@OP
This topic is quite spiritually educative and I must admit I am still learning from all posts. I might strongly support Frosbel's posts but also I am learning from others.

@Patsey,

Methinks your write up sounds rather religiously inclined and it is seemingly opinionated.I would implore you to open up your mind to the truth about God's word and lay less emphasis from what you were taught in a school nay bible school.What is the essence of acute critical thinking with the word of God?The word of God is not an academic exercise! What is of essence to a christian is to humble him(her)self before God and ask for the Spirit of understanding of God's word and equally form a habit of independently studying the bible.

Finally,as Christians let us continually learn from each other and desist from pouring vituperations on posters.Rather let us apply our energies in doing a critique of posts and justifying it with the WORD. Most of these heated arguments arise from the fact that denomination has not helped us as Christians in any way.

A momentary break from Gen.6 and proper examination of 2Pet.2;4 & Jude 1;6 would be of benefit for this topic.

"The angels which kept not their estate but left their own habitation he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgement of the great day".

Since the beginning of this dicussion, no one has dared to to unveils these angels in chains. Pls nobody should tell us this is satan and his co-rebels because Satan is presently not under any bondage, but rather he is ruling the world right now. Then how come some angels in chains and what what was their sins against God.

2Peter2;1 "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 judgement;

There is clear agreement btw Peter and Jude concerning some angels under punishment which happen to be the missing link in Gen.6;1-6

Now let us link the above to Gen.6.
1. "And it came to pass, when 'men' began to multiply on the face of the eaarth, and daughters were born unto them," 'Men' here refers to both the living godly and the earthen of that era, no more no less.
2."That the 'sons of God' saw the 'daughters of men' that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose". Why the sudden clarification by the author? For the daughters of men are both the daughters of the godly and the ungodly, but the sons of God gives a distinct and defined the individuals involved in the marriage to the daughters of men, i.e not the sons of men that are given in marriage to the daughters of men but of God

In Job 1;6,the bible called angels the 'sons of God', even Satan presented himself at the gathering. All angels are sons of God, so at the beginning of Gen.6;1, they were sons of God, but at the commission of the sin later in the chapter, they became a fallen angel. angei

firebrand: A momentary break from Gen.6 and proper examination of 2Pet.2;4 & Jude 1;6 would be of benefit for this topic.

"The angels which kept not their estate but left their own habitation he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgement of the great day".

Since the beginning of this dicussion, no one has dared to to unveils these angels in chains. Pls nobody should tell us this is satan and his co-rebels because Satan is presently not under any bondage, but rather he is ruling the world right now. Then how come some angels in chains and what what was their sins against God.

2Peter2;1 "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 judgement;

There is clear agreement btw Peter and Jude concerning some angels under punishment which was happen to be the missing link in Gen.6;1-6

Now let us link the above to Gen.6.
1. "And it came to pass, when 'men' began to multiply on the face of the eaarth, and daughters were born unto them," 'Men' here refers to both the living godly and the earthen of that era, no more no less.
2."That the 'sons of God' saw the 'daughters of men' that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose". Why the sudden clarification by the author? For the daughters of men are both the daughters of the godly and the ungodly, but the sons of God gives a distinct and defined the individuals involved in the marriage to the daughters of men, i.e not the sons of men that are given in marriage to the daughters of men but of God

In Job 1;6,the bible called angels the 'sons of God', even Satan presented himself at the gathering. All angels are sons of God, so at the beginning of Gen.6;1, they were sons of God, but at the commission of the sin later in the chapter, they became a fallen angel. angei

The angels left their first estate when they rebelled against God with their leader SATAN.

They are reserved in chains of darkness which could mean simply darkness , the kingdom of darkness , slavery to wickedness and darkness. They cannot repent, they cannot change, they are doomed and damned without remedy.

The bible also says the God knows how the wicked are reserved unto the day of judgement.

"The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:" - 2 Peter 2:9

This has nothing to do with the sons of God in the bible, no relationship whatsoever.

Also to refer to disobedient angels or humans as Sons of God is totally out of order. Sons of God can only be used to refer to obedient angels or Human Beings.

frosbel:

The angels left their first estate when they rebelled against God with their leader SATAN.

They are reserved in chains of darkness which could mean simply darkness , the kingdom of darkness , slavery to wickedness and darkness. They cannot repent, they cannot change, they are doomed and damned without remedy.

The bible also says the God knows how the wicked are reserved unto the day of judgement.

"The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:" - 2 Peter 2:9

This has nothing to do with the sons of God in the bible, no relationship whatsoever.

Also to refer to disobedient angels or humans as Sons of God is totally out of order. Sons of God can only be used to refer to obedient angels or Human Beings.

Your first paragraph above does not agree with the 2Pet.2;4 ".....but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains, to be reserved unto judgement";
The angels in question are not the company of that of Satan, for satan is not yet cast into hell, infact he is destined for the lake of fire. The angels in 2peter are presently harmless, in chains of darkness. Satan and his cohorts are everywhere today but definitely not in hell.

Then the quetion, how does God reserve the unjust unto the day of judgement? which according to the verse was referring to humans and angels.

Besides, I think Judas Ischariot was a disciple of Christ, a born again, but later bacame servant of the Devil. Demas was a devout son of God, but but later chose the pleasures of the world. So I maintain that these angels were sons of God prior to the commission of the terrible sin, but became fallen angels after the they sin.

It seems as if brethen here assume that all the answers must be in the cannonised bible, this i am afraid is not true. Not every thing that was revealed to man by God was captured in the bible, that is apart from the fact that not everything is revealed to man in the first instance. The book of enoch corroborates the genesis 6 story and even explains it in greater detail yet most brethen here are not even interested in examining it whether it answers the questions raised by the OP or not. They would rather present their own assumptions as facts without any biblical or otherwise backing. How do we intend to learn when our minds are closed like this?

