Feb
11
What to Make of This Weird Bible Passage?: Gen. 6:1-4 (part 2)
As planned, this week continues our look at what a few of the best study Bibles have to say about Genesis 6:1-4 — the passage that first speaks of “sons of God” and the Nephilim (or giants). It is one of the most curious and hard to completely interpret passages in the Bible. Of course, more academic papers, commentaries, and other books might go into the various issues in even more depth. (Beware, there’s a lot of junk out there, too.) But, this is just to give readers (and myself) a basic understanding of the main hypotheses proposed over the centuries.
Let’s proceed…
NIV Faithlife Illustrated Study Bible
“When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days — and also afterward — when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.” (Gen. 6:1-4 (NIV))
6:1 daughters The OT usually refers to the birth of male children when describing a generation. In this case, the reference to daughters deliberately contrasts with the sons of God (see v.2).
6:2 sons of God This Hebrew phrase, bene ha’elohim, and similar phrasings (bene elohim and bene elim) are used elsewhere in the OT only of heavenly beings (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 89:6; 82:6; see Dt 32:8 and note). Thus, bene elohim could refer to the spiritual beings who are members of God’s council — the divine council. The Hebrew phrase bene el-chay (which may be translated “sons of the living God”) is used for the people of Israel in Hos 1:10 and may be an echo of this ancient concept of the divine council (see Hos 1:10 and note). The bene ha’elohim could also be human rulers or kings. This idea is based on the OT references to the Davidic king as son of God (Ps 2:7; 2Sa 7:14; 1Ch 17:13). The sons of God could represent the human male line of Seth, while the daughters of men are the descendants of Cain.
6:3 My Spirit The Hebrew word used here, ruach, is often used to refer to breath (see Ge 2:7 and note; Job 9:18; 19:7; Ex 15:8; La 4:20). This means that this phrase likely refers to the human life span. will not contend The Hebrew word used here, yadon, occurs only here in the OT; its origins are unclear. It could mean “remain,” “contend” or “be strong”. for they are mortal The Hebrew grammar here could be understood as an additional thought, rather than the cause of God’s decision. God may be asserting that he has the authority to judge humanity since he is God and not flesh. a hundred and twenty years It is unclear if this refers to the shortening of the human life span or the amount of time before the flood. If it refers to the span of human life, it would only be a general rule — some individuals after the flood are said to have lived more than 120 years (e.g., Abraham; Ge 25:7).
6:4 Nephilim The Hebrew term used here, nephilim, occurs only here and in Nu 13:33, where it is associated with gigantism and people of unusual height. The great height of the Nephilim — who are described as the sons or descendants of Anak in Nu 13:33 — discourages the Israelites from conquering the promised land. afterward It seems that nephilim were on the earth after the flood (see Nu 13:33). Nonetheless, Noah and his family were the only human survivors of the flood (compare note on Ge 6:17). Perhaps Noah’s family did not escape the cohabitation of the sons of God described in 6:2. Some later extra-Biblical Jewish texts, such as 1 Enoch, agree with this view, but Noah and his generations are called blameless (v.9), which suggests that none of the members of Noah’s family are Nephilim. This would lend credibility to the view that the flood was localized, not global: The Nephilim survived because there was no flood where they were at the time (see 7:19 and note). heroes This may refer to the Nephilim — which would make them the offspring of the sons of God and human women (see note on 6:2) — or introduce another ancient mighty group spawned by the sons of God.
[Following this, there is a word definition box for “Nephilim”, which says…]
Ancient Jewish texts and translations of the OT render the Hebrew world nephilim with terms that describe men of inordinate height. The Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the OT) renders the term gigantes (“giants”). The term is not a synonym for “sons of God” (see Ge. 6:2 and note); the Nephilim could, though, be the offspring of the sons of God from cohabiting with the daughters of humans.
