The first eight verses of Genesis 6 provide the nucleus of the theory that states the "sons of God" to be fallen angels. In order for the theory to maintain a sense of credibility, since the term angels is not specifically mentioned, it is necessary to obtain support by citing several other references in the Old Testament that make mention of the "sons of God" as angels and of the term, Nephilim. The main element of the theory is that the "sons of God" are angels, however that identification is nowhere defined at any point in the Genesis narrative. As a result, definitions regarding the terminology associated with angels, are obtained from other Old Testament sources. The primary references used are as follows:

1. Job 1:6
2. Job 2:1
3. Job 38:7
4. Numbers 13:28, 31-33

REFERENCE I

JOB 1:6 (NAS)
"Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them."

The content of the book of Job does not deal with the character and nature of angels, however the particular part of the narrative, in relation to Chapter 1, Verse 6, does mention the term "sons of God" in regard to a very revealing occasion. The context of Verses 6-12 places the narrative in heaven and in the direct presence of the Lord, Jehovah. The subject of the occasion becomes Job, and, if it can be assumed that he lived at the same time as, or slightly before Abraham, then the events occurred within the last 4500 years. The occasion was the gathering of the "sons of God" in order that they might present themselves in the presence of the Lord. This is the first mention of such a gathering in the scripture and it is unknown as to just what was the reason for the occasion. It might be assumed that the appearance of the "sons of God" was commanded by Jehovah, however, in the particular verse it is not noted as to whether this was a one-time special occasion or whether it was something done on a regular and scheduled basis.

It has traditionally been interpreted by most scholars that in Verse 6, the term "sons of God" is an expression used to describe the heavenly host of angels. The term "sons of God" is ben ha'elohim, meaning sons of Elohim. It is among this group that Satan also appears, evidently having access to the presence of God even in his fallen state. There is apparently no good reason to dispute the interpretation of the term "sons of God" as a name for angels, however its use is somewhat oblique. The question proposed, even among those who believe that the reference is to angels, is in what manner can angels be considered "sons of God"? It might be proposed that they are sons in the sense that they are the created progeny of Elohim, the Creator. However, does that preclude the fact that human beings are also the created progeny of Elohim, the Creator, having the breath of God in their being? The picture is also a comparison and contrast with Job, who is the primary subject of the text. The Lord, Jehovah, is seen holding court in heaven, his created subjects coming before him, perhaps to do homage, give an account of themselves or to engage in worship or a celebration, 1:6. Job is also seen in a leadership role, that of a priest, in relation to his family, having sent for them after the days of feasting had been completed, so that he could offer sacrifices for their sins, 1:4-5. The Lord is shown having authority over His created sons, the angels, and Job is shown having authority over his procreated sons and also his daughters.

Satan also makes his appearance with the "sons of God", however he is not stated to be one of the "sons of God", but "came among them," 1:6 (NAS), or "came with them," 1:6 (NIV). Satan is shown to have joined the company, but is not actually considered to be a part of them. By his appearance, it is possible that he was not in attendance simply on his own, but was it fact under the authority and command of the Lord to present himself just as had the sons of God. The questions then must be asked, was Satan considered an angel and were there other fallen angels in attendance or had the fall of angels not yet occurred? Is Satan also a created "son of God"? The book of Job does not address the issues raised.

REFERENCE II

JOB 2:1(NAS)
"Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them to present himself before the Lord."

The question of whether the gathering in 1:6 was a one-time event or a scheduled occasion is answered. The same type of gathering is again repeated on a second occasion and the indication is that there was a specific time assigned and known in advance as to when the gathering would occur, "there was a day," 1:6, 2:1 (NAS). Satan again makes an appearance, but it is also noted that he is also there in order "to present himself before the Lord," 2:1 (NAS). The appearance before the Lord was a command which not even Satan could refuse. Just as in 1:7, the Lord commands Satan to account for his activities, "'From where do you come?'" 2:7 (NAS) and "'Where have you come from?'" 2:1 (NAS). Again the terminology used is "sons of God", "ben ha'elohim". The occasion is identical in nature to that of 1:6, so the two references are, in fact, only one, not being separate references to "sons of God" in different contexts.

