Who "are" the sons of GOD in Genesis 6?

[DeepMindQuest]

As the record clearly indicates, the offspring of the unions between the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" were progeny of the most grotesque sort, being "giants in the earth," the same being "mighty men which were of old, men of renown," monsters not only in size but also monsters in wickedness, and they always, without exception, were disposed to thwart the purposes of God (Genesis 6: 1, 2, 4). In the minds of many readers, the first reaction to this passage is such that, in spite of its obvious and clear intent, its incredulity begs for an alternate interpretation. The standard interpretation of the liberals is to think of the fairy tales of antiquity, the legends of ogres and dragons, and the myths of the gods consorting with men - and then to dismiss the entire story as legend and superstition, but a careful examination of the passage will elicit a far deeper meaning.

Often the biases and presuppositions we bring into a matter prevent our understanding and acceptance of its face value and patient meaning. Modern Christians have often attempted to make this passage in Genesis more palatable intellectually by explaining the "sons of God" as Sethites and the "daughters of men" as Cainites, with their union representing the breaking down of the wall of separation between believers and unbelievers. Another interpretation which avoids the supernaturalistic implications is that the phrase "sons of God" referred to kings and nobles, in which case the commingling so described is merely an account of royalty marrying commoners.

The first matter of understanding regarding this amazing portion of Scripture beyond its plain contextual intent turns quite obviously to the Hebrew meaning of the phrase "sons of God" (bene elohim). In the New Testament, of course, this term is used with reference to all who have been born again through personal faith in Jesus Christ (John 1:12; Romans 8:14; etc.), and the concept of a spiritual relationship of believers to God as analogous to that of children to a father is also found in the Old Testament (Psalm 73:15; Hosea 1:10; Deuteronomy 32:5; Exodus 4:22; Isaiah 43:6). However, none of these examples use the same phrase as Genesis 6:2, 4; furthermore, in each case the meaning is not really parallel to the meaning given in Genesis. Neither the descendants of Seth nor true believers of any sort have been previously referred to in Genesis as sons of God in any kind of spiritual sense and, except for Adam himself, they could not have been sons of God in a physical sense. In context, such a meaning would be strained, to say the least, in the absence of any kind of explanation. When we are told that "men" began to multiply on the face of the earth, and that the sons of God saw the daughters of "men," in each case the human race is clearly signified, in other words the descendants of Cain and Seth alike. Hence the "sons of God" are plainly distinguished from the generations of Adam. The only obvious and natural meaning without such clarification is that these beings were sons of God, rather than of men, because they have been created, not born. Such a description, of course, would apply only to Adam (Luke 3:38) and to the angels, whom god had directly created (Psalm 148:2, 5: Psalm 104:4; Colossians 1:16).

