The context of Genesis 6 flows out of the continuation of humanity and the introduction and propagation of the godly line from Seth through the patriarchs.The continuation of the narrative must be considered in relation to Chapters 4 and 5. If context is to be a consideration and continuity is to be maintained, then Chapter 6 is a natural progression from the elements noted and listed in Chapters 4 and 5. It is the line of Cain, flowing out of the sin of Cain that is the subject in Chapter 4. It is the contrast, the designation of the godly line through the appointment, by God, of Seth, as the righteous replacement for Abel, against the rebellious and godless line of Cain that is seen in one of its sons, Lamech. Both chapters are the expression of Genesis 3:15; Chapter 4 being the description and progression of the "seed of Satan" and Chapter 5 being the description and progression of the "seed of the woman" as evidenced by its inception and placement by the hand of God. It was Eve who realized that God then placed Seth directly in her life, and that of Adam, as she stated:

GENESIS 4:25 (NAS)
"... 'God has appointed me another offspring in place of Abel, for Cain killed him.'"
These two lines have been apparent, even from the beginning of Chapter 3. It was Satan who appeared in the garden through the serpent, who was the father of one line, "the seed of Satan". And it was Adam and Eve who would, after the fall, become the representatives and progenitors of the "seed of the woman". This was the true beginning of the contrast, the alliance of the heavenly with that of the earthly through the sinfulness of Satan and the accepting of that conduct and moral violation into their lives and hearts by Adam and Eve. It was out of that union that the two lines began their development through humanity. The first expression of the two lines being in the lives of the unrighteous Cain and righteous Abel, resulting in corruption and violence. The corruption being the ungodly nature of Cain and the violence being the murder of his brother Abel. There was also violence before the murder, expressed in the attitude toward God expressed by Cain, Genesis 4:5-6. This is the same pattern to be seen in Chapter 6 as God looked on the earth and saw nothing but corruption and violence, Genesis 6:11-13. There is nothing new in Chapter 6 that had not gone on before, as the corruption was the way of Cain and the violence followed. The violence was once more against God and was expressed as a rejection of His presence and knowledge, Job 21:14-15. It is the union and the contrast of Chapters 4 and 5 that is marked and noted. There was a way of Cain and a civilization that was charged to follow the godly way in Chapter 5. But in Chapter 6, God saw only the corrupt and violent way being the total sum of every human being, with the exception of Noah. The way of Cain had prevailed and the godly line had totally and completely been assimilated into the godless world, losing every aspect of belief in God and His precepts, becoming totally apostate. The progression and eventual end of the civilization is presented in the most graphic picture possible:

1. It was God who provided and set a moral standard for His creation, and Adam and Eve. Through their sin, they took what was not theirs to take, violating the standard.
2. It was God who provided a creation of innocence. It was Adam and Eve, taking sin into their lives who brought about a creation of guilt.
3. It was God who created man in His own image, and man who said that he did not wish God to be in his life or even know about His ways.
4. It was God who created life, and man, through Cain, who took away life by the murder of his own brother.
5. It was God who created a world of beauty, through the plants and animals, and man, through his sin, that brought the destruction of that world through the flood.
6. It was God who established the pattern for marriage, and man, through the way of Cain that violated the relationship and turned it into polygamy.
7. It was God who gave instruction for the worship of Himself, and man, through Cain, who defiled that worship, establishing a civilization that rejected God.
8. It was God who established the godly line through Seth, and man, who abandoned the godly line through apostasy and the choosing of the wrong way.
9. It was man who took and God who judged what was taken.

