Should we fear space aliens?

Stephen Hawking's new documentary premiered Sunday night on the Discovery Channel. In it, he claimed that intelligent alien life almost certainly exists and that the search for it is valuable. He also suggested that the potential threats posed by contact with alien intelligence should discourage us from actively sending out messages to the cosmos. As anyone who has seen the Discovery Channel broadcast knows, it did an excellent job of explaining astrobiology and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. It illustrated how vast the search is (and will become) and its potential impact on Earth's inhabitants.

You were saying ...

The only reason an advanced civilization would be hostile to us is if they wanted our resources. However, any civilization sufficiently advanced to reach us would be sufficiently advanced to mine whatever resources they wanted from the vast stores available in the uninhabitted parts of any given solar system. A fight, even with a bunch of relative simpletons such as us, would merely be an irrational waste of resources. Not likely.

There is the clear addressing of "aliens", from the authoritative, inerrant and infallible Word of God -- and thus, on this matter. It also pertains to the world-wide flood that transpired because of this "alien" interaction with human beings, a "judgement from God" which was also for the purpose of "saving the human race" -- as the "aliens" were on the verge of destroying all human beings, at that point.

I posted the following in regards to these "aliens" (and I use that word in quotes because we know they weren't "aliens" as in the sense of an being from some civilization in space that evolved far beyond us and then came here on exploration, or "whatever" and interacted with the "beings" from this planet).

No, these so-called "aliens" were none other than the created beings that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob made, who rebelled against God (our Creator God of the Bible, who made all things in the universe, including the universe and all things which exist) -- and interacted with human beings, creating "hybrids" -- a great sin that God judged by destroying all human life (including all the hybrids) except for 8 individuals in the world, who then went on to repopulate the entire globe to the point of the numbers of humans we have on the planet now.

Here is my post from another FReeper thread, Post #93 ...

I was half-asleep when I read that and posted back. I hate to tell you that I sometime even check FRee Republic when I'm in bed... LOL ... [I can do it on the iPhone and post that way, too...]

So, I didn't really get too much information for you.

But, let me tell you what this is all about. These particular pictures are not the "main story" here. The main story is in Genesis Chapter 6, and also involves why the world-wide flood came about, that is told to us in Genesis.

If anyone is to go "researching" it actually should be on the "main story line" here and not so much the pictures.

So, I'm going to gather up some materials that speak to that issue and post them here.

Some people may think that we're dealing with very little information here... so "slim pickings" so to speak. But, we know a lot of things from the Bible from just a few verses, on different subjects. And what we learn from the Bible and some "key" to understanding -- can, very many times -- hinge on just one word and understanding that one word in the original language, as it was originally intended and as it was given to us.

Genesis Chapter 6

1 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the
earth, and daughters were born to them,

2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were
beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.

3 And the Lord said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for
he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty
years."

4 There were giants 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 in the earth,
and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil
continually.

6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was
grieved in His heart.

7 So the Lord said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the
face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the
air, for I am sorry that I have made them."

8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.

9 This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his
generations. Noah walked with God.

10 And Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with
violence.

12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all
flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.

13 And God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for
the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will
destroy them with the earth.

In chapter 5, we just had a rundown of all the generations from Adam to Noah, so we could see his "genealogy"...

Verse 9 is sort of a wrap-up from the previous Chapter 5, when it says ...

This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God.

Noah was a just man (and that's "just" in the same way that we are "justified" in the Lord, today). AND.., in addition, Noah's "genealogy" was "perfect" -- or, in other words (and in the context of how it's to be understood) -- Noah's genealogy was "all human" and not "half-human and half-non-human".

In verses 1 and 2, we see it says ...

Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.

There's your context for understanding what was going on here, and it also leads one to the realization of why the world-wide flood was required, too.

We see in verse 4 ...

There were giants 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.

That wording, "sons of God" always means angels in the Hebrew Old Testament. It's never used of anything else, except one -- and that's Adam. And you'll see why. The angels were all creations, directly, of God, and thus they were all "sons of God". Now, Adam was also, an original creation of God, so that made Adam a "son of God" -- which he is referred to, also. Outside of just the instance of Adam, only the angels are "sons of God" -- so that's how it's understood. In addition, if we go to the New Testament (different language, though), we've got the terms "sons of God" there, too. It's a completely different context here, though, and you'll understand why and how that's "perfect" too -- in its use in the New Testament.