Infact, this topic so disturb me to the point I had to do many study on it. In my study/research, I agree that many "people" referred to the book of Enoch which even parallels with some exact word in Gen. 6:1-4. In fact, there are three (3) thoughts/interpretations to this subject namely:

sons of God = angels
sons of God = children of God (Godly descendant's of Seth)
sons of God = great kings and the likes

That makes me feel am not alone in this subject.

One of the questions people who supports that "sons of God = angels" are not able to answer is that: does angels have se.x organs to mate? Are angels male or female, they are neither. At a point, some even said, when God drove Adam and Eve out of Eden and place the Cherubims in the garden, these might be those angels in Gen.6:1-4 that "did not kept that place" according to Jude 6. 1 Pet. 2:4 did not mention their sin but Jude 6 did and their sins where two: they did not keep their first estate and left their habitation.

The other group said, when Jesus said angels dont marry. He wasn't saying angel cannot marry but that in ressurection, there is no marriage.

Now, if angels are spirits (And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire Heb 1:7) and Jude is telling us that they sin of the angels was that they "left their habitation". Can that be interpreted to mean these angels left their bodily form? Because 1 Pet 2:4 tells us they sinned and if you look at Jude 5-7 and 1 Pet 2:4-6, THEY BOTH PARALLEL WITH EVENT LEADING IN THE TIME OF NOAH PLUS SODOM AND GOMMORAH.

Could all these be hints or keys to understanding?

Anyone who suggests that scripture does not contain all that we need and we should therefore go to other so called books for reference should be avoided.

Everything we need to know is in the bible , divinely inspired by GOD.

Sons of GOD cannot mean fallen angels, just like John says that he that sinneth is of the devil , so he says that he that is of God sinneth not.

Secondly, if male angels have sexual organs, what about female angels. How biologically possible is it for 2 creatures of totally different make-ups to mate and produce offspring. How sillier can this get ?

So God who formed man and designed his sexual organs for procreation also made sure that he could mate with angels

And how does this edify the body of Christ , how does it result in the salvation of souls , how does it glorify God.

Angels and Men cannot procreate, the same as Man cannot procreate with animals. Angels DO not Marry, they have no Sex organs , period !!!

Or maybe they borrowed sex organs from the Men of renown who lived in those old days

I recently came across a quote from a bestselling children’s author who based her bestseller on her understanding of a passage in Genesis. Author Lauren Kate wrote the book Fallen about an angel who is romantically attracted to and pursues a relationship with a human teenager. In the January 11, 2010 issue of Publisher’s Weekly (PW) on p. 13, Kate claims, “The idea for the book came from a line I read in Genesis about a group of angels who were effectively kicked out of heaven because they lusted after mortal women. I became curious about what the experience might be of a teenage mortal who suddenly became the object of an angel’s affection.”

The passage Lauren Kate refers to is Genesis 6:1-6, but from her quote to PW it is obvious she did not read the passage for herself and probably just heard about it from someone. The scripture never talks about anyone being kicked out of heaven for their lust. Here’s what the passage says:

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

2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

3And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

4There 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.

5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. [Genesis 6]

It has often been claimed that the “sons of God” in this passage refers to fallen angels and that the giants (often called Nephilim) who walked the Earth in ancient times were the offspring of the angels and the women. Those who hold to the belief that angels mated with humans use the argument that the phrase “sons of God” only refers to angels in the Old Testament (OT), using the book of Job as their proof–

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. [Job 1:6]

Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. [Job 2:1]

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. …Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? [Job 38:4, 6-7]

They are correct that the phrase “sons of God” is talking about angels in Job, but a closer examination of the scriptures shows that Genesis 6 is NOT talking about angels. It is referring to humans and this truth can be deducted from the principles and context of what the Bible teaches. I will highlight a few points from the Bible as proof.

Point 1: Sons of God are humans who follow God. This is shown in both the OT and the New Testament (NT). In the OT, God gives the message to Pharaoh through Moses that Israel is his son–

And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn. [Exodus 4:22-23]

We also know from the OT that God said Solomon was his son–

I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: [2 Samuel 7:14]

When we look at the NT, we are plainly told that believers are the sons of God–

But as many as received him [Jesus Christ], to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: [John 1:12]

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. [Romans 8:14]

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God… [1 John 3:1]

Now if we go back to Genesis 4, it establishes the context for chapters 5 and 6. At the end of Genesis 4, we are shown that two families of men are emerging in the Earth–Cain’s descendants and Seth’s descendants. It was Seth’s descendants who “call upon the name of the LORD,” [Genesis 4:26]. In other words, Seth’s descendants were those who worshiped God and their lineage is highlighted in Genesis 5. Since they worshiped God, they were considered sons of God and were the sons of God in Genesis 6. It was Cain’s descendants and other unbelievers who were the “daughters of men.”

Point 2: Fallen angels are never called sons of God. Satan, who is the fallen angel Lucifer (see Isaiah 14:12-15, Ezekiel 28:12-17), first appears in the garden of Eden in Genesis 3. We must also take into account that Satan, according to Revelation 12:4, convinced 1/3 of the angels in heaven to follow him in his rebellion against God as he started a war in heaven. Revelation 12 also tells us that Satan lost the war and was kicked out of heaven with his angels. It was at this point that

…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] 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. [Jude 6]

Since these angels “kept not their first estate,” they lost all the privileges and benefits they had in heaven, including the right to be called the “sons of God.” Because Satan is present in Genesis 3, we know he has already been kicked out of heaven with his angels. So by the time Genesis 6 comes around, neither Satan nor his angels would have been referred to as the “sons of God.”