It is in Chapter 4 that is seen the choosing and the taking by man that represents the way of Cain. It is a choice always away from and in opposition to the precepts of God. It is a choice always made by the will of man that has as its expression the sinful heart, mind and conduct of humanity. It is in Chapter 5 that is seen the placing and appointing by God of His plans and purposes. It is in God's plan that the "seed of the woman" be maintained and it is the success in this endeavor that brings about the glory to God in His ultimate plan. The godly line of Seth did not maintain its godliness, but it was that very failure that was in the purpose of God to show all future generations that apart from a proper relationship to Him, there is no way to escape the direct hand and judgment of God. This is the picture presented in Chapters 4 and 5. Cain was the original apostate, creating a civilization that believed it had no reason to consider or even think about the real God. In the appointed godly line, it was the apostates who adopted the same value system and abandoned the true God for the godless society represented in Cain. In both instances, the end was an absolute and total cataclysm. It was a disaster of world wrenching proportions, with physical and spiritual death as a result for every human being. This is the example given, in II Peter 2:5, regarding the ancient world. It was a civilization that rebelled against God and excluded the real God from their lives, but they could not escape the God who sees, is there and who judges. They did not believe there was a God who saw their sin and would judge their hearts, but at the right time, "He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly," and swept them all away. This is the parallel of Peter, as he told the church of the doom of the apostates in his day. The apostates were of the same mind as these ancients before the flood, their sin was the same, it was profound, and God will judge them truly at the great day. They cannot escape the hand of God as he will sweep them into the lake of fire, Revelation 21:8. It is in Chapter 4 that the way of Cain is revealed as a line of descent into a world of alienation. It is in Chapter 5 that the way of Seth is revealed as a line of differentiation, from that of Cain, that results in apostasy and eventual alienation. The world of the ungodly and the world of the religious apostate all terminate in the same destination, alienation from God and judgment by Him.

It is at the end of Chapter 4 that God left the civilization who had followed the way of Cain and gave an example of their godless beliefs, the foolish prattle from the mouth of Lamech. It was a civilization, that in only seven generations, had become totally corrupt. There are no more references to those people or their descent. True, they are in Chapter 6 as the flood comes, but God's dealing with them was in judgment. Their deeds, their people and descendants were no longer of concern to God. They had abandoned Him, and He had abandoned them.

In the beginning of Chapter 5, it is seen that God acted in the lives of men. He did as He wished without regard for the opinions or desires of men. God appointed or placed a progenitor, Seth, of the godly line. The parallel may be traced to Seth's mother, Eve. It was God who created and appointed her to the wife of Adam, she not having a choice because God placed her as He chose. It was in the son of Seth that the tenuous difference between the line of Cain and the godly line is seen. The difference is of such an insignificant amount that it had to be maintained and appointed by the hand of God. The difference is indicated by the name of the son of Seth, Enosh. His name means weak, afflicted, faint, frail, but most graphically, incurably ill. The godly line were of no difference in kind, they were incurably ill in their spiritual nature outside the direct hand of God. Unless God directly placed Himself in their lives, there could be no hope for them just as there was already no hope for those who followed the way of Cain. There was no prohibition given, but the context would indicate that the relationship to God was necessary for spiritual survival. It is in Chapter 6, Verse 3, that it is seen how this relationship would come about. It was the Spirit of God who dealt with the godly line, calling them to repentance and righteous living. It was Enoch, seen in the book of Jude, through whom the Spirit preached, who had as his message the judgment of apostasy. In Enoch is seen the example given by Peter in II Peter 2:9, "... then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation..," (NAS), cf. Psalm 31:23. It was Enoch who lived a righteous life in a world of apostasy, who God rescued and preserved from the temptation of the evil men around him. It was God who appointed and placed the fathers of the godly line, but in their sons and daughters the spirit of God strove and dealt with them in their sin through the preaching of the patriarchs. They continued to reject and fall away into apostasy, resulting in a union with the godless world around them. God placed the patriarchs, He gave them a message to preach through His Spirit and He preserved and continued the line of the "seed of the woman" even though the progeny of the great men would not believe and became apostate. Is there a parallel to the references in the New Testament, Luke 12:49-53? How much grief must have been in the families of the patriarchs as they saw their sons and daughters fall away into the ungodliness of the world. They not only abandoned the teachings of their parents, but they appropriated the way of Cain into their lives with the full force of its consequences as already had been expressed by its adherents. In the message of Enoch, was the cry of a man calling to the apostates in judgment, perhaps calling to his own children.

The message and picture of Genesis is of a real humanity, people living real lives in a real world in which they must come to terms with God or He will deal in judgment on His terms. It is an example for all of humanity to follow. They were the same as all to follow and today the picture can be seen in reverse, humanity is in the same condition today as it was in the days of Noah. Time does not make a difference in the condition of the heart and mind, only a relationship with or without God can do that. Yet, with the intrusion of angels into the human experience, all of this is put into question. This becomes a new relationship and the results become unknown. Now, there are serious questions and the relationship of man to angels and God becomes very unclear.