REFERENCE III

JOB 38:7 (NAS)
"'When the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?'"

The verse is a direct quote from the Lord, Jehovah, when He directed questions at Job to reveal his ignorance about the activities of Himself. The question directed by the Lord, to Job, was in connection with the creation of the earth and it must be seen in context with Verses 1-6. The question to Job was, where was he when the cornerstone of the earth was laid by the Lord? The occasion was a celebration at which the "morning stars" sang in unison as a choir and the "sons of God" shouted praises of joy. The question was rhetorical in nature, because Job knew he had not been present at the creation, but certain other groups had been present and they are mentioned specifically; the "morning stars" and the "sons of God".

Again, descriptive terms are used with no definition being supplied. The "morning stars" were apparently a great celestial choir who sang at the dedication ceremony for the creation of the earth, or perhaps sang during the entire creation process. The "sons of God" also participated, also as a celestial choir, but relegated to a somewhat secondary position, given the assignment to shout instead of sing. The language is certainly poetic, in that real stars cannot sing and God did not have actual sons. Yet the application is familiar, the elements of the universe being commanded to praise God as in the Psalms.

Psalm 148:3 (NAS)
"Praise Him, sun and moon; praise Him, all stars of light!"

The terminology in Job must apply to beings in heaven that are similar in nature to the "sons of God" because the participants in the celestial choir actually sing and shout, something that the sun, moon and stars cannot do. "They are symbols of the angels, bearing the same relation to our earth, as angels do to us." Jamiesson-Fausett-Brown

However, there is more implied in the verse than just a different name for angels. There are "morning stars" and "sons of God", both groups having different functions. In a sense, there are ranks or levels of duties implied, with different values assigned to the services provided. "Morning stars" are singers, their musical ability and assignment being of a higher level than the "sons of God" who are given the assignment to shout. Shouting is not attributed to the same high level as singing. In addition, the "morning stars" are mentioned first and the "sons of God" are mentioned second. To the reader of the verse, there can be no escaping the fact that there appear to be two groups mentioned having two different functions. In relation to human conduct, singing would seem to be the higher function and shouting being the more base or less noble. The fact that these are actually beings is indicated by the reason for their singing and shouting. Both groups performed their service out of the context of an emotional feeling of joy, not for or of themselves, but because of the actions of the Lord in creation.

The most interesting aspect of the reference to "morning stars" and the "sons of God" is the fact that two different descriptive phrases are used in order to describe what are essentially the same kind of beings, namely angels. However this cannot be allowed in relation to the theory. By definition, according to the theory, the "sons of God" can have only one meaning, that of angels. Given the same logic, the "sons of God" in 38:7 can only be angels, but the "morning stars" must also have their own definition. By associating a reference in the New Testament with Job 38:7, it may be shown that the "morning stars" can be seen as a celestial choir, composed of many Christs, as He is called the "bright morning star" (NAS), Revelation 22:16. In context, the association of the "morning stars" with Christ cannot be allowed, even when the standards of the theory are applied, yet the same reasoning is used in order to associate Genesis 6:2 with Job 1:6, 2:1 and 38:7. Given the fact that the term "morning star" can have more than one meaning, it does not seem improbable that the term "sons of God" may also have more than one application.

REFERENCE IV

NUMBERS 13 (NAS)

28:	"'Nevertheless, the people who live in the land are strong, and the cities are fortified and very large; and moreover, we saw the descendants of Anak there."
31:	"But the men who had gone up with him said, 'We are not able to go up against the people, for they re too strong for us.'
32:	So they gave out to the sons of Israel a bad report of the land which they had spied out, saying, 'The land through which we have gone, in spying it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants; and all the people whom we saw in it are men of great size.
33:	There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.'"

