Sons of Earth & Sky: The Nephilim, Giants, & Demons

There are many provocative, intriguing, and tantalizing passages in the Bible that as such, often cause the reader to react to, rationalize, or reject them. When Scripture doesn’t fit neatly in our carefully curated cultural box, instead of adjusting our box, we often adjust the Bible. Arguably, the most intriguing and provocative passage in all of Scripture is the first few lines of Genesis chapter 6 which briefly describes “the sons of God” marrying and having relations with “the daughters of men” prior to the flood. Due to the brevity and perplexing nature of the passage, most skim over it, not realizing the enormous impact these few verses have on the rest of the biblical narrative. But for many others, this passage has sparked imaginations throughout the ages and has dramatically shaped their worldview.

A Problematic Passage

When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

GENESIS 6:1-4 (ESV)

Most modern translations do not attempt to translate the Hebrew proper noun Nephilim at all, so English readers are simply left with a curiosity. However, older translations such as the Bishops Bible, Geneva Bible, King James Bible, and Darby Bible all rendered this term in English as giants. Those translations were heavily influenced by the earlier Greek and Latin translations which also rendered Nephilim as giants. But with modern versions opting to transliterate rather than translate the word, the verse doesn't quite grab people's attention to the same degree. That is not to say that this small detail sanitizes the passage of all intrigue, however.

In fact, these four verses have sparked much debate in modern theological circles. Many Western scholars have attempted to rationalize the text by arguing that the phrase “sons of God” in this passage refers to the descendants of Seth, who were righteous, while the contrasting phrase “daughters of man” refers to women descended from Cain, who were unrighteous. The resulting offspring they assert were mighty men of renown by being of “better stock” due to benefiting from a deeper gene pool and therefore were simply a hearty breed of humans.

However, this is a rather illogical explanation considering these events took place just a few generations after Adam during the lifetime of Enoch's father, Jared, according to other reliable texts. This was only around 500 years after creation and nearly a 1,000 years before the flood. As such, the human gene pool was not at all shallow at that point in time. Keep in mind that God didn't start forbidding marrying close relatives in Levitical law for roughly another 2,000 years. Today—roughly 5,500 years later—human genetic drift (loss of genetic information due to geographically isolated populations, also known as inbreeding) has progressed much further, but even now simply cross-breeding two ethnically different parents does not produce a genetically exceptional child.

But with this simple, scientific-sounding interpretation of the text, readers move on and little thought is given to the gravity and ramifications of this passage. However, that interpretation does not even line up with what other scriptures have to say about this passage, let alone account for well-established Jewish tradition and the myriad of parallel myths and legends throughout the world. There is an enormously paradigm-shifting event described in this text if we would simply read Scripture for what it says rather than what is most convenient or believable for us to accept.

The Sons of God

Scripture must be used to interpret Scripture, and if a word or phrase is used that we don’t fully understand within the given context, it helps to look for that word or phrase elsewhere in Scripture to see if a different context can shed some light on it. As it so happens, this exact phrase, “sons of God” (ben Elohim in Hebrew), is also used in the book of Job, and the context there makes the meaning of the phrase very clear. In every occurrence of the phrase “sons of God” in Job, it refers to angelic beings.

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. The LORD said to Satan, "From where have you come?" Satan answered the LORD and said, "From going to and fro on the earth,

and from walking up and down on it."

JOB 1:6-7 (ESV)

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. And the LORD said to Satan, "From where have you come?" Satan answered the LORD and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it."

JOB 2:1-2 (ESV)

"Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"

JOB 38:4-7 (ESV)

In chapter 1 and 2, clearly the phrase "sons of God" is a descriptor of spiritual beings as Satan was "among them" and they all were "before the Lord" in His presence. Chapter 38 clarifies this meaning beyond any doubt, equating the "sons of God" with the "morning stars" (another phrase meaning spiritual beings, see 2Pe 1:19, Rev 2:28, and Rev 22:16 as well as Isa 14:11-14, Dan 8:9-11, Rev 1:20, and Rev 3:1) and clearly stating that the "sons of God" were witness to the creation of the earth—an event which happened before humans of any lineage were around.

While the language switches from Hebrew to Greek in the New Testament, the phrase “sons of God” can also be found there and again, it usually refers to spiritual beings (e.g. Luk 20:36, Rom 8:19). In Hebrew, to be a “son of” meant to carry the likeness and authority of one’s father or to be of his essence. This is why the Jewish religious elite balked at Jesus calling Himself the son of God, because it implied that Jesus was of God’s essence and authority. It is also why we as believers are adopted sons of God, because we were not of His essence, but we received His spirit through Christ. Angelic beings are called “sons of God” because He both created them and, like God, they are spiritual beings.