Point 3: God did not create angels with the ability to procreate with each other or with humans. God, who knew from the beginning that he would be betrayed, established at the creation of the angels that angels in heaven would neither marry nor be given in marriage (see Mark 12:25). He created them without this capability so that even when the fallen angels rebelled, nothing they could do would ever change this fact. This is why the fallen angels who were not yet placed in the chains of darkness in hell, and who roam the Earth freely, can only go so far as to possess unbelievers. If the immortal fallen angels could procreate, they would not waste their time possessing people since procreation would be a more direct route of affecting and infecting humanity for their evil purposes. Even when they possess unbelievers, their possession cannot affect the reproductive cells of the man or woman they possess so that they can spawn children. This is also why unbelievers in the Bible who are called “children of the devil” are only considered his children in the spiritual sense and not in the physical sense.

Point 4: God only complained about mankind in Genesis 6. The Lord makes several statements in Genesis 6 that prove he is upset with humans, not angelic beings. Here is what he says–

3And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. …

5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. [Genesis 6]

God was clearly angry by what he saw. If fallen angels were actively participating in these events, why would he just focus on punishing men and not the angels who were involved? Throughout scripture we see how God places boundaries on what fallen angels can do and how he rebukes devils when they go too far (e.g. the serpent’s judgment at Eden, the story of Job, Michael’s dispute with Satan over Moses’ body, Jesus casting out devils, Gabriel and Michael’s fight with the Prince of Persia to get to Daniel), so if they were involved here, why is it that there is no mention of him saying he would punish them? He didn’t mention them because it was only humans involved in this situation.

Conclusion: Based on these four points, I’ve concluded that the big deal made over sons of God marrying and having children by the daughters of men speaks to the ongoing theme throughout scripture that God dislikes spiritually mixed marriages. In other words, God gets upset when his followers marry unbelievers. He did not like it in Genesis 6, or when he established the nation of Israel as his chosen people, or when he called believers in Jesus Christ to be separated from the world. The Lord has never liked such relationships because it is always the spiritual state of the believer that gets the short end of the stick. It is always the worshiper of God who ends up severely compromising their relationship with Yahweh when they get hitched to unbelievers.

Angels have never mated with humans and have never produced offspring by humans. This is one thing God has never allowed and will never allow.

–posted by Harry A. Gaylord–

Let us all be aware that this text in Genesis is brief and not too easy to understand.
We should also understand it will be difficult to build an elaborate theology out of this and other similar fragments of biblical information. If we needed this information, God would have provided it in a more clear and complete form.

'sons of God' this phrase although most often used for angelic beings rarely refers to human beings. There has been great controversy over the identification of this phrase. However there have been three major interpretations:

1. it referes to the godly line of Seth (Genesis 5)
2. it refers to a group of angelic beings
3. it refers to the kings or tyrants of Cain's line (Genesis 4)

Furthermore, this phrase is used overwhelmingly in the Old Testamemt for 'angels' (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Psalm 29:1; 89:6-7; Dan 3:25).

In the Intertestamental book of I Enoch, which was a very popular book among the believers in the New Testamemt period, along with the 'Genesis Apocryhon' from the Dead Sea Scrolls, interpretes 'sons of God' as rebellious angels (I Enoch 12:4; 19:1; 21:1-10). I Enoch even asserts that Noah's flood came to destroy the angelic/human union which was hostile towards God and His plan for creation.

Above all we should know that it will be difficult to relate our understanding and level of theology with God's divine theology.

All in all, great topic from the poster and good level of understanding from everyone.

TheShopKeeper: Let us all be aware that this text in Genesis is brief and not too easy to understand.
We should also understand it will be difficult to build an elaborate theology out of this and other similar fragments of biblical information. If we needed this information, God would have provided it in a more clear and complete form.

'sons of God' this phrase although most often used for angelic beings rarely refers to human beings. There has been great controversy over the identification of this phrase. However there have been three major interpretations:

1. it referes to the godly line of Seth (Genesis 5)
2. it refers to a group of angelic beings
3. it refers to the kings or tyrants of Cain's line (Genesis 4)

Furthermore, this phrase is used overwhelmingly in the Old Testamemt for 'angels' (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Psalm 29:1; 89:6-7; Dan 3:25).

In the Intertestamental book of I Enoch, which was a very popular book among the believers in the New Testamemt period, along with the 'Genesis Apocryhon' from the Dead Sea Scrolls, interpretes 'sons of God' as rebellious angels (I Enoch 12:4; 19:1; 21:1-10). I Enoch even asserts that Noah's flood came to destroy the angelic/human union which was hostile towards God and His plan for creation.

Above all we should know that it will be difficult to relate our understanding and level of theology with God's divine theology.

All in all, great topic from the poster and good level of understanding from everyone.

Sons of God

The descendants of Seth were called by the name of the Lord (Genesis 4:25,26). This is not true in reference to the descendants of Cain. The servants of God in all ages have been called the sons of God (Job 1:6; Romans 8:14; 1 John 3:2). The character of Seth's descendants proves that they were the sons of God (Genesis 5:3-29; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 7:1). The character of Cain's descendants proves that they were not the sons of God, for Cain Himself was a murderer, a fugitive, and vagabond (Genesis 4:8-14), and his descendants were polygamists and murderers (Genesis 4:17-23)- Source / Condensed Biblical Cyclopedia

The scripture is plain for those who are humble and led by the Spirit of God.

God is not the author of confusion.

In our pride to understand 'twisted theology' we have wandered away from the truth.

Fr0sbel: Anyone who suggests that scripture does not contain all that we need and we should therefore go to other so called books for reference should be avoided.