The verses are used in relation to the theory of angels, assumed in Genesis 6:4, because of the reference to the Nephilim and the descendants of Anak. The connection is made between the mention of the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4 and the Nephilim of Numbers 13:33, the purpose of which is to identify the Nephilim of Genesis as being of the same nature as those in Numbers, meaning that they were beings of gigantic physical size. The possibility that there was an actual connection, in the manner of descent from the Nephilim of Genesis, is an impossibility, given the occurrence of the flood. There is no evidence that Noah or any of his sons or daughters-in-law were part of the Nephilim.

There is no evidence that the Nephilim, the Anak or the Rephaites are the product of a union of angels with human women, although there are those who make that claim. The people who were seen to be of large stature are noted as being descended from one man by the name of Rapha as described in II Samuel 21:16 and I Chronicles 8:2. The connection that is inferred is that the Nephilim of Genesis were called such because they were of great physical size just as the Nephilim in Leviticus. The association may be valid, however the Leviticus record makes no connection to the Genesis narrative.

The references to people of tall stature are numerous in the Old Testament. The descendants of Rapha are called Rephaites and Zamzummites (Deuteronomy 2:11, 20-21; 3:11,13; 9:2; Joshua 12:4; 13:12; 15:8; 17:15; 18:16 Samuel 21:16, 18, 22; I Chronicles 20:4, 6, 8) and the Nephilim are considered descendants of Anak (Numbers 13:22, 28, 33; Deuteronomy 9:2; Joshua 15:13, 14; 21:11; Judges 1:20). The Emites are also a group considered to be Rephaites (Deuteronomy 2:10-11). It is generally believed that all of the people mentioned were considered by the Israelites to be tall or of large stature.

PART II
COMPARISON OF OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES

Job 1:6 and Job 2:1 both refer to separate events but are virtually identical in their content. In each verse there is a specific day mentioned, a reference to the "sons of God" and a gathering in which they were to present themselves to the Lord. In both instances Satan is noted as being among the "sons of God", but in 1:6 no mention is made as to the reason for his presence, which is stated in 2:1, "to present himself before the Lord," (NAS). The gathering is an examination and time of accountability on the part of the "sons of God" and Satan. At both occasions Satan is asked by the Lord from where he had come. The question was not necessarily one regarding where he had been, but what he had been doing. In both instances the answer was the same, "'From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it,'" 1:7; 2:2 (NAS). The comparison to I Peter is inescapable:

I PETER 5:8 (NAS)
"Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour."

In Chapter 1, Verses 7-12, the Lord presents someone that Satan is told to consider; a person who he might attempt to devour. That person is Job, and in the interlude between the mention of the first gathering and the second gathering, Satan causes Job to lose all of his animals, servants, sons, daughters and possessions. The time period is not stated, but the events all happened on the same day. Perhaps the gatherings were as close together as a week.

The two citations raise many more questions than are answered by a reading of the narratives. If the "sons of God" are angels, in 1:6 and 2:1, as is almost universally believed, then do they include all the angels? The question becomes relevant because Satan, the fallen archangel Lucifer, is also present, giving rise to the possibility that the fallen angels could have been present also. If that be the case, then there is a question regarding the meaning of New Testament verses that refer to angels being bound in chains and kept in darkness, cf. Jude 6, II Peter 2:4.

The citation in Job 38:7 is not of the same nature as those of 1:6 and 2:1. The time period is much different, being before, or during, the creation of the universe, many years prior to the events of Job. However, the scene also apparently takes place in heaven and the choirs mentioned are also universally believed to be the heavenly host of angels. The gathering is not of the same order as that in Job 1:6 and 2:1, but is a celebration festival expressing joy and jubilation because of the actions of Elohim, the Creator, in making the universe.