There are occurrences of similar phrases found in Scripture such as “children of God” or “sons of the living God,” but when they are used, the context makes it clear they are not referring to spiritual beings. The phrase “sons of God” is clearly an idiom for angelic or spiritual beings and is likely why similar phrases are also used of Godly men and women in other passages by likening them to angels. So, the wording of Genesis 6 leans strongly toward meaning angelic beings, but the context of the passage offers further evidence, as do other passages of Scripture.

The Nephilim

Genesis 6:4 goes on to call the offspring or descendants of these “sons of God” a very peculiar proper name—it calls them “the Nephilim.” Again, older English Bibles translate this word as “giants,” which isn’t incorrect, it just isn’t the totality of the Hebrew word. The name Nephilim comes from one of two possible roots. It is either a plural form of the Hebrew root nephal, or the Aramaic noun naphiyla. While both words derive from the Semitic root npl which means to fall, be cast down, be judged, or to be overthrown, the Aramaic word specifically meant giant—a meaning that is also clearly present in Scripture. As we shall see, both of these related Semitic words shed some light on the Ancient Near Eastern concepts present in the biblical and historical texts.

While the Hebrew root word nephal is used many times in the Old Testament, the proper noun Nephilim is used only twice—here in Genesis 6:4 and once more in Numbers 13:33. Both times it is referring to the same thing—a particular and terrifying breed of men known, among other qualities, for their exceedingly large stature. Numbers 13:33 is the report of the spies of the Promise Land and they claimed the sons of Anak, who occupied the land, to be descendants of the Nephilim, referencing the Genesis account. In this passage, we see the clear association between the Nephilim and giants.

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. 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."

NUMBERS 13:32-33 (NASB) (emphasis added)

Here the Sethite view again runs into problems as the sons of Anak were clearly “men of great size” which makes very little sense if the Nephilim were simply the mixed offspring of Seth and Cain's lineage. On the other hand, offspring of great size and strength makes more sense if the fathers of these beings were more than human. Keep in mind that Genesis 6:4 clearly states that the Nephilim were "on the earth in those days and afterward." This would suggest some sort of genetic link ties the giants after the flood to the giants before the flood which we'll discuss later. But if we recognize that Nephilim are angelic half-breeds or demigod offspring, then it would account for the unnatural size of this race of people, as well as their legendary and infamous reputation. Other scriptures affirm this rather unsettling reality as well.

And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep. For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard); then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority. Bold and willful, they do not tremble as they blaspheme the glorious ones…

2 PETER 2:2-10 (ESV) (emphasis added)

For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day—just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

JUDE 1:4-7 (ESV) (emphasis added)

Notice the context of both passages—sensuality, sexual immorality, and unnatural desire. Notice also that both the pre-flood account and Sodom and Gomorrah are used as examples of this despicable behavior and that the angelic beings referenced of the former were said to be "chained in gloomy darkness." The parallel Greek concept used here is that of Tartarus which is the Greek word used in 2nd Peter, however, English Bibles translate it improperly as “hell.” But Tartarus was the deepest pit of Hades reserved for the Titans—fallen deities according to Greek mythology who were cast out of heaven by the Olympian gods and chained in utter darkness. According to this parallel myth, the Titans were the giant, immortal offspring of Gaia (earth) and Uranus (sky) who ruled the primeval world until they were overthrown by Zeus. This narrative sounds eerily similar to the Jewish tradition of the Nephilim, as well as mirroring many other ancient myths.

Many Mythological Parallels

To understand the worldview of the ancient Hebrews, one must understand their cultural context. The Jewish understanding of the Nephilim is informed by Ancient Near Eastern concepts held by the Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, and Assyrians. Even more so than the Romans were to the Greeks, these successive Mesopotamian civilizations were closely related in culture, language, heritage, and beliefs, and all of them worshipped—among others—a pantheon of demigods known as the Anunnaki. The word itself translates to "princely seed," but is derived from two root words as they were the offspring of An (sky) and Ki (earth).

In both the ancient Greek and Mesopotamian myths, sky is represented or personified by a male while earth is represented or personified by a female. So, you can see the clear parallels between these narratives and the biblical account of the Nephilim in Genesis as it describes sons of God and daughters of man. Both Peter and Jude used the Greek parallel to communicate biblical truth and historical events to a Greek culture which was less familiar with the Jewish texts. But Sodom and Gomorrah were also invoked as an example to buttress the argument, as the people of those cities also wanted to have sexual relations with the angels under Lot’s roof, though, in that case, they did not succeed.