It is quite obvious that the above statement is refering to me, however what you failto realise is that there is a difference in what we need to know and what we want to know. Every thing we need to know about our salvation is in the bible but not every thing we want to know about the history of mankind is there if not we would not be having this debate. The problem with "christians" is that we tend to be close minded as far as the bible is concered and assume it contains everything when there is clearly no statement from God that it does. Our ultimate source as christians is the holy spirit and not the bible so don't get so tight on it. Not every thing in the bible is today applicable to the christian belief system.

Pastor Kun:

It is quite obvious that the above statement is refering to me, however what you failto realise is that there is a difference in what we need to know and what we want to know. Every thing we need to know about our salvation is in the bible but not every thing we want to know about the history of mankind is there if not we would not be having this debate. The problem with "christians" is that we tend to be close minded as far as the bible is concered and assume it contains everything when there is clearly no statement from God that it does. Our ultimate source as christians is the holy spirit and not the bible so don't get so tight on it. Not every thing in the bible is today applicable to the christian belief system.

The book of Enoch may contain some truths but it is definitely not the inspired Word of God. It may contain some spoken words of Enoch but that doesn't justify the book to be part of the canon of Scripture.

Gen. 6:2-4: “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also afterward, 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.”

The question of the mention of sons of God in Gen. 6 has always provoked much controversy. Did Angels actually co-habitat with humans, or were they the godly descendant's of Seth that took women from the ungodly line of Cain.

It has been the opinion of the majority of Rabbis that this event had actually occurred, and that they were indeed angels. Ancient rabbinical sources, and the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ all upheld this view. The early church agreed with this view almost to the end of the fourth century. ( Justin, Cyprian, Athenagoras, Eusebius, also Josephus, Philo, and Judeaus accepted this traditional view. While we should not let tradition be the final say in doctrinal matters we can learn from their statements why they considered this view. What changed this view is only speculated but it very well could have been from an anti supernatural out look.

Today there are many conservative scholars that hold to the view of actual angels. M. R. DeHaan, C. H. McIntosh, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, F. Delitzsch, A. C. Gaebelein, A. W.Pink, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Henry Morris, Chuck Smith. While we don't interpret the Bible because of their view, it is good to read why they have come to these conclusions.

The Hebrew word for "sons of God" is Bene elohim. This term for angels occurs four times in the Old Testament in the Septuagint version (the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures ) It's meaning is always used as angels of God, never of man. Most scholars believe this event describes a union between fallen angels who cohabited with human females. This unnatural occurrence of combining two different species resulted in a offspring of what is called 'giants' in the King James/N K J version and "Nephilim" in the New American Standard, and the English translation of the Jewish Masoretic text.

OLAADEGBU:

The book of Enoch may contain some truths but it is definitely not the inspired Word of God. It may contain some spoken words of Enoch but that doesn't justify the book to be part of the canon of Scripture.

Whilst i can't personally vouch that the book of enoch is the word of God, same way i can't say for sure it is not. other than the fact that it expansiate on the genesis 6 story we agree is inspired in the bible. We also know that the early christians made use of the book of enoch and considered it as inspired as evidenced in the letter of Jude verses 14-15. My question to you is that how do you know for sure that that it is defintely not the inspired word of God? The ethiopean church which was established even before the roman catholic church we seperated from accepts and uses the book of enoch as scripture along with several other christian denominations. So my question again how do you know for certain which book is not inspired?

Throughout this article we will go through the pros and cons of each view and weigh out the evidence to see which view makes the most sense Scripturally. The two principal interpretations are, the term

Sons of god are the godly line of Seth (Sethites).
The other view is that they are fallen angels.

Their is no easy solution or quick answers to this question, both views have strong and weak points and good men are divided on the answers. The main scriptural argument for the Sons of God not being angels is the scripture Matthew 22:30 Jesus describes the Holy angels in heaven as not marrying, nor reproducing after their own kind.

This argument proposes that the Sons of God must be human because a sexual union between angels and humans is impossible and leans towards Greek mythology. Since angels are sexless this terminology could easily be referring to godly men (Hosea 1:10 you are sons of the living God ). It is a assumption, when God says “ sons of Elohim” that he is referring to the “sons of Seth.”

The main objection then is that angels do not reproduce sexually, however if we look at the verse more carefully we see Jesus stating that "the angels of God in heaven neither marry nor are given in marriage". He gives a specific location, which gives us only two alternatives. Because of where they are located it is a functional impossibility, or that he is referring to only the angels that obey God that do not marry. Either way it leaves open the possibility of this occurring on Earth and with the fallen angels that are disobedient to God.

What Matt.22:30 does specifically say is that angels do not marry. Marriage was given to generate new offspring. Angels do not have the ability to procreate among their own species. They may or may not be sexless, although they are in an invisible spirit form they are pictured as male, with male names Michael, Gabriel. They are also called sons of God not daughters. When they become visible they will usually appear as young men. God made an innumerable amount of angels simultaneously, he does not continue creating them, so they never increase or decrease in number.

Goshen360: Gen. 6:2-4: “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also afterward, 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.”

The question of the mention of sons of God in Gen. 6 has always provoked much controversy. Did Angels actually co-habitat with humans, or were they the godly descendant's of Seth that took women from the ungodly line of Cain.

It has been the opinion of the majority of Rabbis that this event had actually occurred, and that they were indeed angels. Ancient rabbinical sources, and the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ all upheld this view. The early church agreed with this view almost to the end of the fourth century. ( Justin, Cyprian, Athenagoras, Eusebius, also Josephus, Philo, and Judeaus accepted this traditional view. While we should not let tradition be the final say in doctrinal matters we can learn from their statements why they considered this view. What changed this view is only speculated but it very well could have been from an anti supernatural out look.

