Angels, 9 Choirs, and Fallen Angels Genesis 6, and the Rapes?

In Genesis 6:4 sons of God of another sort rape women and they had children called Nephilim. Were the rapists fallen angels? Could they have bodies that could travel through the vacuum of space, fly, and take women?

Tradition has 9 choirs of angels, could any of them have bodies and reproduce?

BobRyan said:

1. Gen 6 says nothing about rape, or any sort of forced interaction. We dare not read into scripture what it does not actually say.
2. Gen 6 does not say that Nephilim came about after the mixed marriages of verse one. Rather the text says the Nephilim were there BEFORE the mixed marriages and also AFTER the mixed marriages and other texts say they were there after the flood.
3. The text of Gen 6 say MAN was wicked. Mankind it says nothing at all about any other species of intelligent life being wicked.
4. Gen 6 does not mention angels at all. (not even fallen angels)
5. John 1 says that people that follow God are called the "sons of God" the "children of God"
6. Matt 22 says God did not create Angels with the function of having families/forming family units.
7. There are no mention of "male and female" angels in the Bible as if they marry or have children even among themselves.

The best solution is that mankind before the flood are all referred to a Nephilim (large in size) and they lived to long ages.

This is also true after the flood because Noah is human, Nephilim ... a large human that lived to a long age.

==========

Gen 6:1 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3 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.” 4 The Nephilim were 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.

5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 The Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 The Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.

9 These are the records of the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his time; Noah walked with God. 10 Noah became the father of three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

11 Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.
13 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. ... 17 Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life,

Jesus said in Matt 22 that Angels don't have the ability/function of forming family units
Augustine and the entire Christian church agreed that Gen 6 is not talking about demons or fallen angels were marrying humans because of Christ's statement in Matt 22.

Click to expand...

I was questioning other Christians' interpretations.

The Catholics, do they teach that the sons of God were the descendants of Cain?

Some in these forums have said the sons of God are angels.

Some say the sons of God are others made in God's image and likeness from other worlds.

It seems their blood line is fallen, so the name Nephilim, and the need to destroy their descendancy. To save Adam's blood line and the Adamic race. To have a Messiah with a holy body.

Do you think Goliath was a Nephil? Where did his father come from?

I like to use speculative theology?

BobRyan said:

In the Septuagint , Nephilim does not mean "fallen", it means giant.
And yet - all mankind was fallen in Gen 3.

In Gen 6 there is no statement that "Nephilim were bad" rather that "man" was bad and "man" had to be destroyed. So the fact that man was called Nephilim before the fall is not why there was a flood.



Humanity before the flood , were all Nephilim. Gen 6 says Nephilim were there before the mixed marriages and that all humans had long lived ages of life. And that Noah and his family were the only ones to survive the flood. So Nephilim before and after the flood means that Noah was Nephilim as well.

Click to expand...

The Septuagint was for Hellenists, and I read from the Young's Literal Translation and checked in Wikipedia.
Nephilim - Wikipedia

The original Hebrew is "fallen ones". Super humanly sinful, by interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 is that they were the offspring of the sons of God. The flood stopped them and stopped their return, or at least discouraged them.

BobRyan said:

Nothing in Gen 6 says Nephilim were superhumanly sinful or that being large , or being long-lived made humans sinful.

The Gen 6 texts never say that God was unhappy with Nephelim. It says the problem was "man" , was humans.

It does not list angels fallen or not as the problem

It notes that man exists before the flood and also after the flood solely because of Noah crossing over

And Christ tells us that angels don't have the function of forming family groups in Matt 22.

Click to expand...

The account in Genesis says God regretted making man. Because of violence, which is what the Nephilim are associated with, and violence often means rape.

Here is how Wikipedia opens.
The Nephilim (/ˈnɛfɪˌlɪm/; Hebrew: נְפִילִים, romanized: Nəfīlīm) are enigmatic figures mentioned in several passages of the Hebrew Bible and later Jewish and Christian literature. They are traditionally associated with extraordinary size, strength, or status, though the biblical texts provide only brief and ambiguous descriptions. The earliest reference appears in Genesis 6:1–4, where the Nephilim are linked to the “mighty men of old” and to the controversial episode involving the “sons of God” and the “daughters of men”. Their identity, origin, and role in early biblical history have been the subject of extensive debate among scholars, theologians, and interpreters.[1]