Luke 20:34-36

34 And Jesus answered and said to them, "The sons of this age marry and
are given in marriage.

35 But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the
resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;

36 nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are
sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

At the resurrection, we are "sons of God" (both men and women, of course). And how perfect is that, because we are "each one" -- "a new creation in Christ". We are directly made from the hand of God, at that point and are not of our father, here on earth, a "son of Adam"...

Note that for Jesus, the Messiah of Israel ...

But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.
- Hebrews 9:11

He is not "of this creation" (as "Son of Man", he is a new creation of God). He is not part of that creation of all that was and is, from that "creation" that we see in the beginning of Genesis.

And..., we shall be like Him...

Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
- 1 John 3:2

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation.
- Galatians 6:15

We don't regard Jesus, the Messiah of Israel as someone "according to the flesh" (previously a "human being"), but as a "new creation of God" and "not of this creation". And likewise, the same of us, who are "in Christ".

Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.
- 2 Corinthians 5:16-17

I did the "rundown" of this in the New Testament to show that it also fits into what the Old Testament says about "sons of God". And so, in the New Testament, we're told about those who are also to be like Jesus, the Messiah of Israel, a "new creation" (a direct creation of God), just like the angels and Adam, in the Old Testament -- and we all will be "like the angels" in that regard -- and also we will not be "of this creation" just like Jesus is not of this creation. That puts us, in a higher order and status, over the angels, as we've been told.

Mankind initially was lower than the angels ..

What is man that You are mindful of him, And the son of man that You visit him? For You have made him a little lower than the angels, And You have crowned him with glory and honor.
- Psalm 8:4-5

But, then as a "new creation in Christ" we are of a higher order ...

Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels?
- 1 Corinthians 6:2-3a

All that to come back to the "sons of God" in Genesis 6, and those particular angels who took women on earth for wives and had children by them, and that these were the "hybrids"....

Genesis 6:11-13

11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with
violence.

12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all
flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.

13 And God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for
the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will
destroy them with the earth.

We see the destruction of mankind (except for Noah and his family, whose genealogy has been traced from Adam to his time) is going to happen, and this is told in context of the angelic corruption of mankind with hybrids. And God says the following, which I think indicates something in particular....

And God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me ...

It appears to me that God is saying that He sees the end of mankind, as a result of this corruption by the angels, into the genealogy (and gene pool) of mankind. And thus, this would be a blow against God and His prophetic word in that a savior would come from mankind, to save human beings who are now under the judgment of God (a death sentence and separated from God).

God is not saying "I see this and I'm going to end all flesh because of this." No, He's saying "what He sees" and God sees that if He allows this to continue -- that He sees the end of all flesh coming before Him. He sees that as the result of this angelic corruption of the human race.

In this judgment of the world-wide flood, destroying all except for 8 people -- God has saved mankind, not that He was trying to destroy mankind. And in the process of saving mankind, God will still keep His promise of the ultimate salvation that He says will come (which we know now to be, the Messiah of Israel).

Satan, through those angels who sinned and had relations with the women of the human race, had hoped to corrupt the human race to the point where God's promise of the coming One who would be the salvation of mankind -- could not happen.

Satan, as always, is the opposer of God and Satan wants to thwart God at every turn. So, the worldwide flood, which seems so drastic to us -- and it certainly does seem drastic to kill off all of mankind except for 8 people -- was exactly what was necessary so that God "would not see the end of all flesh coming before Him..."

As always, God seeks to save mankind and Satan seeks to destroy mankind.

We can see here what is said in the New Testament about this ...

2 Peter 2:4-9

4 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to
hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for
judgment;

5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight
people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world
of the ungodly;

6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned
them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward
would live ungodly;

7 and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct
of the wicked

8 (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous
soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)--

9 then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and
to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment,

More specifically ...

... God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly ...

Jude 1:6-7

6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their
own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the
judgment of the great day;

7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner
to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone
after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the
vengeance of eternal fire.

We can see that this sin was so severe, that the angels who committed it were consigned permanently to being imprisoned and not allowed free (as the other evil angels are allowed, presently).

