Who were the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:1-4? Historical and Literary Context Genesis 6:1–4 speaks of a time before the Flood when humanity was multiplying rapidly on the earth. These verses introduce the phrase “sons of God,” who are said to have taken wives from among the “daughters of men.” The text reads: “the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful” (Genesis 6:2). This passage—just a few lines—carries profound implications and has occupied interpreters for centuries. The phrase “sons of God” (Hebrew: bene ha’elohim) appears elsewhere in Scripture (e.g., Job 1:6, Job 2:1) and typically indicates a class of beings distinct from ordinary human beings. However, throughout the history of biblical interpretation, several viable positions have emerged. Below are the major viewpoints, along with supporting evidence and discussion. Use of the Term “Sons of God” in Scripture 1. In Job 1:6, the same Hebrew phrase appears in a context describing supernatural beings presenting themselves before God. 2. Psalm 29:1 and Psalm 89:6 (varied Hebrew forms) similarly speak of heavenly beings or a divine assembly. 3. In contrast, the New Testament occasionally uses “sons of God” to refer to believers (Romans 8:14) through adoption into God’s family, though this is not linguistically identical to Genesis 6, as the language there is Hebrew rather than Greek. This term’s range of meaning sets the tone for multiple interpretations regarding Genesis 6:1–4. Major Interpretations 1. Fallen Angels Many interpreters see this as describing fallen angels who took human wives. This view draws from: • The consistent use of “sons of God” in Job 1:6 and 2:1 to denote angelic beings. • Extra-biblical Jewish writings like 1 Enoch, which expands on the idea of angels (the “Watchers”) who sinned by marrying women and producing offspring called Nephilim. While not considered canonical Scripture, such documents reveal ancient understandings prevalent in Second Temple Judaism. • Some early Christian writers, such as Justin Martyr and Tertullian, favored this interpretation, seeing it as consistent with the supernatural worldview of the Genesis narrative leading up to the Flood. However, interpreters raise questions about how angels, as non-physical beings, could procreate with humans. Advocates of this viewpoint respond by noting that certain angels in Scripture appear in physical form (e.g., Genesis 19:1–3). They argue that these rebellious angels overstepped divinely established boundaries, a theme referenced in Jude 6–7 regarding “angels who did not stay within their own domain.” 2. Descendants of Seth and Descendants of Cain Another perspective identifies the “sons of God” as the righteous lineage descending from Seth, while “daughters of men” represents the line of Cain, known for waywardness after the murder of Abel. According to this view: • The preceding chapters highlight two genealogical lines—Seth’s line associated with worship of God, and Cain’s line, which includes notable sinners such as Lamech (Genesis 4:23–24). • Genesis 4:26 notes that in Seth’s time, “men began to call upon the name of the LORD,” implying spiritual devotion. Adherents suggest that Seth’s line was set apart as faithful to God, so they were uniquely called “sons of God.” • The intermarriage of these godly men with ungodly women from Cain’s line led to widespread corruption, culminating in the necessity of the Flood. Supporters of this interpretation see it as consistent with biblical emphasis on separation from sin, especially in marriage (e.g., Deuteronomy 7:3). Yet others argue it does not entirely explain the reference to the offspring as “Nephilim” (Genesis 6:4), typically seen as unusually powerful or giant beings. 3. Tyrannical Kings or Nobles A third proposal posits that “sons of God” were powerful rulers or kings who foolishly declared themselves quasi-divine. In the ancient Near East, it was not uncommon for rulers to be considered godlike or have divine right. Advocates of this view observe: • Some ancient Mesopotamian texts refer to kings using terms that imply divinity or sonship of the gods. • The mention of mighty men and “men of renown” in Genesis 6:4 fits with the idea of rulers who established dynasties and whose arrogance led them to violate divinely established moral boundaries. • These kings may have taken as many wives as they chose, resembling the polygamous practices of powerful ancient rulers, which contributed to the spread of violence. One strength of this view is its consistency with a sociopolitical reading of the text. However, critics note that many of the earliest Jewish and Christian commentators favored a supernatural understanding of the phrase “sons of God,” and the force of the original Hebrew suggests more than mere human royalty in some contexts. Archaeological and Manuscript Evidence 1. Dead Sea Scrolls (Qumran): Portions of the Hebrew text from Qumran evidence little to no variation in Genesis 6:1–4 from the traditional Masoretic Text, reflecting the remarkable preservation of these verses. 2. Septuagint (Greek Translation): The phrase in Genesis 6:2 is rendered “angels of God” (angeloi tou Theou) in some Septuagint manuscripts, reinforcing a supernatural reading. Other manuscripts translate it more generically. This variation indicates early interpretive diversity. 3. Ancient Near Eastern Context: Several Mesopotamian and Canaanite texts refer to interactions between gods and humans. While these parallels are external sources and must be separated from the monotheistic framework of Scripture, they do highlight the environment in which Genesis was understood. Theological and Interpretive Considerations Regardless of which view readers adopt, Genesis 6:1–4 serves to illustrate humankind’s deep moral decline prior to the Flood (Genesis 6:5 notes that “every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil”). The passage highlights: • The need for divine intervention, explaining in part the global judgment of the Flood. • A warning against crossing moral boundaries, whether celestial beings rebelling, the righteous line compromising, or humans exalting themselves as gods. • The ultimate sovereignty of God, who remains above all created order and who orchestrates judgment tempered by grace (as shown in the calling of Noah). Summary of Interpretations and Key Takeaway 1. Fallen Angels: Supernatural beings who transgressed God’s design. 2. Righteous Sethite Line: Faithful men who corrupted themselves by marrying descendants of Cain. 3. Tyrannical Rulers: Powerful men abusing divine authority claims. Each interpretation has roots in biblical text and history. Many interpreters lean toward a supernatural reading, given the usage of similar verbiage in the book of Job and other ancient Jewish writings. Others remain within a human interpretation based on genealogical contexts. Regardless of the chosen interpretation, the text highlights human depravity before the Flood and foregrounds the sovereignty of the Creator. This historical narrative stands as both a sober reminder of sin’s devastating reach and an assurance of the righteous judgment and mercy of God, who orchestrated His plan of redemption to overcome the world’s corruption. |
    |