Today there are many conservative scholars that hold to the view of actual angels. M. R. DeHaan, C. H. McIntosh, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, F. Delitzsch, A. C. Gaebelein, A. W.Pink, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Henry Morris, Chuck Smith. While we don't interpret the Bible because of their view, it is good to read why they have come to these conclusions.

The Hebrew word for "sons of God" is Bene elohim. This term for angels occurs four times in the Old Testament in the Septuagint version (the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures ) It's meaning is always used as angels of God, never of man. Most scholars believe this event describes a union between fallen angels who cohabited with human females. This unnatural occurrence of combining two different species resulted in a offspring of what is called 'giants' in the King James/N K J version and "Nephilim" in the New American Standard, and the English translation of the Jewish Masoretic text.

No Brother.

Who are these Men ? There were many so called church fathers and recent pastors I respected , but after due diligence in my research found that many of them did not believe the bible in it's entirety.

I know ONLY of Christ and what his word says.

Besides I cannot take the explanation of Rabbis who could not decipher the scripture to know that the Messiah was coming to explain this subject.

Earlier, and using the strong s dictionary , I quoted and explained what the Hebrew word meant, which is anything from Sons as in Humans to Angels.

But in the context of quotation, the Sons of God saw that the women were beautiful , they went into anyone of them they chose and produced a Giant and wicked offspring.

Again , let me make it clear, God will never , has never , and it has never occurred to him, to create a situation where angels and humans could mate.

Why is it not happening today at least once, what will the offspring look like, what where their names.

Please let us now wrest scripture , let us take the bible at face value.

God bless.

"That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 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" (Genesis 6:2-4).

sons of God (Genesis 6:2).

The identity of these "sons of God" has been a matter of much discussion, but the obvious meaning is that they were angelic beings. This was the uniform interpretation of the ancient Jews, who translated the phrase as "angels of God" in their Septuagint translation of the Old Testament. The apocryphal books of Enoch elaborate this interpretation, which is also strongly implied by the New Testament passages (Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4-6; 1 Peter 3:19,20). The Hebrew phrase is bene elohim, which occurs elsewhere only in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. In these three explicitly parallel usages, the contextual meaning can be nothing except that of angels. A similar phrase bar elohim, occurs in Daniel 3:25, and another, bar elim, occurs in Psalm 29:1 and Psalm 89:6. All of these also refer explicitly to angels. The intent of the writer of Genesis 6 (probably Noah) was clearly that of introducing a monstrous irruption of demonic forces on the earth, leading to universal corruption and eventual judgment.

took them wives (Genesis 6:2).

The "taking" of these women most likely refers to fallen angels, or demons, "possessing" their bodies. The word "wives" (Hebrew ishshah) is better translated "women." There is no necessary intimation of actual marriage involved. By this time in history, anarchism and amorality were so widespread that these demons were easily able to take possession of the bodies of multitudes of ungodly men; these in turn engaged in promiscuous sex with demon-possessed women, with a resulting rapid population growth, Satan perhaps hoping thereby to generate a vast army of human recruits to his rebellion and also to thwart the coming of God’s promised Seed by thus corrupting all flesh.

My spirit (Genesis 6:3).

One of the ministries of God’s Holy Spirit has always been to convict man’s spirit of "sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment" (John 16:8 ). Man is also "flesh," however, and there is perpetual conflict between the flesh and the spirit, even in the life of a believer (Romans 8:5; Galatians 5:16,17). God is long-suffering with respect to man’s rebellion, but only for a time: the hour of His judgment must eventually arrive.

hundred and twenty years (Genesis 6:3).

This prophecy was apparently given, perhaps through Methuselah, just 120 years before the coming Flood. The prophet Enoch had already been translated. Shem, Ham and Japheth had not yet been born and God’s specific commands to Noah (Genesis 5:32; 6:10,13,21) not yet given.

giants (Genesis 6:4).

These "giants" were the monstrous progeny of the demon-possessed men and women whose illicit activities led to God’s warning of imminent judgment. The Hebrew word is nephilim ("fallen ones" ), a term possibly relating to the nature of their spiritual "parents," the fallen angels. That they were also physical giants is evident from the fact that the same word is later used in connection with the giants in Canaan at the time of Joshua (Numbers 13:33) and by the fact that the word here was translated in the Septuagint by the Greek word gigantes.

Defender's Bible Notes

We find in the scriptures that angels have the ability to appear as men even though they are spirit creatures. They are able to perform numerous human functions such as eating food as in their encounter with Abraham in Genesis 18. They are able to perform other bodily functions as well, they can walk and talk among us in such a way that we may not be aware of them unless they reveal themselves, Heb. 13:2 “do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some have unwittingly entertained angels.”

The angels that came to warn Lot were mistaken for men and were sought out for homosexual use by the men of Sodom. Angels are also able to carry out God's plans on Earth by supplying food for man 1 kings 19:5-7 Mt. 4:11. They are able to execute God's judgment Rev. 7:1, 14:17, inflict punishment upon man Ez.9:1-8 Acts 12:23. There seems to be some change of substance that takes place on Earth that they can become physical, contrary to their original nature. So if they are able to possess a body of a man and can eat and carry out other functions then why not other abilities.

The term Son of God is never used of man in the Old Testament, only of angels. (Job.1:6,2:1, 38:7). The only exception is Nebuchadnezzar who said of the one who was in the fire with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, was like the Son of God” (Dan. 3:25). This was written in Aramaic and he was probably stating this from his Pagan perspective.