You can see that these are the angels of Genesis 6, as they are compared to thos of Sodom and Gomorrah, and "going after strange flesh" -- of which the Bible calls it something of a "similar manner" to those angels of Genesis 6.

And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day ...

AND SO..., this is the backdrop to what I'll post here, in the next few posts, from others who have written articles on it. And it's the backdrop to those pictures that were presented.

The pictures aren't the "real story" -- the real story is Genesis 6, the angels who left their abode and cohabited with women, and that it required a worldwide flood to prevent the total and complete destruction of the human race, as a result of that.

You were saying ...

Puh-leeesse! I am totally sympatico with making contact with space aliens. Maybe we could aid them in a few earth abductions.

Well, there is a serious consideration of "alien abductions" and it's apparently alarming to some who are seeing these claims pop up all over the place (and these people don't all know one another ... ).

Here is some further information from Chuck Missler on the days of Noah. It's still a continuing problem and God has not dealt with it "finally" as judgment day is not here yet ...

As The Days of Noah Were

By Chuck Missler

Focus on Jerusalem is always striving to present enlightening and provocative prophecy–related material to its readers. The FOJ Library has been built to house numerous articles by various authors that I think have been inspired by the Holy Spirit. One of the foremost prophecy thinkers of our day is Chuck Missler of Koinnoia House Ministry. His books and articles on the Nephilim and the Days of Noah are interesting and timely reading. (03-14-06) In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus also likens the Last Days, not only to the days of Noah, but also makes a stark comparison to the times of Lot, and the prevailing condition that existed in Sodom. Both of these cultural debaucheries exist today, as in no other time since the days of Noah and Lot.

(Luke 17:26-30 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.)

As The Days of Noah Were

And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man."

The emergence of the "Nephilim" was what brought about the Flood of Noah. Who were they? Is the current interest in the possibility of "alien" involvements somehow of Biblical relevance?

The Nephilim

Genesis 6 indicates that the "sons of God" (B'nai Elohim) took wives of the "daughters of men," which gave birth to the "Nephilim." What on earth was going on? The B'nai Elohim is a term that refers to angels. It occurs four times in the Old Testament and is rendered "Angels of God" in the ancient Septuagin translation. The intrusion of certain angels into the human family resulted in unnatural offspring termed Nephilim, which derives from the Hebrew naphal (to fall), or the Fallen Ones. (The Greek Septuagint renders this term gigantes, which actually means "earth-born." This is often misunderstood to mean "giants," which they also happen to have been, incidentally.)

Line of Seth

The early church viewed the B'nai Elohim as angels up through the late fourth century: Justin, Athenagoras, Cyprian, Eusebius, et al. (also Josephus, Philo, Judeaus, and the Apochrypha regard this view). Celsus and Julian the Apostate exploited the older common belief to attack Christianity. Cyril of Alexandria, in his reply, repudiated the orthodox position. Julius Africanus (a contemporary of Origen) introduced the theory that the "sons of God" simply referred to the genealogical line of Seth, which was committed to preserving the true worship of God.

Seemingly more appealing, the "Sethite theory" prevailed into the Medieval Church, and many still hold this view. This view, however, has several serious problems. There is no indication that the Sethites were distinguished for piety; they were not exempted from the charge of general wickedness which brought on the flood. In fact, Seth's son Enosh was the one who introduced apostasy to that world. This is masked by a mistranslation of Genesis 4:25, which should read:

"...then men began to profane the name of the Lord."

Furthermore, when the faithful marry the unfaithful, they do not give birth to unnatural offspring! And the "daughters of men" were not differentiated with regard to the Flood. All were lost.

(Incidentally, the Nephilim didn't completely end with the flood. Genesis 6:4 mentions, "...and also after that..." We find the sons fo Anak, the Anakim, later in the Old Testament.)

The Reason for the Flood

It was the infusion of these strange beings into the human predicament that brought on the Flood of Noah. The Flood was preceded by four generations of prophets/preachers warning of the coming judgment: Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, and Noah. It seems that this was part of Satan's stratagem to corrupt the line of Adam to prevent the fulfillment of the Messianic redemption. Noah was apparently unique in that his genealogy was still uncorrupted.

