah’s arrival.
These marriages—and the offspring known as the Nephilim—represent an attempt to defile humanity, making it unredeemable and stopping God's redemptive plan.
Genesis 6:12: “All flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.”
2. To Spread Unchecked Violence, Wickedness, and Chaos
Genesis 6:5 says, “The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth…”
Whether supernatural or merely sinful unions, these marriages resulted in a society filled with violence, evil imaginations, and rebellion.
Satan’s aim is always to destroy what God created as good—especially marriage and family.
3. To Imitate and Distort God’s Design for Marriage and Reproduction
God ordained marriage to be sacred and between a man and woman for godly offspring (Malachi 2:15).
These unholy unions mock that design, producing giants or mighty men (Genesis 6:4) who represent human pride and possibly demonic influence.
4. To Lead Humanity into Judgment
By encouraging unholy unions, Satan helps accelerate the moral collapse of humanity.
This sets the stage for God’s judgment through the flood—an attempt by Satan to destroy mankind or at least render God’s redemptive plan void.
But God preserves Noah—a “preacher of righteousness” and a man found blameless in his generations (Genesis 6:9)—ensuring the seed continues.
What is the resulting offspring of these unholy marriages?
The resulting offspring of these unholy marriages, according to Genesis 6:4, are called the Nephilim.
The term Nephilim comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to fall” (נָפַל naphal), so many translate it as “fallen ones.” However, its exact meaning is debated. What we do know from the text:
They were offspring of the “sons of God” and the daughters of men.
They were known as “mighty men of old”, heroes or warriors of great reputation.
Their presence is associated with a time of increased wickedness and violence on the earth.
What Do We Know for Sure?
The Nephilim were real historical figures, present “in those days and also afterward” (suggesting they reappeared after the flood, possibly in Numbers 13:33).
They were linked to a time of increasing wickedness, violence, and pride on the earth.
Their presence is part of the reason God says in Genesis 6:5–7 that He will destroy mankind with a flood.
🧱 Post-Flood Giant Clans
🧱 Post-Flood Giant Clans
Although the flood wiped out the Nephilim (along with the rest of humanity, except Noah’s family), the Bible later mentions other giant clans in the land of Canaan. These post-flood giants may have been:
Actual descendants of the pre-flood Nephilim (if their lineage somehow survived).
Second-generation hybrids from another angelic incursion (according to some interpretations).
Independent but similar groups, who were simply very large and fearsome warriors.
Here’s a breakdown:
1. 🔥 Anakim (Descendants of Anak)
1. 🔥 Anakim (Descendants of Anak)
Scripture references: Numbers 13:28, 33; Deuteronomy 9:2; Joshua 11:21–22
Described as very tall and strong warriors.
The spies sent by Moses said they saw the Anakim and felt like grasshoppers in comparison (Num. 13:33).
Called “descendants of the Nephilim” in that verse—linking them explicitly, at least from the spies' perspective.
Anak was a prominent figure; his sons were Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai (Numbers 13:22).
The Anakim lived primarily in Hebron and surrounding hill country in Canaan.
Joshua 11:21–22: Joshua eventually drove out most of the Anakim from the land, except in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod—Philistine territory.
📍Connection to Nephilim?
Direct link in Numbers 13:33—though possibly exaggerated.
Some scholars believe the Anakim were considered a continuation of the Nephilim-type warrior class.
2. 🗻 Rephaim
2. 🗻 Rephaim
Scripture references: Deuteronomy 2:11, 2:20; Genesis 14:5; Joshua 17:15
A broad term used for multiple giant tribes.
Sometimes translated simply as “giants.”
Associated with Canaan, Bashan, and surrounding territories.
Og of Bashan, king of the Amorites, was the last of the Rephaim (Deut. 3:11). His iron bed was over 13 feet long!
📍Connection to Nephilim?
Possibly a generic term for giant peoples post-flood.