The term “sons of God” is used consistently for the angels in their unfallen estate, they are Gods sons because they were directly created by him. When the title sons of God is used such as in the passages of Gen. 6, Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 it is exclusively used of angels who have access to God's throne. (this is a common Semitic expression ) We find that each time when the sons of God present themselves before God's throne (which is in heaven), Satan is with them. This shows that these sons are the fallen angels as God addresses Satan as their representative when they assemble. The vicinity of this meeting is in heaven, for Satan informs God that he has come to his assembly “from going to and fro in the earth.”

God questioning Job in his trial. Job 38:3-7 “Now prepare yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer Me.” Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”

Job 38:7 is clearly a reference to the angels united in harmony when they were created in reference to Gen.1:1. It is prior to the rebellion of the angels. Once again this term is used for angels and not man. When God created the heavens there was a time when all the angels were united and harmony existed in heaven. They were together in worship and service to God their creator this is taking place when the earth was first created before man is on it. There is also the Hebrew term of bene elim which is found in Psalm 29:1, 89:6 which means sons of the mighty, referring to man as a class of mighty beings (possibly a more general meaning to include the angels).

OLAADEGBU:
"That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 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" (Genesis 6:2-4).

sons of God (Genesis 6:2).

The identity of these "sons of God” has been a matter of much discussion, but the obvious meaning is that they were angelic beings. This was the uniform interpretation of the ancient Jews, who translated the phrase as [size=12pt][i]"[color=blue]angels of God" in their Septuagint translation of the Old Testament. The apocryphal books of Enoch elaborate this interpretation, which is also strongly implied by the New Testament passages (Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4-6; 1 Peter 3:19,20). The Hebrew phrase is bene elohim, which occurs elsewhere only in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. In these three explicitly parallel usages, the contextual meaning can be nothing except that of angels. A similar phrase bar elohim, occurs in Daniel 3:25, and another, bar elim, occurs in Psalm 29:1 and Psalm 89:6. All of these also refer explicitly to angels. The intent of the writer of Genesis 6 (probably Noah) was clearly that of introducing a monstrous irruption of demonic forces on the earth, leading to universal corruption and eventual judgment.

took them wives (Genesis 6:2).

The "taking" of these women most likely refers to fallen angels, or demons, "possessing" their bodies. The word "wives" (Hebrew ishshah) is better translated "women." There is no necessary intimation of actual marriage involved. By this time in history, anarchism and amorality were so widespread that these demons were easily able to take possession of the bodies of multitudes of ungodly men; these in turn engaged in promiscuous sex with demon-possessed women, with a resulting rapid population growth, Satan perhaps hoping thereby to generate a vast army of human recruits to his rebellion and also to thwart the coming of God’s promised Seed by thus corrupting all flesh.

My spirit (Genesis 6:3).

One of the ministries of God’s Holy Spirit has always been to convict man’s spirit of "sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment" (John 16:8 ). Man is also "flesh," however, and there is perpetual conflict between the flesh and the spirit, even in the life of a believer (Romans 8:5; Galatians 5:16,17). God is long-suffering with respect to man’s rebellion, but only for a time: the hour of His judgment must eventually arrive.

hundred and twenty years (Genesis 6:3).

This prophecy was apparently given, perhaps through Methuselah, just 120 years before the coming Flood. The prophet Enoch had already been translated. Shem, Ham and Japheth had not yet been born and God’s specific commands to Noah (Genesis 5:32; 6:10,13,21) not yet given.

giants(Genesis 6:4).

These "giants" were the monstrous progeny of the demon-possessed men and women whose illicit activities led to God’s warning of imminent judgment. The Hebrew word is nephilim ("fallen ones" ), a term possibly relating to the nature of their spiritual "parents," the fallen angels. That they were also physical giants is evident from the fact that the same word is later used in connection with the giants in Canaan at the time of Joshua (Numbers 13:33) and by the fact that the word here was translated in the Septuagint by the Greek word gigantes.

Defender's Bible Notes

And my brother , you really believe that our beloved GOD, Father, Saviour and Lord Almighty , was helpless in the face of this onslaught of his fallen angels against the daughters of men

That our God who loves us so much , the crown of his creation that he created man but made some unlikely error of allowing angels to mate with them ?

The only reason why God destroyed man was because the imagination of his heart was evil and the earth was covered with violence not becuase of any so called inter-breeding.

My God, My Father, the God I have heard about and know through the scriptures will never do such a wicked thing.

God is light and in him is no darkness at all, not even one iota. In God is the perfection of wisdom. To suggest that his wisdom is flawed is something we should avoid getting dragged into !!!

In the New Testament believers are also called Sons of God but this is by adoption not referring to nature ( Rom. 8:14-15; Gal 4:5; Eph. 1:5 ). The Greek word teknon means born ones, meaning children who have a likeness of Jesus' character from a spiritual birth, by being adopted into His family therefore i.e. they are sons [children of God.]

Jesus is also called the Son of God it is used in a singular sense, not in the plural as sons being one of many, he being the only begotten Son ( unique one of a kind, no other like him). In the scriptures son simply means one possessing the same nature of something. Examples such as son of Abraham or son of man means one possesses the same nature as the subject named. The Greek word for son which is used for Jesus is huios. It is limited exclusively for him, signifying he is the son by nature not by adoption. When the word “Sons of God” are used in Genesis 6 and in the Old Testament; in Hebrew it is Bene Elohim, showing they are a special creature related to Elohim (God), not related to man. They are not referred to as the “sons of Cain” or the “daughters of Seth?”

When we go back to the Gen.6 account there are other terms that need to be considered. The title “daughters of men.” Some consider the phrase “the daughters of man” to be the daughters of the Cainites only. But this phrase does not name a tribe but is a general and all encompassing statement, leaving no distinction of any moral or spiritual kind, it is a general term that includes both Cainite and Shethite females, it is referring to females of the human race (Hebrew benoth Adam daughters of Adam) they were natural descendants. Also the term Nephilim (giants) in Gen.6:4 has an interesting history. Nephil means fallen one, ("im" at the end of any Hebrew word changes it to a plural, nephillim - fallen ones.) This does not mean giant, or monstrous in size but someone who possesses super human ability in strength and intelligence, not stature.