The actual expression "sons of God," bene elohim, occurs explicitly three other times, all in the very ancient book of Job (1:6; 2:1; 38:7), and in each case the term refers indisputably to angelic beings. These are the beings whom, apparently, were created sometime during the first half of the creation week, probably on the first day (Genesis 2:1; Job 38:4-7; Luke 2:13). Twice in the beginning of the book of Job we read of the sons of God presenting themselves before Him at stated times, and Satan also comes with them as being himself a son of God, though a disobedient, fallen, and rebellious one. In Job 38:7 the morning stars are represented as singing together, and the sons of God as shouting for joy, over the creation of our earth. There are, as well, implicit references to these sons of God in a number of other passages. There is no doubt that, in these passages, the meaning also applies exclusively to the angels. A very similar form bar elohim is used in Daniel 3:25, and refers either to an angel or to a theophany. The term "sons of the mighty" (bene elim) is used in Psalm 29:1 and also Psalm 89:6, and again refers to angels. The sons of Elohim the mighty Creator are confined to those creatures made directly by the Divine hand, and not born of other beings of their own order. Hence, in Luke's genealogy of our Lord, Adam is called a son of God (Luke 3:38), and, so also Christ is said to give to them that receive Him power to become the sons of God (John 1:12). For these are born again of the Spirit of God as to their inner man even in the present life. This is only possible with man since he is delivered from the penalty of death and brought into newness of life through a substitutionary atonement, unlike the angels which, on the other hand, have been fixed in their position as angels of grace, or damnation, the latter hopelessly lost in their state of perdition. At the resurrection those of mankind who are redeemed by the blood of the Lamb, who is Christ, will in their glorified physical bodies, be clothed with a spiritual body, a building of God (II Corinthians 5:1); so that they will then be in every respect equal to the angels, being altogether a new creation (Luke 20:36). Thus, all reasonable doubt insofar as the context, language, and plain exegesis of Genesis 6:1-4 is concerned, is removed regarding the intent of the writer to convey the concept of angels, fallen angels no doubt, acting in opposition to God's will. This also was the meaning placed on the passage by the Greek translators of the Septuagint, by Josephus, by the writer of the ancient apocryphal book of Enoch, and by all the other ancient Jewish interpreters and the earliest Christian writers. It is apparent that the first Christian writers to depart from this understanding and suggest the Sethite interpretation were Chrysostom and Augustine. Even an appeal to some of the later "fathers," who abandoned the orthodox view of Genesis 6:1-4 because it is "refuted by its own absurdity" must themselves then answer their own patient frivolity of contending that the "giants" were merely individuals of the same race who were "slightly larger and stronger, and more evil," than the rest of the people. By the same token they must also answer why the world at Noah's time was "divided" into Sethites and Cainites, which in reality we know it was not. Furthermore, those who would interject the Christian Church into the Old Testament economy to justify the "sons of God" as being simply believers, thus mortal men, distracts the issue from one of a direct Biblical exegesis to other grounds which are much the obscure, if not outright fallacious. These men, in spite of their greatness in doctrine and theory, were still humanly fallible and capable of missing important elements of Biblical truth in their doctrines. In our own time this opposing view has been widely propagated by C. I. Scofield in the notes of his famous reference Bible. To apply the term "sons of God" as such to mere men is to stretch the matter beyond a reasonable limit, for it can only refer to those sons of God involved in a second and deeper apostasy of those fallen ones from on high.

 

[Zadok7000]

Jude 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

 

[DeepMindQuest]

St. Clement was a Roman who characterized himself as a "lover of chastity from his earliest youth." He struggled for years with the dread of oblivion after death. In his quest for truth, he studied with the philosophers, who only argued unceasingly and left him in still greater spiritual turmoil and despair. Then he hears of our Savior's preaching to the Jews, and of His miracles, and attempts to go to Judæa. On the way he meets St. Barnabas who has come to preach in Alexandria, but the sophisticated Greeks deride the simple discourse of Barnabas, and Clement takes Barnabas to his lodgings to protect him from the crowd. Then Barnabas leaves for Judæa, and shortly thereafter Clement does, as well. When he arrives in Cæsarea he again comes upon Barnabas, who introduces him to St. Peter. Commending him for rescuing Barnabas from the unruly crowd in Alexandria, Peter invites him to join his party as it makes its way to Rome with the message of Truth, and to become his attendant. In the course of St. Peter's discourse on our Savior's teachings, he gives an account of creation of the world and of man. This is St. Clement's account of what St. Peter said next.
All things being completed which are in heaven, and in earth, and in the waters, and the human race also having multiplied, in the eighth generation, righteous men, who had lived the life of angels, being allured by the beauty of women, fell into promiscuous and illicit connections with these; and thenceforth acting in all things without discretion, and disorderly, they changed the state of human affairs and the divinely prescribed order of life, so that either by persuasion or force they compelled all men to sin against God their Creator. In the ninth generation are born the giants, so called from of old, not dragon-footed, as the fables of the Greeks relate, but men of immense bodies, whose bones, of enormous size, are still shown in some places for confirmation. But against these the righteous providence of God brought a flood upon the world, that the earth might be purified from their pollution, and every place might be turned into a sea by the destruction of the wicked. Yet there was then found one righteous man, by the name of Noah, who, being delivered in an ark with his three sons and their wives, became the colonizer of the world after the subsiding of the waters, with those animals and seeds which he had shut up with him. In the twelfth generation, when God had blessed men, and they had begun to multiply, they received a commandment that they should not taste blood, for on account of this also the deluge had been sent. In the thirteenth generation, when the second of Noah's three sons had done an injury to his father, and had been cursed by him, he brought the condition of slavery upon his posterity. . . In the fourteenth generation one of the cursed progeny first erected an altar to demons, for the purpose of magical arts, and offered there bloody sacrifices. In the fifteenth generation, for the first time, men set up an idol and worshiped it. . . .