Not called Nephilim, but may be related in nature or origin.
3. 💀 Emim
3. 💀 Emim
Scripture references: Deuteronomy 2:10–11
Lived in Moab before being displaced.
Described as great and numerous and tall, like the Anakim.
The Moabites called them Emim, but they were counted as Rephaim by the Israelites.
📍Connection to Nephilim?
Indirect. Part of the larger Rephaim classification.
Likely seen as Nephilim-like in size and reputation.
4. 🪨 Zamzummim (or Zamzummites)
4. 🪨 Zamzummim (or Zamzummites)
Scripture reference: Deuteronomy 2:20–21
Lived in the land of Ammon before being defeated by the Ammonites.
Also considered part of the Rephaim.
Described as great, numerous, and tall.
📍Connection to Nephilim?
Another giant race under the Rephaim umbrella.
Possibly regional names for similar groups of giant warriors.
If part of God’s judgment by sending the flood upon the earth was to destroy these giants (nephilim) that were the offspring of these unholy marriages, how did they reappear again after the flood?
📖 Key Passages to Consider:
📖 Key Passages to Consider:
Genesis 6:4 (ESV): “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them.”
Numbers 13:33 (ESV): “And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.”
🧩 Three Main Explanations:
🧩 Three Main Explanations:
1. A Second Incursion of Fallen Angels (Repeat of Genesis 6)
1. A Second Incursion of Fallen Angels (Repeat of Genesis 6)
This view suggests that after the flood, fallen angels again took human women and produced Nephilim.
While Genesis 6:4 says, “and also afterward,” this could imply that such events recurred post-flood.
Proponents argue that Satan, seeing that his first attempt failed, tried again with Anakim, Rephaim, and other giants mentioned later in the Old Testament.
However, Scripture does not explicitly describe a second angelic incursion, so this view relies on inference and tradition (such as 1 Enoch).
2. The Nephilim Referred to in Numbers 13:33 Are Not the Same Nephilim
2. The Nephilim Referred to in Numbers 13:33 Are Not the Same Nephilim
Some scholars argue the spies exaggerated out of fear. The Nephilim reference in Numbers 13 may have been figurative or legendary, not literal descendants of pre-flood beings.
Clue: The statement comes from the faithless spies, who said, “We seemed like grasshoppers…”
It's possible they saw tall, intimidating warriors (Anakim) and assumed or compared them to the Nephilim of old.
3. Nephilim Genes Somehow Survived Through One of Noah’s Daughters-in-Law
3. Nephilim Genes Somehow Survived Through One of Noah’s Daughters-in-Law
A minority view suggests that the Nephilim bloodline may have survived the flood through the wives of Noah’s sons.
While Scripture says Noah was “blameless in his generations” (Genesis 6:9), nothing is said about the genetic purity of his sons’ wives.
If one of them carried genetic traces of the Nephilim, their descendants (e.g., Anakim, Rephaim) might have carried giant-like traits. However, this is speculative and not directly stated in the text.
🧠 What Can We Say for Sure?
🧠 What Can We Say for Sure?
The original Nephilim perished in the flood—Genesis is clear that only Noah and his family survived (Genesis 7:23).
"Nephilim" reappearing post-flood (in Numbers 13:33) may refer either to:
A second similar event, or
People of great size and strength who reminded others of the Nephilim, whether literally related or not.
Is the reference to 120 years a limit on the lifespan of humans from this point forward, or is it in reference to the number of years before God will send the flood on the earth?
🕰️ View 1: A Countdown to the Flood (Judgment Delay)
🕰️ View 1: A Countdown to the Flood (Judgment Delay)
Interpretation:
The 120 years refers to the time remaining before God sends the flood.
In this view, God is declaring that mankind’s wickedness has reached a point where judgment is inevitable, but He will give them 120 more years before He brings the flood.
This aligns with the idea of God’s patience and long-suffering, giving people a chance to repent.