A reading of Genesis, Chapters 1-5, would lead the reader to the natural conclusion that they are dealing with a history of the accountability of man in relation to God. The narrative and the teaching does not even give a hint regarding the existence of angels or the possibility of their intrusion into the lives of humanity. The entire emphasis of Chapter 5 is the origin and placing of the godly line by God Himself and a recitation of the lineages of the patriarchs, leading up to the last, Noah. The introduction of the angels presupposes a setting aside of the narrative, regarding the godly line and the patriarchs, and an inclusion, for only one verse, the subject of angels and human women. The subject is suddenly brought into the narrative without introduction, without explanation and without resolution of the obvious conflict. These angels are referred to in a most unusual manner as "sons of God" with no previous reference or definition; that definition requiring a look into the book of Job to find the meaning. There is no flow to the narrative that would give the reader even a slight hint of the possibility that this activity would occur; it is just suddenly there, and it is supposed that the reader is thoroughly capable of dealing with this unbelievably bizarre subject without any previous or subsequent information in the narrative. Yet, the flow of the narrative, in spite of what some would have the reader believe, would indicate that the "sons of God" and the godly line of Seth, rather than angels, is the natural progression because that has been the subject and context previously in Chapter 5.

The introduction of the godly line in Chapter 5 is the contrast to the way of Cain in Chapter 4. The contrast is striking. The seventh generation, through Cain, produced the arrogant boasting and immoral conduct in relation to marriage, by Lamech. The seventh generation, through Seth, brought a man who "walked with God" and who God took to Himself so that he would not see death, in the person of Enoch. This was to be the establishment of the relationship of the world to the heavenly; a civilization of mankind directly opposed to God and a people established and placed by God to carry on His name and peach the message He would give. The lines were not equal as the godless line produced many more individuals and filled the earth. The godly line produced fewer individuals and almost all of them became apostate. The two lines were to be in opposition, to be at enmity with each other as the godly line was the "seed of the woman" and the Cainite line was the "seed of the serpent" as the scene between Cain and Abel continued. The contrast and enmity was revealed through the patriarchs, but there were problems in the godly line, revealed in the prophecies of Enoch regarding apostasy and the lament of Lamech, wishing for rest through the birth of his son, Noah. The hint by Lamech that life was difficult in working the soil and that the godly line were oppressed, probably by the world system around them, also indicated that they were probably in the minority. Enoch's preaching was against apostasy and rather than see the message as being for the line of Cain, it may be better to see it as a condemnation of the apostasy in the godly line of Seth. There is a hint in Lamech's lament that he was hoping that in Noah, God would bring the enmity or redeemer promised in Genesis 3:15, so he named his son, "rest". In this respect it becomes very natural to see in the flow of the narrative, the introduction and development of the reason for the flood. In the line of Cain, the reason was ungodliness to the point of it being impossible for them to be redeemed, and in the godly line it was apostasy, also resulting in ungodliness to the point of it being impossible for them to be redeemed. The godly line is seen abandoning God for only the base and sensual desires of the society around them. The Cainite society welcomed them with open arms. It is the same circumstance found in all apostasy and sin:

1. Abandonment of the precepts of God.
2. Desiring something other than the way of God.
3. Taking that which is not right.
4. Bringing about judgment from God.

From the beginning of the creation narrative, until the reference in question, the subject had been the relationship of God to man. The question of how or why sin entered the world and why it came from one of His created beings was not the subject. It was the relationship of man to sin, and the resulting break in fellowship, that the scripture had been dealing. It had dealt with God's judgment of Satan for his part in bringing sin into the creation and against man for his participation. The subject had been God, as Creator and Redeemer, making provision for the salvation of a fallen humanity. It was the placing of Himself against the stream of human endeavor, making the promise and provision of a Redeemer to come. It was a God, dealing with His earthly creation, not God dealing with the heavenlies.

Nowhere is the idea of fallen angels mingling with humanity mentioned in the Genesis narrative. Angels, with the exception of the cherubim, and Satan, who is not referred to as an angel, are not mentioned in the Garden nor in the patriarchal period itself. The preference is to deal with the narrative in the context in which it exists. The context of the verses should be taken in relation to the previous Chapter 5, and the narrative that flows directly into the verses. The scripture had been concerned with God, Satan and man; never with the conduct of fallen angels. In the Garden of Eden, the initial temptation and introduction of sin came from outside the character of man, through the words and conduct of the serpent. Then, in the life of Cain, sin came from within the heart of man as he was an expression of fallen Adam. It is with that sin, originating within the character of man, and the promise of a Redeemer, who would deal with that sin, that the narrative had been relating. Suddenly, sin, once more is said to appear from outside the character of man, brought into the world and expressed through evil, fallen angels, who had never been part of the narrative. Why is this conduct suddenly making an appearance, and what does it have to do with man, with sin, with God, and to the promise of a Redeemer?