The meaning of the term Nephilim is uncertain. Many translations render the word as “giants,” influenced by the Septuagint’s use of the Greek term gigantes, though this may reflect later interpretive traditions rather than the original Hebrew sense. Some scholars derive the term from the Hebrew root n-p-l (“to fall”), leading to interpretations such as “fallen ones” or “those who cause others to fall,” while others propose meanings related to violence, domination, or social oppression. Because the biblical text does not define the term explicitly, later Jewish and Christian writings played a major role in shaping the modern understanding of the Nephilim.[2]

The Nephilim appear again in Numbers 13:33, where ten of the Twelve Spies report encountering formidable inhabitants in Canaan described as descendants of the Nephilim. This passage has contributed to the longstanding association of the Nephilim with great physical stature, though some scholars argue that the spies’ report may reflect exaggeration, fear, or rhetorical emphasis rather than literal description.[3]

Interpretations of the Nephilim vary widely across religious and academic traditions. One influential view, preserved in Second-Temple literature such as 1 Enoch and Jubilees, identifies the Nephilim as the offspring of rebellious angels (the Watchers) and human women, portraying them as destructive giants whose corruption contributed to the moral decline preceding the flood. Another major interpretation, found in some early Jewish and Christian commentaries, understands the Nephilim as powerful human rulers or warriors, possibly arising from intermarriage between the righteous line of Seth and the unrighteous line of Cain. A third approach views the Nephilim as legendary or symbolic figures reflecting ancient Near Eastern traditions about semi-divine heroes or primordial beings.[4]

Outside the canonical Hebrew Bible, related terms or concepts appear in several deuterocanonical books—including Judith 16:6, Sirach 16:7, Baruch 3:26–28, and Wisdom 14:6—and possibly in Ezekiel 32, where scholars debate whether the term refers directly to the Nephilim or to a related class of fallen warriors. These texts contributed to the development of later Jewish and Christian traditions about ancient giants, divine-human unions, and the pre-flood world.[5]

In modern scholarship, the Nephilim are studied within the broader context of ancient Near Eastern mythology, comparative linguistics, and the history of biblical interpretation. Parallels have been drawn between the Nephilim and regional traditions involving giant clans, heroic demigods, or semi-divine figures, though the extent of these connections remains debated. The Nephilim have also become prominent in contemporary popular culture, appearing in novels, films, video games, and speculative theories, where they are often reimagined as hybrid beings, ancient superhuman races, or remnants of a lost primordial world.[6]

1 Peter 3:18,19,20 mentions the Nephilim

The Liturgist said:

No, angels are spiritual beings and lack corporeal form and do not reproduce.

As far as Genesis 6 is concerned, I wouldn’t worry about it that much; this verse becomes something of a distraction from more important verses for our salvation such as 1 Corinthians chapter 11 (entire) or John chapter 6 or John 3:16, for example. Genesis is primarily Christological prophecy and should be read as typological prophecy with some allegory (for instance, consider, Christ our True God re-created man on the Cross on the sixth day, in his image, rested in the tomb on the seventh and then rose from the dead on the eighth, the first, as in, “let there be light”, and the Gospel of John riffs Genesis ch. 1 in John ch. 1 in order to make this connection clear. Additionally, Christ the Incarnate Son and Word of God Himself in Luke ch. 24 shows the Disciples how all the books of the Law and Prophets spoke of him…

Thus reading the Old Testament as being primarily about Christ, rather than reading it as primarily a historical account, is itself scripturally preferrable. That’s not to say its not historically accurate in whole or in part (more likely in part with respect to Genesis) but that reading it for historical data misses the main point, which is what it says about our salvation in Christ as opposed to what it says about events in the prehistory of mankind.

Click to expand...

It seems some Baptists and others, disagree, and have pushed me out of discussions. By a stretch of the imagination, angels can change form to suit environments. And can form material bodies that can reproduce. Back then I was saying, that sons of God from Genesis 6 and Job, refers to other races of humans from other worlds.

The Liturgist said:

On this point, you’re engaging in anthropomorphology (the application of human attributes to God) through a literal misinterpretation of the text.

Elsewhere, Scripture is extremely clear that God is unchanging and impassable, and of pure love, and omniscient, which means that He does not actually regret or change his mind about having done something, rather, these are figures of speech. The plan for our salvation was always the plan; God is never surprised by us. This is a consequence of omniscience, omniopotence, immutability and impassability.

Click to expand...

I think I agree with you. He foreknew that in this course of things, He'd have contentment and regret. Contentment at that time only with the eight souls to board the ark.