For this next one, I will leave in the bracketed letters marking each translation note (tn) and study note (sn) for ease of reference…
NET Full Notes Edition
“When humankind[a] began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born[b] to them,[c] 2 the sons of God[d] saw that the daughters of humankind were beautiful. Thus they took wives for themselves from any they chose. 3 So the Lord said, “My Spirit will not remain in[e] humankind indefinitely,[f] since[g] they[h] are mortal.[i] They[j] will remain for 120 more years.”[k] 4 The Nephilim[l] were on the earth in those days (and also after this)[m] when the sons of God would sleep with[n] the daughters of humankind, who gave birth to their children.[o] They were the mighty heroes[p] of old, the famous men.[q]” (Gen. 6:1-4 (NET))
a. Genesis 6:1 tn The Hebrew text has the article prefixed to the noun. Here the article indicates the generic use of the word אָדָם (ʾadam): “humankind.”
b. Genesis 6:1 tn This disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + verb) is circumstantial to the initial temporal clause. It could be rendered, “with daughters being born to them.” For another example of such a disjunctive clause following the construction וַיְהִי כִּי (vayehi ki, “and it came to pass when”), see 2 Sam 7:1.
c. Genesis 6:1 tn The pronominal suffix is third masculine plural, indicating that the antecedent “humankind” is collective.
d. Genesis 6:2 sn The Hebrew phrase translated “sons of God” (בְנֵי־הָאֱלֹהִים, vene haʾelohim) occurs only here (Gen 6:2, 4) and in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. There are three major interpretations of the phrase here. (1) In the Book of Job the phrase clearly refers to angelic beings. In Gen 6 the “sons of God” are distinct from “humankind,” suggesting they were not human. This is consistent with the use of the phrase in Job. Since the passage speaks of these beings cohabiting with women, they must have taken physical form or possessed the bodies of men. An early Jewish tradition preserved in 1 En. 6-7 elaborates on this angelic revolt and even names the ringleaders. (2) Not all scholars accept the angelic interpretation of the “sons of God,” however. Some argue that the “sons of God” were members of Seth’s line, traced back to God through Adam in Gen 5, while the “daughters of humankind” were descendants of Cain. But, as noted above, the text distinguishes the “sons of God” from humankind (which would include the Sethites as well as the Cainites) and suggests that the “daughters of humankind” are human women in general, not just Cainites. (3) Others identify the “sons of God” as powerful tyrants, perhaps demon-possessed, who viewed themselves as divine and, following the example of Lamech (see Gen 4:19), practiced polygamy. But usage of the phrase “sons of God” in Job militates against this view. For literature on the subject see G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:135.
e. Genesis 6:3 tn The verb form יָדוֹן (yadon) only occurs here. Some derive it from the verbal root דִּין (din, “to judge”) and translate “strive” or “contend with” (so NIV), but in this case one expects the form to be יָדִין (yadin). The Old Greek has “remain with,” a rendering which may find support from an Arabic cognate (see C. Westermann, Genesis, 1:375). If one interprets the verb in this way, then it is possible to understand רוּחַ (ruakh) as a reference to the divine life-giving spirit or breath, rather than the Lord’s personal Spirit. E. A. Speiser argues that the term is cognate with an Akkadian word meaning “protect” or “shield.” In this case, the Lord’s Spirit will not always protect humankind, for the race will suddenly be destroyed (E. A. Speiser, “YDWN, Gen. 6:3, ” JBL 75 [1956]: 126-29).
f. Genesis 6:3 tn Or “forever.”
g. Genesis 6:3 tn The form בְּשַׁגַּם (beshaggam) appears to be a compound of the preposition ב (bet, “in”), the relative שֶׁ (she, “who” or “which”), and the particle גַּם (gam, “also, even”). It apparently means “because even” (see BDB 980 s.v. שֶׁ).
h. Genesis 6:3 tn Heb “he”; the plural pronoun has been used in the translation since “man” earlier in the verse has been understood as a collective (“humankind”).
i. Genesis 6:3 tn Heb “flesh.”
j. Genesis 6:3 tn See the note on “they” earlier in this verse.
k. Genesis 6:3 tn Heb “his days will be 120 years.” Some interpret this to mean that the age expectancy of people from this point on would be 120, but neither the subsequent narrative nor reality favors this. It is more likely that this refers to the time remaining between this announcement of judgment and the coming of the flood.