The following, from "The Clementine Homilies," is an elaboration on the subject of creation quoted above from the "Recognitions of Clement." (The translator calls it "a more developed speculation.")
For of the spirits who inhabit the heaven, the angels who dwell in the lowest region, being grieved at the ingratitude of men to God, asked that they might come into the life of men, that, really becoming men, by more of an exchange of ideas they might convict those who had acted ungratefully towards God, and might subject every one to adequate punishment. When, therefore, their petition was granted, they metamorphosed themselves into every nature; for, being of a more godlike substance, they are able easily to assume any form. So they became precious stones, and [metals]. . . They also changed themselves into beasts and reptiles, and fishes and birds, and into whatsoever they pleased. . .
But when, having assumed these forms, they . . .changed themselves into the nature of men, in order that, living holily, they might subject the ungrateful to punishment, yet having become in all respects men, they also partook of human lust, and being brought under its subjection they fell into cohabitation with women; and being involved with them, and sunk in defilement and altogether emptied of their first power, were unable to turn back to the first purity of their proper nature, . . .they trode the impious path downward. For they themselves, being fettered with the bonds of flesh, were constrained and strongly bound; wherefore they have no more been able to ascend into the heavens.
But from their unhallowed intercourse spurious men sprang, much greater in stature than ordinary men, whom they afterwards called giants; not those dragon-footed giants who waged war against God . . . but wild in manners, and greater than men in size, inasmuch as they were sprung of angels; yet less than angels, as they were born of women. Therefore God, knowing that they were barbarized to brutality, and that the world was not sufficient to satisfy them (for it was created according to the proportion of men and human use), that they might not through want of food turn, contrary to nature, to the eating of animals, and yet seem to be blameless, as having ventured upon this through necessity, the Almighty God rained manna upon them, suited to their various tastes; and they enjoyed all that they would. But they, on account of their bastar*..d nature, not being pleased with purity of food, longed only after the taste of blood. Wherefore they first tasted flesh.
And the men who were with them there for the first time were eager to do the like. Thus, although we are born neither good nor bad, we become one of the other; and having formed habits, we are with difficulty drawn from them. But when irrational animals fell short, these bastard men tasted also human flesh. For it was not a long step to the consumption of flesh like their own, having first tasted it in other forms.
. . . All things, therefore, going from bad to worse, on account of these brutal demons, God wished to cast them away like an evil leaven, lest each generation from a wicked seed, being like to that before it, and equally impious, should empty the world to come of saved men. And for this purpose, having warned a certain righteous man, with his children, to save themselves in an ark, He sent a deluge of water, that all being destroyed, the purified world might be handed over to him who was saved in the ark, in order [that there might be] a second beginning of life. And thus it came to pass.

"Recognitions of Clement," Book 1, Ch. xxix–xxx,
and "The Clementine Homilies," Homily 8,
Ch. xii–xvii, Ante-Nicene Fathers​

 

[DeepMindQuest]

Josephus on Giants
Jewish historian Josephus speaks of giants in his writings. He corroborates the predominate view held by early church fathers that giants were the offspring of fallen angels and women.
1. Now this posterity of Seth continued to esteem God as the Lord of the universe, and to have an entire regard to virtue, for seven generations; but in process of time they were perverted, and forsook the practices of their forefathers; and did neither pay those honors to God which were appointed them, nor had they any concern to do justice towards men. But for what degree of zeal they had formerly shown for virtue, they now showed by their actions a double degree of wickedness, whereby they made God to be their enemy. For many angels(11) of God accompanied with women, and begat sons that proved unjust, and despisers of all that was good, on account of the confidence they had in their own strength; for the tradition is, that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did; and being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions and their acts for the better: but seeing they did not yield to him, but were slaves to their wicked pleasures, he was afraid they would kill him, together with his wife and children, and those they had married; so he departed out of that land.-- Antiquities, Book 1, chapter 3 section1