Fits the timeline: Noah had time to build the ark and preach righteousness (2 Peter 2:5), warning others during this 120-year period.
Support:
Context is judgment and the coming flood (Genesis 6:5–7).
God often announces judgment with a grace period (cf. Jonah 3:4—“Yet 40 days…”).
Fits well with the theme of divine patience.
👴 View 2: A Limit on Human Lifespan
👴 View 2: A Limit on Human Lifespan
Interpretation:
The 120 years is a new maximum lifespan God is placing on mankind due to their sinfulness.
Before the flood, humans regularly lived 700–900 years (see Genesis 5).
After the flood, lifespans gradually decrease, eventually leveling out closer to 120 years (though not immediately—e.g., Abraham lived to 175).
This view sees God placing a new limit on how long humans will live in their sinful condition.
Support:
This view interprets “his days shall be 120 years” as referring to individual human lives, not a countdown.
Modern human lifespans rarely exceed 120 years, possibly reflecting this divine limit.
✅ Which View Is Correct?
✅ Which View Is Correct?
Both interpretations have merit, and some scholars even see both meanings as compatible:
Primary context seems to favor View 1 (judgment delay)—God is preparing to wipe out corrupt humanity, and the 120 years is a period of warning before the flood.
However, View 2 (lifespan limit) could also reflect a long-term effect of human sinfulness that began to take root after the flood.
If we’re focusing on the immediate context of Genesis 6, the judgment countdown view seems stronger—but both interpretations are worth considering.
NOTES
When men began to multiply on the face of the earth: During these days of rapid population expansion (especially because of long lifespans in the pre-flood world), there was a problem with ungodly intermarriage between the sons of God and the daughters of men.
The sons of God saw the daughters of men: There are four main views on the identify of the sons of God.
The Sethite View
Interpretation: The "sons of God" are descendants of Seth, the righteous lineage, while the "daughters of men" are descendants of Cain, the unrighteous lineage.
Support:
This view aligns with the broader biblical theme of the intermarriage between the righteous and unrighteous leading to corruption (e.g., Ezra 9, Nehemiah 13).
It avoids the supernatural elements of the angelic view.
The context of Genesis 4-5 highlights two distinct lines: Seth's line (godly) and Cain's line (ungodly).
Criticism:
The phrase "sons of God" is not explicitly used in the Old Testament to refer to human believers until later texts.
This view struggles to explain the Nephilim as a consequence of this union.
The Royal or Dynastic View
Interpretation: The "sons of God" are powerful kings or rulers who claimed divine status, and the "daughters of men" are ordinary women they took as wives or concubines.
Support:
Ancient Near Eastern texts often portray kings as divine or semi-divine.
The practice of polygamy and the abuse of power by rulers fits the context of escalating wickedness in Genesis 6.
Criticism:
This interpretation does not clearly explain the emergence of the Nephilim as mighty men or giants.
The term "sons of God" more naturally refers to divine beings than to kings.
The Angelic or Fallen Angels View
Interpretation: The "sons of God" are interpreted as fallen angels who left their proper domain and took human women as wives, producing the Nephilim, a race of giants or mighty men.
Support:
The term "sons of God" (Hebrew: bene Elohim) is used elsewhere in the Bible (e.g., Job 1:6, 2:1) to refer to angels.
Ancient Jewish and early Christian traditions support this interpretation.
Jude 6-7 and 2 Peter 2:4 are sometimes linked to this view, describing angels who sinned.
Criticism:
This interpretation raises questions about how spiritual beings could physically reproduce with humans.
The idea of angelic beings marrying humans is seen by some as inconsistent with Jesus’ statement in Matthew 22:30 that angels do not marry.
Demon-Possessed Men View (Variation of the Fallen Angel View)
Interpretation: The "sons of God" are not fallen angels themselves but men who were demon-possessed and acted under the influence of demonic forces, taking human women as wives and producing the Nephilim.