l. Genesis 6:4 tn The Hebrew word נְפִילִים (nefilim) is simply transliterated here, because the meaning of the term is uncertain. According to the text, the Nephilim became mighty warriors and gained great fame in the antediluvian world. The text may imply they were the offspring of the sexual union of the “sons of God” and the “daughters of humankind” (v. 2), but it stops short of saying this in a direct manner. The Nephilim are mentioned in the OT only here and in Num 13:33, where it is stated that they were giants (thus KJV, TEV, NLT “giants” here). The narrator observes that the Anakites of Canaan were descendants of the Nephilim. Certainly these later Anakite Nephilim could not be descendants of the antediluvian Nephilim (see also the following note on the word “this”).
m. Genesis 6:4 tn This observation is parenthetical, explaining that there were Nephilim even after the flood. If all humankind, with the exception of Noah and his family, died in the flood, it is difficult to understand how the postdiluvian Nephilim could be related to the antediluvian Nephilim or how the Anakites of Canaan could be their descendants (see Num 13:33). It is likely that the term Nephilim refers generally to “giants” (see HALOT 709 s.v. נְפִילִים) without implying any ethnic connection between the antediluvian and postdiluvian varieties.
n. Genesis 6:4 tn Heb “would come to.” The verb בּוֹא (bo’; “to come, enter”) with the preposition אֶל (’el; “to”) means “to approach, to come to” (HALOT 113 s.v. בּוֹא) and is a euphemism for coming together for sexual relations. See the note at 2 Sam 12:24 on this phrase being only a euphemism. A more literal rendering such as “get together with” would be less clear about the sexual implication, so a clearer euphemism has been used for the translation. The Hebrew imperfect verbal form portrays the action as repetitive or customary.
o. Genesis 6:4 tn Heb “and they gave birth to them.” The masculine plural suffix “them” refers to the “sons of God,” to whom the “daughters of humankind” bore children. After the Qal form of the verb יָלָד (yalad, “to give birth”) the preposition ל (lamed, “to”) introduces the father of the child(ren). See Gen 16:1, 15; 17:19, 21; 21:2-3, 9; 22:23; 24:24, 47; 25:2, etc.
p. Genesis 6:4 tn The parenthetical/explanatory clause uses the word הַגִּבֹּרִים (haggibborim) to describe these Nephilim. The word means “warriors; mighty men; heroes.” The appositional statement further explains that they were “men of renown.” The text refers to superhuman beings who held the world in their power and who lived on in ancient lore outside the Bible. See E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB), 45-46; C. Westermann, Genesis, 1:379-80; and Anne D. Kilmer, “The Mesopotamian Counterparts of the Biblical Nephilim,” Perspectives on Language and Text, 39-43.
q. Genesis 6:4 tn Heb “men of name” (i.e., famous men).
These two study Bibles gave the usual options for “sons of God”, “120 years”, and Nephilim, while also adding their own insights, which I appreciated. The NET seems to be a little more comfortable expressing a preference for one assumption or interpretation over another (e.g., notes [d] and [k]). They both (but especially the NET) delved more into Hebrew words and grammar than either of the first two we looked at (see part 1). This is the NET’s specialty, after all. I like that not only does the NET retain the Hebrew script, but by copy-n-pasting the notes from online, I was able to include the Hebrew script here, too. If you are like me, you may not be able to read Hebrew or have understood all of that linguistic stuff, but you were able to get the gist of what was being said most of the time.
There is one other orthodox, conservative approach that was not mentioned in any of the four study Bibles we looked at, and that is the one taught by the late Michael S. Heiser (though he isn’t the only one). It is a bit surprising that the Faithlife Illustrated Study Bible just touches on this — with its mention of God’s divine council and 1 Enoch — but goes no further, since Heiser was Scholar-in-Residence at Faithlife Corporation, as well as one of the Academic Editors of the study Bible in question. But, then, it would require a lot of background information on his view on “angels” and the divine council and related things, which is why I’m not going to attempt to explain it myself. If interested, you might want to start with his book The Unseen Realm, then Reversing Hermon, Angels, and Demons (the last two of which I have not yet read as of this writing).
That’s a wrap for this topic, though one day I might attempt to write up my (tentative) position on all of this. Meantime, I learned a couple things while putting this together, and I hope you did while reading it, too.