The Liturgist said:

That’s not historic Christian teaching concerning the holy Angels or their fallen counterparts.




Respectfully, that seems very unlikely.

Also how does any of this pertain to the important main point of Christianity, which is Christ our True God dying for us on the Cross and rising from the dead, thus completing the creation of humanity and redeeming us from sin, and giving us the hope of salvation through faith in Him, through the Holy Gospel and union with the Body of Christ in the Church?

Click to expand...

The idea is that, the Messiah needed a pure bloodline.

The Liturgist said:

On this point, you’re engaging in anthropomorphology (the application of human attributes to God) through a literal misinterpretation of the text.

Elsewhere, Scripture is extremely clear that God is unchanging and impassable, and of pure love, and omniscient, which means that He does not actually regret or change his mind about having done something, rather, these are figures of speech. The plan for our salvation was always the plan; God is never surprised by us. This is a consequence of omniscience, omniopotence, immutability and impassability.

Click to expand...

What more would you say about Anthropomorphology?

Paleouss said:

Greetings to you GoldenKingGaze. Hope and Peace to you in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Most know my stance on this subject, I think. But I would like to respond to a couple of your comments in various posts within this thread.


As BobRyan rightly suggests, Genesis 6:4 does not explicitly nor implicitly suggest that the "sons of God" raped (as you say) the "daughters of men". In the pursuit of truth, I would think one would want proper perimeters on their exegesis. Genesis 6:2 explicitly states, "...they took wives for themselves..."


Goliath was most certainly not a Nephilim.

Point #1 - The oldest Hebrew manuscript of 1 Samuel 17:4 is the fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls (50-25BC) that states Goliath’s height was “four cubits and a span” (approx. 6’9”). This older scroll, which is a Dead Sea caves find, contradicts the newer (not as old) Massoretic Text which says that Goliath’s height was “six cubits and a span” (approx 9’9”). So Goliath was most likely not as tall as we were led to believe.

Point #2 - Argument From Reason - Contradiction of Nephilim Evil Spirit vs DNA?

1. The Book of Enoch suggests that the children of the angel/human union had “evil spirits” (1Enoch 15:9) when they were born. They were, according to the Book of Enoch, neither angel nor human and had evil spirits from the beginning. They had no choice but to be evil. This ‘no choice’ was a result of their distinctive difference from all other human beings, i.e., they were born with “evil spirits”.
2. Because of this, when they died the Book of Enoch says, “ the dwelling of the spirits of the Earth, who were born on the Earth, is Earth” (Enoch 15:10). Therefore, as the Book of Enoch reasons, evil spirits roam the earth where their evil spirits were born.
3. Therefore, what makes a Nephilim a Nephilim is their evil spirits that are present at birth to death, and after death. Being “giant” is simply an adjective that describes their size (the Nephilim are said to be giant in stature).
4. Some Angel Advocates want to speculate the presence of “angel DNA” among the 8 passengers of Noah’s ark.
5. It would follow, however, that if #1 is true then the speculative #4 is false. For Nephilim are distinguished by their “evil spirit” not their DNA. For what makes a Nephilim distinct from human beings is their evil spirit.
6. If the speculative #4 is true then the Book of Enoch #1 is false.
7. Since all Book of Enoch believers believe in #1, for it says it in the Book of Enoch, then the speculative #4 should be false to every Angel Advocate with proper reasoning.
8. Since Nephilim are distinguished by their evil spirit at birth (so it is said), and none of the 8 survivors in Noah’s boat had evil spirits, else God would have destroyed them, then it follows that nothing was passed on post-flood that would produce more Nephilim.
9. If nothing was passed on post-flood then there were no Nephilim after the flood, if in fact the Nephilim are a cross breed race of angel and human procreation that have evil spirits at birth and God proclaimed He would wipe them form the earth (as the Book of Enoch suggests).

Of course some Angel Advocates see this reasoning clearly. So they avoid the DNA argument and speculate a 'second wave of fallen angels'. But that is clearly false as well if reasoned out properly.


There is literally no mention of Nephilim in these verses.

Just to head off any speculative response you might have... The Book of Enoch clearly states, as do most every Angel Advocate, that the Nephilim evil spirits remain on earth after death. They do not go to tartaroō. I will repeat for emphasis, Nephilim evil spirits do not go to the place human spirits go (according to the Book of Enoch). Nephilim spirits roam the earth (as they say).