The strange events which led to the flood are also alluded to in ancient mythologies.⁸ The legends of the Greek "titans"--partly terrestrial, partly celestial--embrace these same memories. (The Greek titan is linguistically linked to the Chaldean sheitan, and the Hebrew satan.)

The Angels that Sinned

There is a great deal revealed in the Bible about angels. They can appear in human form, they spoke as men, took men by the hand, even ate men's food, are capable of direct physical combat, some are the principal forces behind the world powers. They don't marry (in Heaven), but apparently are (or were) capable of much mischief. The strange events of Genesis Chapter 6 are also referred to in the New Testament. Peter refers to events preceding the flood of Noah:

"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment..." 2 Peter 2:4

(Peter uses the term tartarus, here translated as hell. This was a Greek term for "the dark abode of woe, the pit of darkness in the unseen world." Homer's Iliad portrays tartarus "as far below hades as the earth is below Heaven...")

Also, in Jude, it mentions them:

"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. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire." Jude 6 and 7.

Scripture warns against meddling with the spirit world. The punishment which overtook the angels that sinned was to emphasize the serious nature of apostasy: beings of a higher order than ours have been hurled down into a dark place of confinement where they have remained for thousands of years. God has not changed His attitude toward them; time has not mitigated the seriousness of their sin. False teachers are prewritten into condemnation.

The "Sons of God" Return?

There are many who believe that the recent "alien" involvements are also demonic and are just another precursor to the end-time. Some also believe that the Coming World Leader may boast of an "alien connection." It would be consistent from what else we can infer from Scripture. (The Restrainer of II Thessalonians 2 may be restraining far more than we have any suspicion of! When He is removed, the world is in for some astonishing surprises!)

In the meantime, what are our weapons of protection against such things? We do, indeed, "wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." Our armor is well defined in Ephesians 6:10-17.

"Mischievous Angels or Sethites?"

In the above analysis we have explored the importance of understanding Genesis 6. The straightforward presentation of the text seems to clearly portray a strange union of fallen angels with women to produce a hybrid race called the "Nephilim," or fallen ones. We enumerated the reasons we accept the "angel" view and why the liberal "Sethite" view is inadequate. Far beyond simply a misunderstanding of the forthright presentation of the text, the "Sethite" view also obscures apprehension of the prophetic Scriptures.

Post-Flood Occurrences

Regarding the Nephilim, Genesis 6:4 also includes the haunting phrase, "...and also after that...." Apparently these strange events were not confined just to the period before the Flood. We find that there seems to be some recurrence of those things which resulted in unusual "giants" appearing in subsequent periods later in the Old Testament narrative, specifically the giant-races of Canaan.

There were a number of tribes such as the Rephaim, the Emim, the Horim, and Zamsummim, that were giants. The kingdom of Og, the King of Bashan, was the "land of the giants." Later, we also find Arba, Anak, and his seven sons (the "Anakim") also as giants, along with the famed Goliath and his four brothers.

When God had revealed to Abraham that the land of Canaan was to be given to him, Satan had over 400 years to plant his "mine field" of Nephilim! When Moses sent his twelve spies to reconnoiter the Land of Canaan, they came back with the report of giants in the land. (The term used was Nephilim.) Their fear of those terrifying creatures resulted in their being relegated to wandering in the wilderness for 38 years.

When Joshua and the nation Israel later entered the land of Canaan, they were instructed to wipe out every man, woman and child of certain tribes. That strikes us as disturbingly severe. It would seem that in the Land of Canaan, there again was a "gene pool problem."

These Rephaim, Nephilim, and others seem to have been established as an advance guard to obstruct Israel's possession of the Promised Land. Was this also a stratagem of Satan?

The Days of Noah

Perhaps the most direct prophetic reference involving these things was the peculiar warning of our Lord Jesus Himself:

And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
Luke 17:26

What does that mean? He also warned:

And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
Luke 21:25,26 (emphasis added)

Is it possible that the UFOs - and their occupants - are part of an end-time scenario?