In all three citations, Job 1:6, 2:1 and 38:7, there is one unifying factor and that is in regard to the terminology "sons of God". It is to this unifying factor and interpretation of the term "sons of God", as meaning angels in heaven, that the theory of the union of angels with human women gains support for the claim. The one element missing from the three citations is a direct connection with the Genesis narrative. The identification of certain terminology in specific verses does not preclude the possibility that the same terminology does not mean the same in other verses. In the absence of a direct connection regarding identification, it is not possible to state with assurance, at this point, that the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:2 are the same as the "sons of God" in Job 1:6, 2:1 and 38:7. It might be noted that a secondary reference used to define an undefined primary reference is not the best evidence. However, in the case of the references in Job, the application is still compelling.

The citations in Numbers 13:28 and 31-33 do not have a direct connection with the verses in Job 1:6, 2:1 and 38:7. They are separate citations that are used in the theory to identify the nature of the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4. The Nephilim of Numbers are identified with a certain origin, being the sons, or descendants, of a specific individual by the name of Anak who was also a descendant of a specific individual by the name of Rapha. The Nephilim are identified with people of exceptional size, but that description is only applied in references to them after the establishment of the nation of Israel.

The root meaning of Nephilim is "the fallen ones" or "the fellers". In Leviticus and following citations, the terminology in regards to Nephilim is somewhat unusual as to the application of its meaning. The Nephilim, in relation to Israel, were apparently people of exceptional physical size, however the meaning of the term does not support the reality of who they were. It might be proposed that the term does apply to them in regards to their fallen spiritual state or to the fact that they fall on, in the manner of a military attack, their enemies. However that is never the application of the term and they are not described in that manner. In Leviticus and following, the Nephilim are equated with great physical size.

Because of the application of the name, in regards to physical size, in Leviticus and following, the same relationship is assumed when dealing with the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4. However, nowhere in the Genesis citation is there a reference to physical size. The Nephilim are described by their name, being "the fallen ones" or "the fellers". There is a great danger in using a later application and meaning of a term in relation to an earlier use of the same term. It may very well be that the Nephilim in Genesis were men of great size, just as the Nephilim were in Leviticus and following. However, the scripture makes no connection between the two groups and does not specifically assign a definition to them based on their physical size. In the Genesis narrative, the best that can be said is that they might have been those who "were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown," Genesis 6:4 (NAS). Even the assignment of that identification to the Nephilim in Genesis is subject to question, because the mighty men and men of renown could also be the children of the "sons of God" and "daughters of men". Part of the theory would also state that the children of the union of the "sons of God" with the "daughters of men" produced the Nephilim mentioned in 6:4, who are half-angel and half-human. The identification of the Nephilim becomes clouded, even in the Genesis citation, and becomes even more so when the Leviticus and following citations are applied to their identity.

When the Old Testament references are compared to each other, they have applications, settings, and meanings that are not necessarily of a uniform nature. The best uniform identification is that of Job, in which the "sons of God" are angels, and that of Leviticus, in which the Nephilim are people of great physical size. The best that can be said for those definitions are that they are clear within their context, that being the book of Job, the book of Leviticus and other citations. In the book of Job, the "sons of God" are clearly identified as angels, but only appearing in heaven, not on earth. In the book of Leviticus, the Nephilim are identified as persons of great size, but only from the viewpoint of the people of Israel. What is missing is a clear application to the book of Genesis. Neither the book of Job or the book of Leviticus refer back to Genesis with their identification of the "sons of God" and the Nephilim. In like manner, the book of Genesis does not reach forward in an attempt to connect definitions with the books of Job and Leviticus

|TOP of page|
|HOME PAGE| |GUEST BOOK| |SITE INFO| |SERVICES| |NEWS| |FAMILIES| |GALLERY of the ARTS| |HAND HISTORY| |GENEALOGY| |CONTACT| |LINKS TO SITES|

PAGE GRAPHICS CREDIT

GG VAULT