​

The Destruction Of The Sodomites By The Assyrian Wall.
At this time, when the Assyrians had the dominion over Asia, the people of Sodom were in a flourishing condition, both as to riches and the number of their youth. There were five kings that managed the affairs of this county: Ballas, Barsas, Senabar, and Sumobor, with the king of Bela; and each king led on his own troops: and the Assyrians made war upon them; and, dividing their army into four parts, fought against them. Now every part of the army had its own commander; and when the battle was joined, the Assyrians were conquerors, and imposed a tribute on the kings of the Sodomites, who submitted to this slavery twelve years; and so long they continued to pay their tribute: but on the thirteenth year they rebelled, and then the army of the Assyrians came upon them, under their commanders Amraphel, Arioch, Chodorlaomer, and Tidal. These kings had laid waste all Syria, and overthrown the offspring of the giants. And when they were come over against Sodom, they pitched their camp at the vale called the Slime Pits, for at that time there were pits in that place; but now, upon the destruction of the city of Sodom, that vale became the Lake Asphaltites, as it is called. However, concerning this lake we shall speak more presently. Now when the Sodomites joined battle with the Assyrians, and the fight was very obstinate, many of them were killed, and the rest were carried captive; among which captives was Lot, who had come to assist the Sodomites. Antiquities, Book 1 chapter 9
3. For which reason they removed their camp to Hebron; and when they had taken it, they slew all the inhabitants. There were till then left the race of giants, who had bodies so large, and countenances so entirely different from other men, that they were surprising to the sight, and terrible to the hearing. The bones of these men are still shown to this very day, unlike to any credible relations of other men. Now they gave this city to the Levites as an extraordinary reward, with the suburbs of two thousand cities; but the land thereto belonging they gave as a free gift to Caleb, according to the injunctions of Moses. This Caleb was one of the spies which Moses sent into the land of Canaan. They also gave land for habitation to the posterity of Jethro, the Midianite, who was the father-in-law to Moses; for they had left their own country, and followed them, and accompanied them in the wilderness.. Antiquities, Book 5 chapter 2 section 3

A little afterward the king made war against the Philistines; and when he had joined battle with them, and put them to flight, he was left alone, as he was in pursuit of them; and when he was quite tired down, he was seen by one of the enemy, his name was Achmon, the son of Araph, he was one of the sons of the giants. He had a spear, the handle of which weighed three hundred shekels, and a breastplate of chain-work, and a sword. He turned back, and ran violently to slay [David] their enemy's king, for he was quite tired out with labor; but Abishai, Joab's brother, appeared on the sudden, and protected the king with his shield, as he lay down, and slew the enemy. Antiquities, Book 7 chapter 12 section 1


2. When the king heard that the Philistines were gathered together at the city Gazara, he sent an army against them, when Sibbechai the Hittite, one of David's most courageous men, behaved himself so as to deserve great commendation, for he slew many of those that bragged they were the posterity of the giants, and vaunted themselves highly on that account, and thereby was the occasion of victory to the Hebrews. After which defeat, the Philistines made war again; and when David had sent an army against them, Nephan his kinsman fought in a single combat with the stoutest of all the Philistines, and slew him, and put the rest to flight. Many of them also were slain in the fight. Now a little while after this, the Philistines pitched their camp at a city which lay not far off the bounds of the country of the Hebrews. They had a man who was six cubits** tall, and had on each of his feet and hands one more toe and finger than men naturally have. Now the person who was sent against them by David out of his army was Jonathan, the son of Shimea, who fought this man in a single combat, and slew him; and as he was the person who gave the turn to the battle, he gained the greatest reputation for courage therein. This man also vaunted himself to be of the sons of the giants. But after this fight the Philistines made war no more against the Israelites. ** (At least 9 feet tall using an 18 inch cubit)
Antiquities, Book 7 chapter 12 section 2

Artabanus also, not long afterward, sent his son Darius as an hostage, with many presents, among which there was a man seven cubits tall, a Jew he was by birth, and his name was Eleazar, who, for his tallness, was called a giant.