The Miry Clay of Daniel 2

The famous dream of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel Chapter 2 appears to lay out all of Gentile history until God ultimately intervenes and sets up His own kingdom. The various metals which make up the image in the dream are well known to serious students of prophecy. Even our common expression, "the idol has feet of clay," comes to us from this classic passage. But what is represented by the "miry clay" in this image? It seems to be strangely mixed-but not completely-with the iron in the dream. The term "miry clay" refers to clay made from dust, a Biblical idiom which suggests death. ) When Daniel interprets this for us he makes an especially provocative allusion in verse 43:

And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. (Daniel 2:43)

As he switches to a personal pronoun, they, "shall mingle themselves with the seed of men..." This is extremely suggestive when viewed in light of the warning of our Lord in Luke 17:26, ostensibly directing us to look more closely at Genesis 6. Just what (or who) are "mingling with the seed of men?" These would seem to refer to some beings who are not the seed of men themselves!

Could this be a hint of a return to the mischief of Genesis 6? It staggers the mind to consider the potential significance of Daniel's passage and its implications for the future global governance. Are these "aliens" so prolific that they constitute a political constituency?

Will there be UFO incidents as part of a carefully orchestrated program to lead us toward a political agenda? Or has it started already? Are the UFOs, and the increasingly widespread abductions, part of the preparations for this scenario?

UFO Abductions?

There seems to be a growing concern within the psychiatric community from the strange (and far too frequent) reports from people who claim to have been "abducted" by the occupants of UFOs. These reports are too bizarre to accept, and yet too frequent-and consistent to ignore. What is particularly disturbing is the estimate from some national polls that as much as 3% of the population may be involved! Perhaps the most well-known researcher in this area is Dr. John E. Mack, who is professor of psychiatry at The Cambridge Hospital, Harvard Medical School. A contributor to over 150 articles in professional (peer-reviewed) journals and a former Pulitzer Prize winner, he certainly appears to have impressive credentials. He has been involved in almost a hundred of these cases personally, and has shocked the professional community by declaring that he believes these beings may be real and that they appear to have an agenda to develop a hybrid race!

At a professional conference on abductions at M.I.T., Dr. Mack asked the provocative question, "If what these abductees are saying is happening to them isn't happening, then what is?" Could all this involve a return to the strange events of "the Days of Noah?"

Mischievous Angels or Sethites?

by Chuck Missler

Why did God send the judgment of the Flood in the days of Noah? Far more than simply a historical issue, the unique events leading to the Flood are a prerequisite to understanding the prophetic implications of our Lord's predictions regarding His Second Coming.¹

The strange events recorded in Genesis 6 were understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, as well as the Septuagint translators, as referring to fallen angels procreating weird hybrid offspring with human women-known as the "Nephilim." So it was also understood by the early church fathers. These bizarre events are also echoed in the legends and myths of every ancient culture upon the earth: the ancient Greeks, the Egyptians, the Hindus, the South Sea Islanders, the American Indians, and virtually all the others.

However, many students of the Bible have been taught that this passage in Genesis 6 actually refers to a failure to keep the "faithful" lines of Seth separate from the "worldly" line of Cain. The idea has been advanced that after Cain killed Abel, the line of Seth remained separate and faithful, but the line of Cain turned ungodly and rebellious. The "Sons of God" are deemed to refer to leadership in the line of Seth; the "daughters of men" is deemed restricted to the line of Cain. The resulting marriages ostensibly blurred an inferred separation between them. (Why the resulting offspring are called the "Nephilim" remains without any clear explanation.)

Since Jesus prophesied, "As the days of Noah were, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be,"² it becomes essential to understand what these days included.

Origin of the Sethite View

It was in the 5th century a.d. that the "angel" interpretation of Genesis 6 was increasingly viewed as an embarrassment when attacked by critics. (Furthermore, the worship of angels had begun within the church. Also, celibacy had also become an institution of the church. The "angel" view of Genesis 6 was feared as impacting these views.)

Celsus and Julian the Apostate used the traditional "angel" belief to attack Christianity. Julius Africanus resorted to the Sethite interpretation as a more comfortable ground. Cyril of Alexandria also repudiated the orthodox "angel" position with the "line of Seth" interpretation. Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages. It is still widely taught today among many churches who find the literal "angel" view a bit disturbing. There are many outstanding Bible teachers who still defend this view.

Problems with the Sethite View

Beyond obscuring a full understanding of the events in the early chapters of Genesis, this view also clouds any opportunity to apprehend the prophetic implications of the Scriptural allusions to the "Days of Noah."³ Some of the many problems with the "Sethite View" include the following:

1. The Text Itself

Substantial liberties must be taken with the literal text to propose the "Sethite" view. (In data analysis, it is often said that "if you torture the data severely enough it will confess to anything.")