PART II
THE THEORY VIOLATES CREATION

Beginning in the first chapter of Genesis, the creation of animals is explained, and they were created to multiply after their kind, Genesis 1:21, 24, 25. The meaning of the terminology being universally accepted as noting the inviolate nature between the mixing of the animal species with its various divisions. Thus, sea creatures, birds, cattle, beasts and creeping things could not cross their established barriers. Birds could not become sea creatures, sea creatures could not become beasts and creeping things could not become cattle. By the same reasoning, there could be no crossing of the barriers between animals and humanity. By definition, the theory of evolution is denied by assigning animals to maintain position within their own kind. It is a fundamental tenet of creationism that this barrier between animals and humans is inviolate. Therefore, the human race is not a species of animal, but a separate creation of beings that are not of, or related to, animals in any way. In the same manner, man has an inviolate position in that he cannot change the fundamental nature of his being. Man does not evolve into a higher humanity or devolve into a lower animal existence. The Genesis narrative states that man was made in the image of God, Genesis 1:26, 27, that is also considered to be inviolate. It may be thought that the image imparted to man is no longer visible in the same manner as it was originally seen, and that may be correct due to the effects of sin on man's character. However, the fact that God specifically fashioned man to an ordered blueprint indicates that there was an inviolate nature regarding his creation and continued existence. Even in his sinful state, the fear of God was that man would eat of the Tree of Life and become immortal, knowing good and evil as God, but living in an eternally sinful state. Man was created, not only according to a specific blueprint, but with the possibility of an eternal, unchanging existence in the state originally created. With this possibility in mind, it can be seen that man is also created with inviolate boundaries that exist in order to maintain his identity as a man and to reveal his creation in the image of God. To change or defile that image is to violate God because man was created as he was intended to be.

The proponents of the theory of the union of angels with human women would be the first to accept the inviolate nature of the crossing of animals with man, and would also be the first to reject the theory of evolution. Yet, they postulate a theory in which heavenly angels cross the boundaries to cohabit with human women in order to produce a new race of beings. This belief is accepted with ease, with no question and no realization that to accept the precept is worse than the theory of evolution.

The union is bizarre enough in its concept, but the children produced are even more so. They are not just beings with a dual nature, such as an angel half and a human half or an angel side and a human side. The children would be a fusion of the angelic and the human, an entirely different creature that was neither angelic or human. The children would be a new type of being; angel- human creatures in which the angelic and human elements could not be distinguished from one another. Whatever human constituents were inherited would not represent true humanity because the image of God would be corrupted, and whatever angelic constituents were inherited would not represent true angelic beings because they would be compromised by the human character. These beings could be seen in the same manner as a child is created by two human beings. The child is also a new creature because it is neither the same as its father or the same as its mother. However, a human child is still the product of two beings of the same kind. The child of an angel and human union would be a product of dissimilar beings, not being like the father or the mother, but a fusion of the two into a new and different type of being. It is the crossing of dissimilar beings that God, in creation, did not allow as a possibility. Man was created in the image of God, but in his fallen nature, although still possessing that image, Adam reproduced his kind in his own nature, Genesis 5:3.