(over 10 feet tall minimum!!) Antiquities, Book 18 chapter 4 section 5
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Early Church and Giants[/FONT]
It was the predominate view in the early church that giants were the offspring of fallen angels.

THE COMMON BIBLE OF THE DAYS IN WHICH PETER, JUDE, AND THE OTHER WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT LIVED, WAS THE SEPTUAGINT. The septuagint can shed much light on this issue.
The Septuagint is a pre-christian Greek version of the original Hebrew scriptures. Several passages of the Old Testament which are quoted in the New Testament, are taken verbatim from the Septuagint. "Several passages of the Old Testament, which are quoted in the New, are taken thence; and, being thus noticed by the writers of the New Testament, from their mode of using it, we may infer that it was in general circulation among the apostolic churches" (History of the Bible, By John Kitto DD. - Pg. 45). The K.J.V. and most modern versions of the Bible read in Genesis 6:2 & 4 "Sons of God," the Septuagint reads, "Angels of God."

Early church fathers believed that the giants spoken of in scripture were the offspring of fallen angels and human woman.

In Ante-Nicene fathers vol.2, chapter 24 we read,

Just as with men, who have freedom of choice as to both virtue and vice (for you would not either honour the good or punish the bad, unless vice and virtue were in their own power; and some are diligent in the matters entrusted to them by you, and others faithless), so is it among the angels. Some, free agents, you will observe, such as they were created by God, continued in those things for which God had made and over which He had ordained them; but some outraged both the constitution of their nature and the government entrusted to them: namely, this ruler of matter and its various forms, and others of those who were placed about this first firmament (you know that we say nothing without witnesses, but state the things which have been declared by the prophets); these fell into impure love of virgins, and were subjugated by the flesh, and he became negligent and wicked in the management of the things entrusted to him. Of these lovers of virgins, therefore, were begotten those who are called giants And if something has been said by the poets, too, about the giants, be not surprised at this: worldly Wisdom and divine differ as much from each other as truth and plausibility: the one is of heaven and the other of earth; and indeed, according to the prince of matter,- "We know we oft speak lies that look like troths."

Irenaeus also writes,

And wickedness very long-continued and widespread pervaded all the races of men, until very little
seed of justice was in them. For unlawful unions came about on earth, as angels linked themselves with
offspring of the daughters of men, who bore to them sons, who on account of their exceeding great
were called Giants. The angels, then, brought to their wives as gifts teachings of evil, for they taught
them the virtues of roots and herbs, and dyeing and cosmetics and discoveries of precious materials,
love-philtes, hatreds, amours, passions, constraints of love, the bonds of witchcraft, every sorcery and
idolatry, hateful to God; and when this was come into the world, the affairs of wickedness were
propagated to overflowing, and those of justice dwindled to very little. ---- Irenaeus, Demonstration, 18. Joseph P. Smith, St. Irenaeus: Proof of the Apostolic Preaching. (London:Longmans, Green & Co., 1952), 58.


Justin Martyr writes in chapter 5 of his Second Apology, entitled ""How the Angels Transgressed":
God, when He had made the whole world, and subjected things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruits and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law - for these things also He evidently made for man - committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they enslaved by lustful passions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate needs, and all wickedness. . . . (p. 363, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers)

This is from The Instructions of Commodianus,
When Almighty God, to beautify the nature of the world, willed that that earth should be visited by angels, when they were sent down they despised His laws. Such was the beauty of women, that it turned them aside; so that, being contaminated, they could not return to heaven. Rebels from God, they uttered words against Him. Then the Highest uttered His judgment against them; and from their seed giants are said to have been born. By them arts were made known in the earth, and they taught the dyeing of wool, and everything which is done; and to them, when they died, men erected images. But the Almighty, because they were of an evil seed, did not approve that, when dead, they should be brought back from death. Whence wandering they now subvert many bodies, and it is such as these especially that ye this day worship and pray to as gods. (p. 435, vol. 4, The Ante-Nicene Fathers)

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

I would like to state a theory, and that is all it is.