The term translated "the Sons of God" is, in the Hebrew, B'nai HaElohim, "Sons of Elohim," which is a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels,⁴ and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament. It was so understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, by the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ, and by the early church fathers. Attempts to apply this term to "godly leadership" is without Scriptural foundation.⁵

The "Sons of Seth and daughters of Cain" interpretation strains and obscures the intended grammatical antithesis between the Sons of God and the daughters of Adam. Attempting to impute any other view to the text flies in the face of the earlier centuries of understanding of the Hebrew text among both rabbinical and early church scholarship. The lexicographical antithesis clearly intends to establish a contrast between the "angels" and the women of the Earth.

If the text was intended to contrast the "sons of Seth and the daughters of Cain," why didn't it say so? Seth was not God, and Cain was not Adam. (Why not the "sons of Cain" and the "daughters of Seth?" There is no basis for restricting the text to either subset of Adam's descendants. Further, there exists no mention of daughters of Elohim.)

And how does the "Sethite" interpretation contribute to the ostensible cause for the Flood, which is the primary thrust of the text? The entire view is contrived on a series of assumptions without Scriptural support.

The Biblical term "Sons of Elohim" (that is, of the Creator Himself), is confined to the direct creation by the divine hand and not to those born to those of their own order.⁶ In Luke's genealogy of Jesus, only Adam is called a "son of God."⁷ The entire Biblical drama deals with the tragedy that humankind is a fallen race, with Adam's initial immortality forfeited. Christ uniquely gives them that receive Him the power to become the sons of God.⁸ Being born again of the Spirit of God, as an entirely new creation,⁹ at their resurrection they alone will be clothed with a building of God¹⁰ and in every respect equal to the angels.¹¹ The very term oiketerion, alluding to the heavenly body with which the believer longs to be clothed, is the precise term used for the heavenly bodies from which the fallen angels had disrobed.¹²

The attempt to apply the term "Sons of Elohim" in a broader sense has no textual basis and obscures the precision of its denotative usage. This proves to be an assumption which is antagonistic to the uniform Biblical usage of the term.

2. The Daughters of Cain

The "Daughters of Adam" also does not denote a restriction to the descendants of Cain, but rather the whole human race is clearly intended. These daughters were the daughters born to the men with which this very sentence opens:

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. Genesis 6:1,2

It is clear from the text that these daughters were not limited a particular family or subset, but were, indeed, from (all) the Benoth Adam, "the daughters of Adam." There is no apparent exclusion of the daughters of Seth. Or were they so without charms in contrast with the daughters of Cain? All of Adam's female descendants seem to have been involved. (And what about the "sons of Adam?" Where do they, using this contrived dichotomy, fit in?)

Furthermore, the line of Cain was not necessarily known for its ungodliness. From a study of the naming of Cain's children, many of which included the name of God,¹³ it is not clear that they were all necessarily unfaithful.

3. The Inferred Lines of Separation

The concept of separate "lines" itself is suspect and contrary to Scripture.¹⁴ National and racial distinctions were plainly the result of the subsequent intervention of God in Genesis 11, five chapters later. There is no intimation that the lines of Seth and Cain kept themselves separate nor were even instructed to. The injunction to remain separate was given much later.¹⁵ Genesis 6:12 confirms that all flesh had corrupted His way upon the earth.

4. The Inferred Godliness of Seth

There is no evidence, stated or implied, that the line of Seth was godly. Only one person was translated from the judgment to come (Enoch) and only eight were given the protection of the ark. No one beyond Noah's immediate family was accounted worthy to be saved. In fact, the text implies that these were distinct from all others. (There is no evidence that the wives of Noah's sons were from the line of Seth.) Even so, Gaebelein observes, "The designation 'Sons of God' is never applied in the Old Testament to believers," whose sonship is "distinctly a New Testament revelation."¹⁶

The "Sons of Elohim" saw the daughters of men that they were fair and took them wives of all that they chose. It appears that the women had little say in the matter. The domineering implication hardly suggests a godly approach to the union. Even the mention that they saw that they were attractive seems out of place if only normal biology was involved. (And were the daughters of Seth so unattractive?)