The children of the union must be seen as a uniquely new kind of being. Although mentioned previously in this essay as having an angel side and a human side, they do not have sides or natures based on dual personalities. They are a fusion of the two beings. They are truly angel- men, their natures actually mixed, blended and combined into a single unity of being. It is because they are a new type of being that they must be seen as unredeemable in the context of the plans of God presented in the scripture. It is not simply a matter for God to redeem the "human side" and reject the "angel side" of the beings, because there is no identifiable human side or angel side. Just as there is a fusion of the genetic material of a human mother and father, the "genetic" fusion of angel and human produced a child that was something other than its parents. The dilemma regarding the union is its relationship to what was created by God. God created heavenly beings, earthly animals and mankind. However, these new type of beings are not created by Him, since they are the fusion of two dissimilar beings of the original creation. These beings are as different from their parents as would be the children of a fusion of animals and humans or animals and angels. The union of animals and humans would not be allowed in the theology of the proponents of the theory and most would probably not allow the union of animals with angels, but in the case of a union with angels and humans, it is not only allowed but is received as a very deep theological and spiritual reality from the mysterious time of the pre-flood earth. The difficulty in the matter is in the nature of the angel beings. They are spiritual beings, in relation to man, and created before man. Yet, it is assumed that God created spiritual angels with a predisposition of compatibility with the physical bodies of human beings. In what manner can it be seen that God would have allowed such a compatibility in light of the fact that He would know the results of that action. Can it be assumed that God deliberately provided the means for such a union or is the reason much more sinister than that, being the assumption that God made a mistake or was forgetful regarding the nature of the beings that He created? The angels, man and animals all have their places in the creation of God, but the children of the fusion of angels and humans have no identifiable place or purpose. Their reason to exist can only be seen in the context of beings that came about solely as a means to subvert the redemptive process of God in relation to man. If that is the case, then the redemptive process was in fact subverted by the appearance of the beings and God is made to be foolish by not being able to prevent their appearance or cruel by allowing their appearance and then assigning guilt to humanity. The union of angels with human beings violates the spiritual nature of angels and violates the physical nature of human beings. It also violates the creative act of God, in that the children produced are not creations of God, but new beings having no relation to His creative intent. The proponents of the theory must assume that God had an intent or hand in their creation, yet there is no mention in the narrative that He had any relation to them regarding their creation. The reference in John notes that God created everything.

JOHN 1:3 (NAS)
"All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being."

If Christ is seen as the Creator by John and He created everything and nothing came into being that was not created by Him, then by reason the angel-human children of the union of angels with human women must have also been created by Him. Yet, there is no record of that creation being assigned to God in Genesis, and no record of God accepting or admitting responsibility for their existence. In fact, the core of the theory admits that the union of angels with human women, and the beings that were produced as children, had no connection with the action of God but were produced by evil, fallen angels under the control of Satan. Therefore, using the very elements of creation brought into being by God, Satan is able to be a creator himself by bringing together the heavenly and the earthly to produce a union of heaven and earth which was never the plan of the creation.

There is a key to the reason why God has continually maintained the existence of man, even in the face of gross sinfulness and the application of judgment that reduced the population of humanity to only eight individuals. That key is found in the creation narrative and concerns a placing, by God, of a creative element into the soul of man that is in the form of the image of God, Genesis 1:26, 27. The redemption of man is necessary because man continues to carry that image, although it is marred and deformed. The universe, the earth and the animal world is expendable because, although created by God, it was not created by God in His image as was man. As is noted by Isaiah, God will not forget those He has created and formed.

ISAIAH 44 (NAS)
21: "'Remember these things, O Jacob, and Israel, for you are My servant; I have formed you, you are My servant, O Israel, you will not be forgotten by Me.
22: I have wiped out your transgressions like a thick cloud and you sins like a heavy mist. Return to Me, for I have redeemed you.'"

ISAIAH 49 (NAS)
14: "But Zion said, 'The Lord has forsaken me, and the Lord has forgotten me.'
15: 'Can a woman forget her nursing child and have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, but I will not forget you.
16: Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands ...'"

The reclaiming of creation through the work of Christ is an important aspect of salvation, but the reforming of the image of God in man is a major component.

ROMANS 8:29 (NAS)
"For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren ..."

COLOSSIANS 3 (NAS)
9: "Do not lie to one another, since you laid aside the old self with its evil practices,
10: and have put on the new self who is being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him -"

The Genesis narrative is very clear as to the nature of what was created and the individual elements that composed the entire creation. The apostle Paul restated those elements that affirm the Genesis narrative, the components of the creation and the inviolate nature of each one of those elements.

I CORINTHIANS 15 (NAS)
39: "All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fish.
40: There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another.
41: There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
42: So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body;
43: it is sown in dishonor, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.
44: it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.
45: So also it is written, 'The first man, Adam, became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
46: However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual.
47: The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven.
48: As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly.
49: Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.