When "the sons of God" are mentioned, it is in the context of God desiring to wipe man from the face of the Earth for their evil.

Why? Sure, they were doing evil and only the desires of their hearts. But don't tell me that is why God went and destroyed all of humanity except for Noah and His family.

This makes sense to me: The demons, and Satan, new of the entire situation of man, in that man had been tainted with sin. Satan's plan was to ruin God's plan. Satan must've known that God would then seek to redeem man, such as sending Jesus as the perfect and final sacrifice for man. Satan obviously did not want this to happen; which would explain the reasoning of Genesis 6. If demons "left their proper abode" and bred with humanity, they could then ruin God's plan for redemption by altering man genetically, making it impossible for man to be redeemed.

A flood would now make perfect sense. God would then flood the Earth, killing all of the Nephelim, and keeping only Noah and his family who were not effected and were holy people to repopulate the Earth without any biological defects.

Just a theory. I don't know if anyone posted that yet, but I didn't see it so I thought I'd mention it.

 

[SummaScriptura]

<snip>I am not going to argue this with you. You just have to far to go&nbsp;if you think that angels can have sex with people. That is just nonsense.<snip>Matthew 22:29-30 Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. [30] For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.

Mark 12:25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

Lets revisit this...

Originally Posted by Matthew in 22:23-33 (ESV)

The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question, saying, "Teacher, Moses said, 'If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up children for his brother.' Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother. So too the second and third, down to the seventh. After them all, the woman died. In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her.

But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob"? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."

And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching.
​

This is a phenomenal passage of scripture because beneath the obvious conflict between Jesus and the Sadducees over the controversy concerning the resurrection, there is a second, undercurrent of controversy in the passage, concerning which books ought to be considered scripture by Jews.

The Sadducees believed the books to be considered scripture by Jews should only be the five books of Moses. So while controverting with Jesus over the resurrection from the dead, they also implied a second layer of controversy with Christ over books which were in circulation among the Jews of that day which were preposterous to the Sadducees; to do this, in this passage they obliquely ridicule a passage from the Book of Tobit, which was in wide circulation in the Hebrew language in the land in those days, alluding the following passage:

Originally Posted by Tobit in 3:7-9 (RSV)

On the same day, at Ecbatana in Media, it also happened that Sarah, the daughter of Raguel, was reproached by her father's maids, because she had been given to seven husbands, and the evil demon Asmodeus had slain each of them before he had been with her as his wife. So the maids said to her, "Do you not know that you strangle your husbands? You already have had seven and have had no benefit from any of them. Why do you beat us? If they are dead, go with them! May we never see a son or daughter of yours!"
​

Rather than being diverted from the subject at hand, the Lord adroitly puts the Sadducees in their place on the question of the resurrection with a quote from the Torah, from the passage with Moses and the burning bush. In addition the position of the Sudducees regarding the rest of the scriptures is also responded to by Christ in a similarly subtle fashion, affirming the value of the other scriptures. In it Jesus appeals to another book which would not have been accepted by the Sadducees either; Jesus alludes to the Book of Enoch and boldly introduces yet a third controversial point, that concerning angels, a subject upon which Enoch writes at great length, the belief in which the Sadducees were also in denial.

Originally Posted by Enoch in 15:3-7 (Schodde)

Why have ye left the high, holy, and everlasting heaven, and lain with women, and defiled yourselves with the daughters of men, and taken wives unto yourselves, and acted like the children of earth, and begotten giants as sons? While ye were spiritual, holy, having eternal life, ye defiled yourselves with women, and with the blood of flesh have begotten children, and have lusted after the blood of men, and have produced flesh and blood as they produce who die and are destroyed. Therefore I have given them wives that they might impregnate them and children be born by them, as it is done on earth. Ye were formerly spiritual, living an eternal life without death to all the generations of the world. Therefore I have not made for you any wives, for spiritual beings have their home in heaven.
​

So, the quote from Jesus you believe invalidates the message of the Book of Enoch, is rather a direct allusion by Jesus to the Book you believe it invalidates. Jesus did not invalidate the claims of Enoch, but rather used the book as a teaching source for the Sadducees; and no wonder, for the Sadducees knew neither the Scriptures nor the power of God and were thus wrong about the resurrection, the scriptures in general and the Book of Enoch in particular.