It should also be pointed out that the son of Seth himself was Enosh, and there is textual evidence that, rather than a reputation for piety, he seems to have initiated the profaning of the name of God.¹⁷

If the lines of Seth were so faithful, why did they perish in the flood?

5. The Unnatural Offspring

The most fatal flaw in the specious "Sethite" view is the emergence of the Nephilim as a result of the unions. (Bending the translation to "giants" does not resolve the difficulties.) It is the offspring of these peculiar unions in Genesis 6:4 which seems to be cited as a primary cause for the Flood.

Procreation by parents of differing religious views do not produce unnatural offspring. Believers marrying unbelievers may produce "monsters," but hardly superhuman, or unnatural, children! It was this unnatural procreation and the resulting abnormal creatures that were designated as a principal reason for the judgment of the Flood.

The very absence of any such adulteration of the human genealogy in Noah's case is also documented in Genesis 6:9: Noah's family tree was distinctively unblemished. The term used, tamiym, is used for physical blemishes.¹⁸

Why were the offspring uniquely designated "mighty" and "men of reknown?" This description characterizing the children is not accounted for if the fathers were merely men, even if godly.

A further difficulty seems to be that the offspring were only men; no "women of reknown" are mentioned. (Was there a chromosome deficiency among the Sethites? Were there only "Y" chromosomes available in this line?)¹⁹

6. New Testament Confirmations

"In the mouths of two or three witnesses every word shall be established."²⁰ In Biblical matters, it is essential to always compare Scripture with Scripture. The New Testament confirmations in Jude and 2 Peter are impossible to ignore.²¹

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell [Tartarus], and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 2 Peter 2:4-5

Peter's comments even establishes the time of the fall of these angels to the days of the Flood of Noah.

Even Peter's vocabulary is provocative. Peter uses the term Tartarus, here translated "hell." This is the only place that this Greek term appears in the Bible. Tartarus is a Greek term for "dark abode of woe"; "the pit of darkness in the unseen world." As used in Homer's Iliad, it is "...as far beneath hades as the earth is below heaven`."²² In Greek mythology, some of the demigods, Chronos and the rebel Titans, were said to have rebelled against their father, Uranus, and after a prolonged contest they were defeated by Zeus and were condemned into Tartarus.

The Epistle of Jude²³ also alludes to the strange episodes when these "alien" creatures intruded themselves into the human reproductive process:

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. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Jude 6,7

The allusions to "going after strange flesh," keeping "not their first estate," having "left their own habitation," and "giving themselves over to fornication," seem to clearly fit the alien intrusions of Genesis 6. (The term for habitation, oivkhth,rion, refers to their heavenly bodies from which they had disrobed.²⁴)

These allusions from the New Testament would seem to be fatal to the "Sethite" alternative in interpreting Genesis 6. If the intercourse between the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" were merely marriage between Sethites and Cainites, it seems impossible to explain these passages, and the reason why some fallen angels are imprisoned and others are free to roam the heavenlies.

7. Post-Flood Implications

The strange offspring also continued after the flood: "There were Nephilim in the earth in those days, and also after that..."²⁵ The "Sethite" view fails to meaningfully address the prevailing conditions "also after that." It offers no insight into the presence of the subsequent "giants" in the land of Canaan.

One of the disturbing aspects of the Old Testament record was God's instructions, upon entering the land of Canaan, to wipe out every man, woman, and child of certain tribes inhabiting the land. This is difficult to justify without the insight of a "gene pool problem" from the remaining Nephilim, Rephaim, et al., which seems to illuminate the difficulty.

8. Prophetic Implications

Another reason that an understanding of Genesis 6 is so essential is that it also is a prerequisite to understanding (and anticipating) Satan's devices²⁶ and, in particular, the specific delusions to come upon the whole earth as a major feature of end-time prophecy.²⁷ We will take up these topics in Part 2, "The Return Of The Nephilim.")

In Summary

If one takes an integrated view of the Scripture, then everything in it should "tie together." It is the author's view that the "Angel View," however disturbing, is the clear, direct presentation of the Biblical text, corroborated by multiple New Testament references and was so understood by both early Jewish and Christian scholarship; the "Sethite View" is a contrivance of convenience from a network of unjustified assumptions antagonistic to the remainder of the Biblical record.