This word is taken from its root word of nephal and nephel which means to fall, abortion or untimely. In 250 BC. the Rabbis that wrote the Septuagint which is a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. They changed the word Nephillim to giant, which is the word most translations currently have (giant in Greek gigentes implies earth born men of great stature Num.13:33 ). This was a significant change which has obscured the meaning even to today. While some contend they are still around in the time of Numbers the giants were not the same species of the Nephilim. Since the Nephils were not Giant in size but in strength, intelligence and ability. The only creatures that lived through the flood were 8 humans, no others. Some postulate that another group of fallen angels returned again , something which the bible never addresses and would need to if this occurred.

@ Frosbel,

Why dont you want to listen to other people's view. Kindly wait till I finish posting this man's teaching am posting and cool down to read it. I think he has a stronger point. The reason that led to God destroying the earth then with flood and how it relates to these angels are taken care of in the article. This is NOT about Rabbis, I don't read rabbis also but we have to be open minded. God bless you.

Fr0sbel:



Sons of God

The descendants of Seth were called by the name of the Lord (Genesis 4:25,26). This is not true in reference to the descendants of Cain. The servants of God in all ages have been called the sons of God (Job 1:6; Romans 8:14; 1 John 3:2). The character of Seth's descendants proves that they were the sons of God (Genesis 5:3-29; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 7:1). The character of Cain's descendants proves that they were not the sons of God, for Cain Himself was a murderer, a fugitive, and vagabond (Genesis 4:8-14), and his descendants were polygamists and murderers (Genesis 4:17-23)- Source / Condensed Biblical Cyclopedia

The scripture is plain for those who are humble and led by the Spirit of God.

God is not the author of confusion.

In our pride to understand 'twisted theology' we have wandered away from the truth.

Frosbel, thanks for the clarification and it's been duely noted.
I'm still a young learner in the things of God.

In Unger's Bible dictionary referring to the word for giants (Nephillim) he writes; “the Nephillim are considered by many as demigods, the unnatural offspring of the daughters of men mortal women in cohabitation with” the sons of God” (angels). This utterly unnatural union, violating God's created order of being, was such a shocking abnormality as to necessitate the worldwide judgment of the flood.” (pg. 788)

Gaebelein interprets,” The designation 'Sons of God' is never applied in the Old Testament to believers,” whose sonship is “distinctly a New Testament revelation.” (A.C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (Penteteuch). p. 29).

Can we find any justification for this view elsewhere in the Bible. Or is it as some claim the story of Greek mythology, where we have legends of titans, the gods of Mt. Olympus (Hercules, Achelles) coming down and intermarrying with humans having hybrids, half human and god. What we find is that this is not limited to only the Greek and Roman cultures, almost all ancient civilizations have legends and myths of visitations from the sky. Are these only folklore or are these legends distortions of what really occurred? We have the same for the flood accounts so it is very possible they are distortions of the true account.

There are several questions that are relevant to this event that need to be answered. First what justification is there to confine the daughters of men to be ungodly women specifically from the line of Cain. Does the bible ever classify people in this manner? If the Sons of God are descendants of Seth what are they doing presenting themselves before the Lord in heaven. Job 1:6, 2:1 (Also bear in mind that Job lived in the time of Genesis, the pre-law)“ there was a day when the Sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.” A[b]lso why would there be such unusual offspring from marriage if they were all of human kind.[/b]

Goshen360: @ Frosbel,

Why dont you want to listen to other people's view. Kindly wait till I finish posting this man's teaching am posting and cool down to read it. I think he has a stronger point. The reason that led to God destroying the earth then with flood and how it relates to these angels are taken care of in the article. This is NOT about Rabbis, I don't read rabbis also but we have to be open minded. God bless you.

Because I believe in the simplicity of the Gospel and not to introduce strange meanings. But I respect your opinions , however I do not agree with them.

Keep posting and I will keep reading , no hard feelings.

"But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ." - 2 Corinthians 11:3

Goshen360: We find in the scriptures that angels have the ability to appear as men even though they are spirit creatures. They are able to perform numerous human functions such as eating food as in their encounter with Abraham in Genesis 18. They are able to perform other bodily functions as well, they can walk and talk among us in such a way that we may not be aware of them unless they reveal themselves, Heb. 13:2 “do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some have unwittingly entertained angels.”

The angels that came to warn Lot were mistaken for men and were sought out for homosexual use by the men of Sodom. Angels are also able to carry out God's plans on Earth by supplying food for man 1 kings 19:5-7 Mt. 4:11. They are able to execute God's judgment Rev. 7:1, 14:17, inflict punishment upon man Ez.9:1-8 Acts 12:23. There seems to be some change of substance that takes place on Earth that they can become physical, contrary to their original nature. So if they are able to possess a body of a man and can eat and carry out other functions then why not other abilities.

The term Son of God is never used of man in the Old Testament, only of angels. (Job.1:6,2:1, 38:7). The only exception is Nebuchadnezzar who said of the one who was in the fire with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, was like the Son of God” (Dan. 3:25). This was written in Aramaic and he was probably stating this from his Pagan perspective.

The term “sons of God” is used consistently for the angels in their unfallen estate, they are Gods sons because they were directly created by him. When the title sons of God is used such as in the passages of Gen. 6, Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7 it is exclusively used of angels who have access to God's throne. (this is a common Semitic expression ) We find that each time when the sons of God present themselves before God's throne (which is in heaven), Satan is with them. This shows that these sons are the fallen angels as God addresses Satan as their representative when they assemble. The vicinity of this meeting is in heaven, for Satan informs God that he has come to his assembly “from going to and fro in the earth.”