Support:
This view avoids the biological difficulties of angels physically reproducing with humans.
It aligns with biblical examples of demons influencing human behavior (e.g., demonic possession in the Gospels).
It maintains the supernatural element of the text while staying within the boundaries of human reproduction.
Criticism:
The term "sons of God" (bene Elohim) is most commonly used in the Bible to refer to divine or angelic beings, not demon-possessed humans.
It lacks direct biblical evidence linking demon possession to the actions described in Genesis 6.
This view still faces challenges in explaining why the offspring of these unions were the Nephilim, described as mighty men or giants, suggesting a genetic anomaly.
The sons of God saw the daughters of men: It is more accurate to see the sons of God as either demons (angels in rebellion against God) or uniquely demon-possessed men, and the daughters of men as human women.
The phrase sons of God clearly refers to angelic creatures when it is used the three other times in the Old Testament (Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:7). The translators of the Septuagint translated sons of God as angels. Those ancient translators clearly thought sons of God referred to angelic beings, not to people descended from Seth.
Jude 6 tells us of the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own habitation. Jude goes on (Jude 7) to tell us they sinned in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh. Here in Genesis 6, as in Sodom and Gomorrah, there was an unnatural sexual union.
It is useless to speculate on the nature of this union. Whether it was brought about by something like demon possession, or whether these angelic beings had power permanently to assume the form of men is not revealed. But we should understand the occult is filled with sexual associations with the demonic, and there are those today who actively pursue such associations.
Jude 6 also makes it clear what God did with these wicked angels. They are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day for not keeping their proper place. Their sinful pursuit of freedom has put them in bondage.
1 Peter 3:19-20 tells us Jesus went to these disobedient spirits in their prison and proclaimed His victory on the cross over them.
An objection offered to this understanding is found in Matthew 22:30, where Jesus said angels neither marry nor are given in marriage; but Jesus never said angels were sexless, and He was also speaking about faithful angelic beings (angels of God in heaven), not rebellious ones.
From the book of 1 Enoch, which is not inspired scripture, but may still contain some accurate accounts: “And it came to pass that the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: ‘Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children… ’ [They] took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments… And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants… And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways.”
And they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose: We can deduce why Satan sent his angels to intermarry (either directly or indirectly) with human women. Satan tried to pollute the genetic pool of mankind with a satanic corruption, to put something like a genetic virus to make the human race unfit for bringing forth the Seed of the woman — the Messiah — promised in Genesis 3:15.
“The Savior could not be born of a demon-possessed mother. So if Satan could succeed in infecting the entire race, the deliverer could not come.” (Boice)
And Satan almost succeeded. The race was so polluted that God found it necessary to start again with Noah and his sons, and to imprison the demons that did this so they could never do this again.
QUESTIONS
And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 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.
NOTES
My Spirit shall not strive with man forever: God did not allow the human race to stay in this rebellious place forever. This means there is a point of no return in our rejection of God. God will not woo us forever; there is a point where He will say “no more.”
All the more reason for us to say today is the day we will respond to Jesus instead of waiting for another day. We have no promise God will draw us some other day.
Yet his days will be one hundred and twenty years: This is not the outside lifespan of man but the time left until the judgment of the flood. The flood happened 120 years after this announcement.
Giants on the earth in those days: This refers to the unnatural offspring of the union between the sons of God and the daughters of men, though there were people of unusual size on the earth both before and after the flood (and also afterward). These ones before the flood were unique because of the demonic element of their parentage. They were the mighty men of old, men of renown.
QUESTIONS
SONS OF GOD (בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים, beney ha'elohim; υἱοὶ θεοῦ, huioi theou). Angels or members of a heavenly host of beings (Gen 6; Job 1:6; 2:1; Deut 32:8; see also Job 38:7; Pss 29:1; 89:6; Dan 3:25). The “sons of God” may be members of the divine council (Pss 82:1; 89:5–7) and may be related to the Nephilim and the Rephaim. In the New Testament, this relationship to the divine comes by adoption (Rom 8:15). Jesus calls peacemakers “sons of God” (Matt 5:9; Luke 6:35), and children of God become so through faith in the Son of God (Rom 8; Gal 3:26).