Therefore, 1 Peter 3:18, 19, 20 are CLEARLY not referring to Nephilim spirits; for Nephilim sprits have not been sent to tartaroō and are not in "prison". They are said to still roam the earth.


Peace to you my brother

Click to expand...

Don't you suspect that the Nephilim mothers would have died in child birth? The fathers may not have been attractive?

Paleouss said:

Greetings to you GoldenKingGaze. Hope and Peace to you in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Most know my stance on this subject, I think. But I would like to respond to a couple of your comments in various posts within this thread.


As BobRyan rightly suggests, Genesis 6:4 does not explicitly nor implicitly suggest that the "sons of God" raped (as you say) the "daughters of men". In the pursuit of truth, I would think one would want proper perimeters on their exegesis. Genesis 6:2 explicitly states, "...they took wives for themselves..."


Goliath was most certainly not a Nephilim.

Point #1 - The oldest Hebrew manuscript of 1 Samuel 17:4 is the fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls (50-25BC) that states Goliath’s height was “four cubits and a span” (approx. 6’9”). This older scroll, which is a Dead Sea caves find, contradicts the newer (not as old) Massoretic Text which says that Goliath’s height was “six cubits and a span” (approx 9’9”). So Goliath was most likely not as tall as we were led to believe.

Point #2 - Argument From Reason - Contradiction of Nephilim Evil Spirit vs DNA?

1. The Book of Enoch suggests that the children of the angel/human union had “evil spirits” (1Enoch 15:9) when they were born. They were, according to the Book of Enoch, neither angel nor human and had evil spirits from the beginning. They had no choice but to be evil. This ‘no choice’ was a result of their distinctive difference from all other human beings, i.e., they were born with “evil spirits”.
2. Because of this, when they died the Book of Enoch says, “ the dwelling of the spirits of the Earth, who were born on the Earth, is Earth” (Enoch 15:10). Therefore, as the Book of Enoch reasons, evil spirits roam the earth where their evil spirits were born.
3. Therefore, what makes a Nephilim a Nephilim is their evil spirits that are present at birth to death, and after death. Being “giant” is simply an adjective that describes their size (the Nephilim are said to be giant in stature).
4. Some Angel Advocates want to speculate the presence of “angel DNA” among the 8 passengers of Noah’s ark.
5. It would follow, however, that if #1 is true then the speculative #4 is false. For Nephilim are distinguished by their “evil spirit” not their DNA. For what makes a Nephilim distinct from human beings is their evil spirit.
6. If the speculative #4 is true then the Book of Enoch #1 is false.
7. Since all Book of Enoch believers believe in #1, for it says it in the Book of Enoch, then the speculative #4 should be false to every Angel Advocate with proper reasoning.
8. Since Nephilim are distinguished by their evil spirit at birth (so it is said), and none of the 8 survivors in Noah’s boat had evil spirits, else God would have destroyed them, then it follows that nothing was passed on post-flood that would produce more Nephilim.
9. If nothing was passed on post-flood then there were no Nephilim after the flood, if in fact the Nephilim are a cross breed race of angel and human procreation that have evil spirits at birth and God proclaimed He would wipe them form the earth (as the Book of Enoch suggests).

Of course some Angel Advocates see this reasoning clearly. So they avoid the DNA argument and speculate a 'second wave of fallen angels'. But that is clearly false as well if reasoned out properly.


There is literally no mention of Nephilim in these verses.

Just to head off any speculative response you might have... The Book of Enoch clearly states, as do most every Angel Advocate, that the Nephilim evil spirits remain on earth after death. They do not go to tartaroō. I will repeat for emphasis, Nephilim evil spirits do not go to the place human spirits go (according to the Book of Enoch). Nephilim spirits roam the earth (as they say).

Therefore, 1 Peter 3:18, 19, 20 are CLEARLY not referring to Nephilim spirits; for Nephilim sprits have not been sent to tartaroō and are not in "prison". They are said to still roam the earth.


Peace to you my brother

Click to expand...

Hi Paleouss, where does it say that the Nephilim were not sent to the world below?

Sorry if my post seemed like Trolling. I look at cross bred lions and tigers, and the mother of the Liger can only just survive pregnancy. Our own mothers find natural childbirth painful. Some die giving birth. If a woman is six foot tall and has a very large child, to birth naturally, she may die during the pregnancy or at the birthing. And typically, evil entities are not depicted as acceptable to look at...

So I am skeptical that the earthly women were willing wives, as in the rape of Dinah later in Genesis.