It should also be pointed out that most conservative Bible scholars accept the "angel" view.²⁸ Among those supporting the "angel" view are: G. H. Pember, M. R. DeHaan, C. H. McIntosh, F. Delitzsch, A. C. Gaebelein, A. W. Pink, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Henry Morris, Merril F. Unger, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Hal Lindsey, and Chuck Smith, being among the best known.

For those who take the Bible seriously, the arguments supporting the "Angel View" appear compelling. For those who indulge in a willingness to take liberties with the straightforward presentation of the text, no defense can prove final. (And greater dangers than the implications attending these issues await them!)

For further exploration of this critical topic, see the following:

George Hawkins Pember, Earth's Earliest Ages, first published by Hodder and Stoughton in 1875, and presently available by Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids MI, 1975.
John Fleming, The Fallen Angels and the Heroes of Mythology, Hodges, Foster, and Figgis, Dublin, 1879.
Henry Morris, The Genesis Record, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids MI, 1976.
Merrill F. Unger, Biblical Demonology, Scripture Press, Chicago IL, 1952.
Clarence Larkin, Spirit World, Rev. Clarence Larkin Estate, Philadelphia PA, 1921.

Endnotes

Matthew 24:37.
Matthew 24:37.
Matthew 24:37; Luke 17:26, as well as Old Testament allusions such as Daniel 2:43, et al.
Cf. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 (where they are in existence before the creation of the earth). Jesus also implies the same term in Luke 20:36.
A footnote in an edition of the famed Scofield Bible, in suggesting that "sons of Elohim" does not always denote angelic beings, points to one ostensible exception (Isaiah 43:6) but the term in question is not there used! God simply refers to Israel as "my sons" and "my daughters." Indeed, all of Adam's race are termed God's "offspring" in Acts 17:28 (although Paul is here quoting a Greek poet).
The sons of Elohim are even contrasted with the sons of Adam in Psalm 82:1, 6 and warned that if they go on with the evil identified in verse 2, they would die like Adam (man). When our Lord quoted this verse (John 10:34) He made no mention of what order of beings God addressed in this Psalm but that the Word of God was inviolate whether the beings in question were angels or men.
Luke 3:38.
John 1:11, 12.
2 Corinthians 5:17.
2 Corinthians 5:1-4.
Luke 20:36.
This term appears only twice in the Bible: 2 Corinthians 5:2 and Jude 1:6.
Genesis 4:18.
Genesis 11:6.
This instruction was given to the descendants of Isaac and Jacob. Even the presumed descendants of Ishmael cannot demonstrate their linkage since no separation was maintained.
A.C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (Penteteuch), p. 29.
Gen 4:26 is widely regarded as a mistranslation: "Then began men to profane the name of the Lord." So agrees the venerated Targum of Onkelos; the Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel; also the esteemed rabbinical sources such as Kimchi, Rashi, et al. Also, Jerome. Also, the famed Maimonides, Commentary on the Mishnah, 1168 a.d.
Exodus 12:5, 29; Leviticus 1:3, 10; 3:1, 6; 4:3, 23; 5:15, 18, 25; 22:19, 21; 23:12; Numbers 6:14; et al. Over 60 references, usually referring to the freedom from physical blemishes of offerings.
Each human gamete has 23 pairs of chromosomes: the male has both "Y" (shorter) and "X" (longer) chromosomes; the female, only "X" chromosomes. The sex of a fertilized egg is determined by the sperm fertilizing the egg: "X+Y" for a male child; "X+X" for a female. Thus, the male supplies thesex-determining chromosome.
Deut. 19:15; Matthew 18:16; 26:60; 2 Corinthians 13:1; et al.
Jude 6, 7; 2 Peter 2:4-5.
Homer, Iliad, viii 16.
Jude is commonly recognized as one of the Lord's brothers. (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; Gal 1:9; Jude 1:1.)
The only other use in the New Testament is 2 Corinthians 5:2, alluding to the heavenly body which the believer longs to be clothed.
Genesis 6:4.
2 Corinthians 2:11.
Luke 21:26; 2 Thess 2:9, 11; et al.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Vol V, p.2835-2836.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.