Old Testament Usage
The “sons of God” (bny ho’elohim) first appear in the preamble to the flood narrative (Gen 6:1–4). The “sons of God” find the daughters of men attractive, take them for wives (Gen 6:2), and are given children by them (Gen 6:4). Their offspring may be the Nephilim, also mentioned in this passage (Gen 6:4). From the Nephilim come a race of giants, the Anakim and, by extension, the Rephaim (Num 13:32–33; see, for example, Goliath). The “sons of God” (bny ho’elohim) stand in contrast to the “daughters of men” (האדם בנות, h'dm bnwt), distinguishing them from mere mortals and implying some form of heavenly being, though attempts have been made to identify them as foreigners or as the offspring of Cain.
The “sons of God” also appear in Deuteronomy 32, which refers to the borders during “the days of old” (Deut 32:7 ESV), which were fixed “according to the number of the sons of God” (Deut 32:8). The temporal phrase “days of old” seems to point this passage back to a legendary time, when the sons of God may have been thought to hold power over the nations.
In the book of Job, the “sons of God” appear three times (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). The “sons of God” present themselves before Yahweh, and Satan comes among them (Job 1:6; 2:1). In this context, the sons of God appear to be a sort of divine council or group of lower heavenly beings. They are mentioned only in passing, although one of the main characters, Satan, is one of them. Later, as Yahweh questions Job, he asks where Job was “when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy” (Job 38:7). Again, this seems to refer to a legendary past, perhaps to the period of divine creation.
A similar phrase occurs in Psa 82. The term “sons of Elyon” (בני עליון, bny 'lywn) in Psa 82:6 is very similar to “sons of God” (בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים, beney ha'elohim). Sometimes translated as “most high,” Elyon is often considered synonymous with Yahweh. In a psalm exalting Yahweh as the head of a divine council of gods (Psa 82:1), the audience is called “sons of Elyon” or “sons of the most high” and is told that “you are gods” (Psa 82:6).
The Aramaic phrase “a son of the gods” (בַּר־אֱלָהִין, bar-elahin) is used to describe the fourth person alive in the midst of the fiery furnace, referring to a divine or semidivine being who was present (Dan 3:25). This late text may represent the shift in understanding from members of a divine council or lesser gods to the later idea of angels or mere messengers of Yahweh (as the “son of the gods” is later used in Dan 3:28). This is the view taken throughout deuterocanonical and pseudepigraphal literature in the period between the Old and New Testaments, although some accounts also refer to the sons of God as “faithful Jews” (Parker, “Sons of (the) God(s),” 799).
New Testament Usage
The Greek phrases translated “sons of God” in the New Testament appear to have little connection to the “sons of God” in the Hebrew Bible. In the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew, Jesus calls the peacemakers “sons of God” (huioi theou; Matt 5:9 ESV). In Luke’s version of the same sermon, known as the Sermon on the Plain, Jesus says those who love their enemies and do good will be “sons of the Most High” (υἱοὶ ὑψίστου, huioi hypsistou; Luke 6:35). Those who have died and entered the resurrection are referred to as “sons of God” (υἱοί εἰσιν θεοῦ, huioi eisin theou), considered “equal to angels,” and “sons of the resurrection” (Luke 20:36 ESV). According to Paul, “sons of God” become so through faith (υἱοὶ θεοῦ ἐστε διὰ τῆς πίστεως, huioi theou este dia tēs pisteōs) and in relationship to the Son of God and by the Spirit of God (Rom 8:14, 19; Gal 3:26).
Matthew James Hamilton, “Sons of God,” in The Lexham Bible Dictionary, ed. John D. Barry et al. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