 

[itisdeliciouscake]

I've always thot it may mean angels/demons.

I don't personally think it's that important tho, and I think anyone who claims that they know 100% what they were is being an idiot.

 

[onwingsaseagles]

The sons of God in Genesis 6 are the descendants of Seth.

 

[SummaScriptura]

When the folks who wrote the older testament scriptures, the Jews, were the only interpreters of those scriptures the explanation of Genesis 6:1-4 was as follows, the heavenly sons of God, the Watchers (a class of angels) lusted after the daughters of mankind and conspired to break God's law, leave their assigned abode in heaven, take human wives, defile themselves by sexual relations with women and to beget children who turned out to be gigantic. That was the unified Semitic view from the period of 2nd-Temple Judaism.

This can be confirmed by anyone by picking up a copy of "The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition", by Florentino Garcia Martinez, Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, and Florentino Garcia Martinez. This is THE MOST exhaustive collection of the non-Hebrew-Bible Dead Sea Scrolls that is available.

If one begins at the beginning of those volumes and proceeds to read through these fragments from hundreds of Jewish religious documents from about the time of Christ, one will get a profound sense that the preoccupation with the Watcher/Giant saga among Jewish writers during and before the time of Christ, borders on obsession. In addition to all of the books of the Hebrew Bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls include many story fragments from the lives of Lamech, Noah, Enoch, Methuselah and the rest as well as numerous accounts of the history of the Nephilim, the gigantic offspring of the Watchers.

One is stricken with the sheer lack of controversy among these writers on this point. To date, I have yet to find even one example from the period of 2nd-Temple Judaism wherein some rabbi or religious writer has a controversy with the Watcher/Nephilim thesis, though controversy abounds on other subjects.

There is evidence that this view prevailed among New Testament writers in the New Testament books as well, but that is perhaps better addressed in another post or thread.

Certainly the idea that angels could even interbreed with human women seems repugnant to our modern sensibilities and apparently it was also for the leaders of the Church from the fourth century forward. I would like to propose however, this offense to our sensibilities has more to do with Greek assumptions about the nature of angels than it does with any scriptural basis.

I have detected several areas in which the Church's ideas concerning angels are at major variance with the dominant view during the time of Christ; here are a couple:

1. Angelic substantiality
Per the prevailing ideas about angels among Christians of all stripes, angels are viewed as spirits, without materiality. Western ideas about the essential differences between human carnality and angelic spirituality make the idea of angelic/human copulation seem impossible. In the Semitic writings from 2nd-Temple Judaism no such problem can be detected. There is a consensus among Semitic writers from the period that angelic spirituality as well as angelic carnality were both simultaneously real, and not mutually exclusive. The writer of the Book of Jubilees even speaks of angels having been created in a circumcised state from the beginning.

2. Angelic peccability
Per the prevailing ideas of Christians there seems to be somewhat a consensus that somewhere in very ancient times there occurred a rebellion among the members of the heavenly angelic hosts. Whatever the reasons for this rebellion, the result was certain angels aligned themselves with Lucifer, rebelled against God and thus sinning, fell. A seemingly assumed corollary to this view is the idea commonly held among Christians that those angels who did not fall, stood the test and are thenceforth immune to further testing, temptation and the possibility of sinning. No such assumptions can be detected amongst Jewish writers from the period of 2nd-Temple Judaism. Not only did angels fall during the time of Jared the father of Enoch, but previous fallings are described as well as future fallings predicted.

For me, what Jewish writers from the time of Christ believed about this point, later controverted among Christians, holds more persuasive weight. To the Jews were given the lively oracles of God. The oracles were in a language whose meanings would have been more immediate to them than to us. The Jews lived closer to the times of the actual composition of those writings and thus were more likely to be the inheritors of original traditions related to their exposition, interpretation and understanding.