Paul reveals the components of creation:
1. There is more than one (kind) of flesh:
    a. Flesh of men
    b. Flesh of beasts
    c. Flesh of birds
    d. Flesh of fish
2. There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies each having a glory of its own, differing from the others:
    a. Sun
    b. Moon
    c. Stars

In the same manner that there are different kinds of flesh and different earthly and heavenly bodies, so there is a difference regarding the body in the resurrection of the dead. The earthly body is buried and becomes perishable and decayed. In the resurrection it becomes imperishable and incorruptible. The earthly body is buried in dishonor, revealing the entrance of death into life as a result of sin. In the resurrection it is raised in glory, sin being left behind and covered by Christ. The earthly body is buried, revealing the inability of humanity to prevent the arrival of death. In the resurrection, it is raised by the power of God into immortality. The earthly body is a natural body of flesh, bone and blood. In the resurrection it is a spiritual body, transformed into a body like that of Jesus Christ, Philippians 3:21. The examples are clear, representing the inviolate nature of the creative elements of God. The heavenly, earthly, physical and spiritual realms are all separate from each other and are under the sole control of God. Men and animals are created distinct from each other. The heavenly is distinct from the earthly and the physical is distinct from the spiritual. What Paul has repeated are the elements of the original creation in Genesis 1 and 2. The differentiation was part of the original creation and was still in effect during the time of Paul. The differentiation is also seen in the resurrection, only men are resurrected to a spiritual existence with the image of Christ infused in his being. The same picture of the heavenly, only from the opposite direction, is seen in Revelation.

MATTHEW 25:41 (NAS)
"'Then He will also say to those on His left, ''Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels ...'''"

There are men who are sinful and judged as guilty by God who are sent to the lake of fire that was originally prepared only for the Devil and his angels. Men, the Devil and angels are cast into the lake of fire, but there are no angel-men who are said to have brought about the destruction of the ancient world. There are no angel-men in the resurrection and there are no angel-men at the judgment. Where is it shown that the angels are judged and sentenced for the actions in a union with human women? Where are their angel-human children judged because of their unredeemable nature? Where does God reveal the deep, dark sin of the ancient world that caused the destruction of all humanity, except for eight individuals?

PART III
THE THEORY VIOLATES GOD AND ELEVATES SATAN

The theory must also be looked at as to why it has captured the attention of so many theologians through the years. One reason may be that it is so appealing and fanciful. It is more like a good science fiction story that captures the imagination. All types of things can be imagined as springing from the premise. But it also has a more serious reason for existing. It can also provide unprincipled teachers and theologians with a method to depreciate the credibility of God without having to admit their motives. The claim, by Satan through the serpent in the Garden of Eden, was that God was trying to fool Adam and Eve by forbidding them to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, because God knew that if they did eat, they would be as wise and great as He. So, God was evil or cruel for preventing them from eating the fruit. Now, in a strange twist of events, Satan has actually been able to fool God and His plans for redemption by subverting the nature of man, creating a hybrid angel-man that was unredeemable. God is shown to be no longer in control of His redemptive plan because Satan could implement a perverted plan that God knew nothing about and could not prevent. God is reduced to a bumbler or incompetent. God was also again mean, because He punished man for something that man could not control. The hidden question in the theory is; how can God possibly punish man when the angels were guilty of the sin? How can God be so cruel? This is the real source of the theory. It reduces the justice of God to cruelty and dismisses the responsibility of man regarding sin. Noah was a preacher of righteousness, and during his lifetime he preached a godly message of repentance and reconciliation to God. Yet, his message would not have applied to the hybrid beings. They could not repent and they could not look forward to a promised redeemer. God's promise of a Redeemer would not apply to them, so God's plan of redemption was crippled in that the Redeemer to come could only redeem part of the race of beings on the earth. In those beings, their evil, angel-human fusion results in a nature that prevents them from ever making a confession of sin and expressing faith in the Redeemer to come. They can never repent, by reason that the angel-fusion can never be forgiven and their human-fusion could not be separated, preventing the possibility of redemption.

The idea of the union of the angels with human women achieves a forceful and very revealing motivation in the following assertion by Stier:

"In all humility and reverence, we wish to remind the reader that the conception of our Savior by the Holy spirit is a counterpart to this dark secret of the old world. It is the desire of the holy angels to look into the mystery of grace, whereas it is the ambition of some fallen angels to penetrate into the mysteries of nature of which the act of procreation is certainly one of the most mysterious."

PART IV
THE SONS OF GOD ARE HUMAN BEINGS

A conclusion of force that would settle the differences regarding the interpretation of the passages in question is not possible. The position one would take in regard to interpretation depends basically upon how one wishes to approach the subject and the specific reasons for adopting a certain theology regarding the subject. There will always be questions regarding the passages and there will never be a definitive conclusion to the conflicts.