God questioning Job in his trial. Job 38:3-7 “Now prepare yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer Me.” Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”

Job 38:7 is clearly a reference to the angels united in harmony when they were created in reference to Gen.1:1. It is prior to the rebellion of the angels. Once again this term is used for angels and not man. When God created the heavens there was a time when all the angels were united and harmony existed in heaven. They were together in worship and service to God their creator this is taking place when the earth was first created before man is on it. There is also the Hebrew term of bene elim which is found in Psalm 29:1, 89:6 which means sons of the mighty, referring to man as a class of mighty beings (possibly a more general meaning to include the angels).

Goshen360, nice explanation which gives a new and deeper understanding.

From the scriptures we can find no justification for separating the race of mankind and making one line righteous the other not. We actually find evidence for the opposite. The scriptures always refer to someone being righteous by their obedience to God, by their spirituality, not by their physical posterity or what family they are in. Why would all the Sethite men be godly and all the women of Cain be ungodly. There is no indication that the line of Seth was godly or stayed godly. If so, why were they also destroyed in the flood along with everyone else. There is no mention of this type of distinction before or afterwards. It would make more sense that intermarriage would occur with also godly women and ungodly men as well. There is no indication to confine the term of “daughters of" to "ungodly women" when it's a general classification for womankind.

Another factor that seems to lead one away from the two classes of humans is Gen.6:2 stating “they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.” In the Hebrew language this describes a violent taking for themselves, not a good thing. Why would godly men resort to this kind of activity for marriage (should they be from Seth)? In the next verse the Lord says his Spirit will not continue to abide with man and then pronounces the time when the future judgment will occur. All this after their marriage to other humans? When Israel did not obey the Lord from marrying outside their own nation there was never such a punishment. Whether this was a punishment incurred specifically for this event or it contributed to it seems to be somewhat obscured at times.

When the righteous marry the unrighteous they do not give birth to such unusual offspring, unless there is another element to this event. How else can one explain the offspring of this union which are described as “mighty men who were of old, men of renown” in Gen. 6:4. This is a description of their power and fame (their abilities intelligence, and strength far exceeded other men.)

If we look at the affect on humanity from this forbidden act it indicates that man became incredibly evil, where his thoughts were bent on evil all day long and he filled the earth with violence. (Gen. 6:5,13) with this afterwards as the affect from the unnatural offspring of humanity God decides to destroy the Earth. This was such a violation to God's created order that it altered mankind and necessitated a worldwide flood.

frosbel:


Because I believe in the simplicity of the Gospel and not to introduce strange meanings. But I respect your opinions , however I do not agree with them.

Keep posting and I will keep reading , no hard feelings.

"But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ." - 2 Corinthians 11:3

No offence my brother. Just wait till I finish and just read slowly. You know me too well that someone will have to convince me beyond all contradictions in a matter of the word. This is proving all things. ~ Still Posting ~

And just a reminder to those adding to scripture that Cain's descendants were cursed; Enoch who the bible recorded as being very close to God was cain's direct son. So all these hogwash about the "phrase daughters of men" refering to cain's descendants is at best the figment of the imagination of it's promoters.

Many say how can a demon (or fallen angels) have sex with a human or have this ability to be physical. As we have already seen angels do change into physical form and can physically help people even though by nature they are invisible spirit beings. The Bible doesn't tell us how this occurred although there are some other factors to consider. A demon can inhabit a person and give them unusual strength and powers beyond any normal human ability. They can even give someone psychic abilities. So it is possible that instead of a creature becoming visible and physical to have sex we have a case of demon possession that affected their offspring's. I’m not saying this is how it occurred but it can be acceptable explanation.

Without the fact of their being two different species angelic and human co- mingling there can be [b]no plausible explanation of God's severe judgment. Which came upon both mankind by the flood and the angels that are now bound in chains. [/b](2 Pt. 2:4-5; Jude 6-7)

What purpose would there be for an angelic assault of this nature? After the fall of Adam and Eve God pronounced judgment on them and the Earth. He also gave a promise that a messiah would come and crush the head of Satan Gen.3:15. What we see consistently throughout the scriptures is a satanic attack to corrupt the line of the messiah. This was his first and probably greatest attempt to pollute the line (gene pool), stopping the seed of woman (Christ) from appearing. By introducing something foreign to the human race, man would eventually become a hybrid, part human and angel, something God never intended. This would have been disastrous because Christ would then not be able to represent man who was made in the image of God. It would be for this reason God took such a drastic measure to rectify this event.

Pastor Kun: And just a reminder to those adding to scripture that Cain's descendants were cursed; Enoch who the bible recorded as being very close to God was cain's direct son. So all these hogwash about the "phrase daughters of men" refering to cain's descendants is at best the figment of the imagination of it's promoters.

Just read the article. I think it best answer all this questions. Though it's lengthy but it worths the time. Thank you.

Pastor Kun: And just a reminder to those adding to scripture that Cain's descendants were cursed; Enoch who the bible recorded as being very close to God was cain's direct son. So all these hogwash about the "phrase daughters of men" refering to cain's descendants is at best the figment of the imagination of it's promoters.

No Pastor , There are 2 Enochs , one from Seth which is the good seed and the other from Cain. Please read scripture below. Thanks.



17 [size=13pt]And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.[/size]

18 And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.

19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.

20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.

21 And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ........

25 ....... And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

26 [size=13pt]And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos:[/size] then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.


[size=15pt]Remember before Seth was born, no man called upon the name of the Lord.[/size]


Seth produced good seed , Cain produced bad, simples !