Did the angels take and mate with women we now conclude our findings. We learned several points of data, with the greatest being the angels did NOT marry or take for themselves daughters of men.
So let’s look for more evidence now in Gen. 6, specifically then what do we have here in verse 4? As we now examine it and if you did not know Genesis is a book of genealogies—it is a book of the families. The sons of God is referring to the godly line who have come down from Adam through Seth, and the daughters of men belong to the line of Cain. So, what you have here now is an intermingling and intermarriage of these two lines, until finally the entire line is totally corrupted (well, not totally; there is one exception and this is Christ Jesus). That is the picture that is presented to us here in this recording of the intermingled lines of taking ungodly women for wives.
The godly men took for themselves wives of all; that is, of the ungodly as well as the godly families, without any discrimination. "Whom they chose," not for the godliness of their lives, but for the goodliness of their looks. The ungodly mothers will not train up children in the way they should go according to the Lord God Almighty; and husbands who have taken the wrong step of marrying ungodly wives cannot prove to be very exemplary or authoritative fathers.
Up to this time they may have been consistent as the sons of God in their outward conduct, but a laxity of choice proves a corresponding laxity of principle. The first inlet of sin prepares the way for the flood-gates of iniquity. It is easy to see that now the degeneracy of the whole race will go on at a rapid pace and why humans need a Savior to deliver us from being ungodly.
Let’s look at the verse “they took them wives”, could possibly be more than one for each of them, after the example of those wicked families into which they were matched; of all which they chose, i.e. loved and liked, as the word choosing is taken, Psalm 25:12, Psalm 119:173, Isaiah 1:29, Isaiah 42:1, compared with Matthew 12:28. This is noted as the first error, that they did promiscuously choose wives, without any regard to their sobriety and religion, minding only the pleasing of their own fancies and lusts, not the pleasing and serving of their Lord and Maker, nor the obtaining of a godly seed, which was God’s end in the institution of marriage, Malachi 2:15, and therefore should have been theirs too.
Folks I recognize, and I want to insist upon it, that many fine teachers/clergy take the opposite view that the 'sons of God; are actually angels from Heaven above who did this act. Therefore, if you accept that view, you will be in good company with those who also succumb to this falseness too. However, I am sure that most of you want to be right and will want to go along with the word of God, not man with what ‘they feel’ is proper.
Lastly, the idea that angels had sexual relations with earthly women is preposterous. As one can imagine, such speculation in the scriptures provides ample opportunity for the heathen world to exploit the scriptures.
Countless books, movies, documentaries, and false religions have exploited such misinterpretations of Genesis 6:1-6. One such exploit is the alleged lost Biblical BOOK OF ENOCH, which teaches that fallen angels had physical intimacy with earthly women that produced offspring 450-feet tall?
Without a doubt, the primary claim of the Book of Enoch is that fallen angels had sex with human women and produced 450-feet tall giants upon the earth. This teaching is ridiculous, unscriptural, and has no solid evidence to support it (Biblically or scientifically). This is another sound reason as to why the Book of Enoch should continue to be rejected as it is nonsense.
If, as some theologians believe angels did have sex with earthly women, then why has it not occurred since Genesis 6:1-6? The scriptures are not silent on this matter, as we have read in Mark 12:25, for "they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven." The demonic succubus (a female demon) and the incubus (a male demon) are believed by demonology experts to have sex with sleeping humans. Of course, this is not a scriptural teaching. Angels cannot marry, nor be given in marriage.
For it is not to angels only that the term "sons of Elohim," or "sons of Elim," is applied; but in Psalm 73:15, in an address to Elohim, the godly are called "the generation of Thy sons," i.e., sons of Elohim; in Deuteronomy 32:5 the Israelites are called His (God's) sons, and in Hosea 1:10, "sons of the living God;" and in Psalm 80:17, Israel is spoken of as the son, whom Elohim has made strong.
These passages show that the expression "sons of God" cannot be elucidated by philological means, but must be interpreted by theology alone. Moreover, even when it is applied to the angels, it is questionable whether it is to be understood in a physical or ethical sense. The notion that "it is employed in a physical sense as nomen naturae, instead of angels as nomen officii, and presupposes generation of a physical kind," we must reject as an unscriptural and gnostic error!
In addition, the entire suggestion that God allowed angels, which would have possessed FULL knowledge of divine realities, to tempt mankind is against the plainest teachings of the Scriptures. 1st Corinthians 10:13 states... "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." It would have been extremely UNCOMMON for women to be tempted by angels into marriage, not to mention the fact that the temptation would have been ABOVE THAT YE ARE ABLE.
We do know that there were giants in the Old Testament, as Goliath himself was 9' 6" tall (1st Samuel 17:4); however, as mentioned earlier, Genesis 6:1-6 fails to state directly that the "giants" of those days were the offspring monsters of bizarre extraterrestrial marriages.
Carefully notice Genesis 6:4 again... "There were giants in the earth in those days; and ALSO AFTER THAT, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." "Also" means in addition to. "After that" means later. Clearly, even from reading the Bible at a childlike level, it is obvious that the "giants" were not the same people as the "mighty men which were of old, men of renown."
Remember people if it doesn’t line up with the word of God properly then we must reject it as falseness from the pit of Hell.
Rev. Brad Luoma, Exorcist & Deliverance Minister
Savior Christian Deliverance Ministries