The writer has taken the position that the "sons of God" are mainly the Sethite line, although there may have been godly members in other lineages as well. This position has been taken, not because of one specific aspect of the theory, but because taken together, the context of the Genesis 6 passage would lead one to that belief. In the absence of the references in Job, there is no question that an interpretation leading to a belief in the union of angels with human women would never be proposed.

The references in the New Testament are speculative in nature only, when an attempt is made to connect them with Genesis 6:1-2. They lead back to Genesis if one wishes to use that approach, but none of them specify or note a reference back to an incident regarding angels and human women. It is this lack of confirmation that compels one to read the Genesis narrative in light of the contextual flow of Chapter 4 into Chapter 5 and the resultant conclusion in chapter 6. It should be noted that the theory, in itself, cannot be understood as to the reason why it would happen and the relationship that it would have between God and man. The only possible meaning would be to lessen the responsibility of humanity in regard to the responsibility and accountability to sin. If the Genesis narrative is read form the viewpoint of accepting the theory, then this aspect of accountability becomes very confusing. It is only man who is seen as accountable, the angels never mentioned or held responsible for such strange and corrosive actions. It is not enough to claim that their sins catch up with them in Jude and II Peter.

If the book of Genesis is to be considered foundational to biblical understanding, then the intrusion of angels into the procreative activity of human beings reveals that part of the foundation is built on sand. No groundwork is laid for such a union in the entire book of Genesis and no teaching is given as to the nature, reason and purpose of such a union. In the rest of the Old Testament, no such teaching is given or even mentioned. If the Genesis 6:2 reference is in relation to angels, then no foundational teaching is developed regarding the incident and it is not until II Peter and Jude that a final, cryptic mention is made of the event. Even then, the specific union of angels with humans is not mentioned in II Peter and Jude. There is no foundational teaching given regarding such an event, there is no foundational theology developed in the scripture regarding such an event and there is no New Testament teaching that specifically identifies and speaks definitively regarding such an event.

The question will be proposed as to the identity of the spirits who were disobedient during the days of Noah, I Peter 3:20, if they do not refer to the theory of angels in Genesis 6:2. The answer to that question cannot be forced because of a rejection of a theory regarding angels and human women that proposes an answer that cannot be supported. The same question might be asked as to what the message was that was preached to those spirits, I Peter 3:19. There is no answer to the question of the proclamation because the scripture does not provide one. The scripture does not specifically identify the spirits just as it does not identify the message given to them. It is a speculation to identify either the spirits or the message.

It is just as great a speculation to identify the "sons of God" as angels in Genesis 6:2. Yet, many have used their speculations in order to base theological precepts on their conclusions. This is a dangerous road to follow because it leads to other speculations and theories, none of which can be proven and many which can be destructive to a right interpretation of doctrine.

As a final note, it is necessary to indicate some conclusions regarding the Genesis narrative. These are speculative in nature and not be considered conclusive:

1. The "sons of God" are the godly line of Seth and other lineages, both men and women.
2. The daughters of men are the women of both the line of Cain and the apostate lines of Seth and other lineages.
3. The Nephilim are better seen as the product of the Cainite line or as the angels themselves.
4. The mighty men and men of renown are the children of the godly line and the line of Cain.
5. The angels in Jude 6 could very well refer to the Nephilim or fallen angels.
6. The spirits of I Peter 3:19 are those of humanity during the time of Noah and are those of whom God removed His Spirit. They are a unique group of unbelieving humanity who did not understand when the flood came, because they had deliberately abandoned God and God had removed His Spirit from them. It was the Spirit who provided the only channel by which they could obtain understanding. The message He preached to them in prison was His triumph over sin and their coming condemnation in judgment for their unbelief.

The union of the "sons of God" and the daughters of men is an example, just as the genealogies are examples in Chapters 4 and 5. The genealogies only mention the male members, but the female members of the families are also included by implication. The reality is that there was a union of sons and daughters from both lines. There are sons and daughters of the godly line becoming unequally yoked with sons and daughters of the line of Cain. The Genesis narrative is a recitation regarding the sin and accountability of humanity. Because of the actions of humanity, sin was significant, it was pervasive and it resulted in judgment. The marriages of the "sons of God" and the daughters of men were examples of being unequally yoked. The "sons of God" may have been apostate, so the union was one of equals in character, but it was their charge to be of the godly line and by that definition they were unequally yoked with a world that they were not to embrace.

In the progeny of the "sons of God" and the daughters of men is seen the results of the marriages between those who were unequally yoked. With the apostasy of the godly line, the "sons of God", it is now shown the base ingratitude and lack of understanding inherent in the human character. God had granted a gift to the line of Seth, a special and sacred privilege of keeping apart, from the world, and being the worshippers and representatives of God, that the people of Cain despised and rejected. God had made a prohibition in granting them the privilege of not becoming part of the profane and desperately corrupt society around them. Yet, even with the testimony of Adam and the patriarchs, the godly line began to drift from the provision and care of God. They began not to understand their position in relation to God and viewed their position and status only in relation to the society to which they were to be in opposition. As with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, God made the prohibition that was for their benefit and good. Yet, they did not see it that way. They saw the prohibition as the negative, something that prevented the obtaining of the good in their lives. Just as with Adam and Eve, to honor the prohibition was to live, but to ignore it was to die, this time in a flood. With that people, is revealed the same manner of conduct that was the way of Adam and Eve, and Cain. The godly line began to doubt the God they were charged to represent and doubt the character and necessity of the relationship they had with Him. The familiar pattern now emerged as the godly line began to see itself out from, and away from the context of its relationship to God. The apostasy resulted from the action of the godly line and their failure to deal correctly with temptation, just as did Adam and Eve, and Cain.

THE NATURE OF TEMPTATION
A. Doubt about God
    1. Doubt the motives of God. Do not want knowledge of Him, Job 21:14.
    2. Doubt the benefit of God. No profit in serving Him, Job 21:15.
    3. Doubt the reality of God. What can God do to us? Job 21:15.
B. Desire for something other
    1. Desire of the body. Sensual lust, Genesis 6:2.
    2. Desire of sight. Only the beautiful women, Genesis 6:2.
    3. Desire of pride. Took all they chose, Genesis 6:2.

It is with temptation being allowed to progress in their lives that the godly line began to abandon God and their spiritual heritage. In the face of overwhelming evidence, the testimony of Adam and Eve, the testimony of the patriarchs, the commands of God and the continuous object lesson in the form of the two cherubim and the fiery sword that were still visible at the entrance to the Garden of Eden, the godly line abandoned their standing under the care of God and aligned themselves with the way of Cain.

The temptation had once more come from within the character of man, expressing itself in apostasy, rejecting the care and provision of God. Once more the godly line revealed the doubt that temptation brings. Temptation doubted the value and benefit of the godly life and saw in the cities and societies of the world what appeared to be a better way, a way that was good and had been denied to them by God. Once more, not just the Cainite line, but the godly line saw that way as the better way, the good way. It was that choice, regarding what the good would be, that resulted in the taking. This time, the taking was all of the elements of the previous taking combined, with even more elements added. It was a taking of the way of Cain and the lifestyle that was represented in that civilization.

ELEMENTS OF THE TAKING
1. Taking the way of Cain, Genesis 4:23, I John 3:12.
2. Taking of wives of whomever they chose, Genesis 6:2.
3. Taking of multiple wives, Genesis 4:19, Genesis 6:2.
4. Taking of the wives of others, Genesis 6:2.
5. Taking a lifestyle of corruption, Genesis 6:5, 11, 12.
6. Taking power, Genesis 6:2, 4.
7. Taking property, Genesis 6:4.
8. Taking honor, Genesis 6:4.
9. Taking God's place, Job 21:14-15, Job 22:17.

Once again, just as in the case of Adam and Eve, and Cain, there is an exchange of lordship, the making of oneself the standard and the ensuing personal actions result in rebellion and apostasy against God. Rebellion and apostasy leads to self-deification and once again to a cataclysm of the first magnitude, denial of the truthfulness of God and a resulting break in fellowship with God. God is always watching, seeing and judging. He sees the first of the apostates in the person of Cain, and he watches continually, throughout the period of the patriarchs, as the godly line becomes smaller, as more and more defect to the life and way of Cain. God waits patiently, as if, perhaps, the line would repent, however He has known from the beginning that it will not be so. There comes a point when God has determined that the limit is now reached; it is time for the judgment process to begin, and then comes the flood.