But even the average believer is probably aware that not all fallen angels—commonly called demons—are locked up in the deepest pit of Hades (in Hebrew, an underworld known as Sheol, which differed considerably from the Greek concept). In fact, most appear to be quite free to wander the earth to and fro like Satan, stirring up trouble and exerting influence. Therefore, these passages only make sense if we recognize that they are referring to a specific group of fallen angels whose offspring were the Nephilim, not fallen angels in general.

Peter and Jude are speaking of the angelic beings who left the heavens (their proper abode), lusted after the daughters of men and, like the two angels in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, took on human form, and therefore were able to have sexual relations and even produce a hybrid offspring of earth and sky—like the Titans and Anunnaki. Of course, it should be noted that the simplest explanation for why the myths of the Titans, Anunnaki, and a host of other demigod (half human, half deity) legends developed in cultures around the world was that they were all inspired by an actual ancient historical event. Just as hundreds of cultures around the world share a version of the flood account and the dispersion at Babel, a single real historical event can produce many legends and traditions.

But the Ancient Near Eastern parallels go even further. While the Mesopotamian myths of the Anunnaki mirror that of the Nephilim as the mighty hybrid offspring of immortal and mortal parents, the cultures surrounding ancient Israel also had a deep mythos describing deities who taught humanity the knowledge to create civilization. This motif, known as the civilizing hero or cultural hero, is exceedingly prevalent throughout societies of the ancient world, but in the context of the Ancient Near East, they were known by the Sumerians as the Abgal and by the Akkadians as the Apkallu.

These seven wise sages were described as divine figures who lived before the great flood and taught men wisdom and knowledge in social forms, craftsmanship, medicine, omens, astrology, and magic. They also helped establish great kingdoms, mated with human women, and were depicted as either part human and bird or part human and fish. However, both depictions communicated the same thing—that they came from the spiritual realm. The bird imagery associated with the heavens, and the fish imagery associated with the underworld, the great primordial sea known as the Abzu.

Interestingly, after the great flood, there were four different Apkallu which were understood as only part Apkallu and part human, with the original seven divine beings described as then residing in the underworld of the dead. However, in ancient Mesopotamia, legitimacy as either a king or a scholar required inspiration from and access to the Apkallu. In this sense, the Mesopotamian Apkallu can be seen as a clear parallel to the Greek Muses and the later Near Eastern Jinn, and Roman Genii.

The wisdom and knowledge revealed by these beings was so advanced, that the Sumerians believed that there was no new wisdom or knowledge to be discovered, only the old wisdom and knowledge from before the flood to be recovered. They had a term for this concept, called ul, a word which meant both ancient and perfect, as they saw the time before the flood as the ideal, the pinnacle of human civilization. Interestingly, the cuneiform logogram which represented ul was that of a kakkabum—a star. As mentioned earlier, stars throughout most ancient civilizations—but especially Ancient Near Eastern societies—were associated with angelic beings.

While all these details seem quite removed from the brief account in the biblical text, it clearly dovetails with the non-canonical Jewish literature on the subject. While these sources should not be taken with the same authority as Scripture, they simply cannot be ignored as they were widely read by the Jews of Jesus' day and were quoted and referenced many times by Jesus and the other New Testament writers. The most influential and often referenced among them being the Book of Enoch, or more properly, 1 Enoch. This extremely popular text among both the Jews and the Early Church describes a sinister group of beings known as the Watchers, an Ancient Near Eastern term also used in the book of Daniel which refers to angelic beings.

"The sentence is by the decree of the watchers, the decision by the word of the holy ones, to the end that the living may know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will and sets over it the lowliest of men."

DANIEL 4:17 (ESV)

The Enoch Narrative

These Watchers were led by one of two main instigators named Semjaza or Azazel—the latter of which is also mentioned by name in the book of Leviticus. This group of angelic beings are described as marrying and fornicating with human women as well as teaching mankind the ways of war, witchcraft, and astrology among other things. Azazel (variant spelling: Asael) in particular is blamed for most of the sin and corruption in the Book of Enoch as well as the Jewish Second Book of Enoch, the book of Jubilees, and The Book of the Giants which were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. 1 Enoch chapters 6-16 recount the story of the sin of the Watchers, but I will quote a few of the most important passages here.

And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: "Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children." And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: "I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin." And they all answered him and said: "Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual curses not to abandon this plan but to do this thing." Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual curses upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual curses upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: Samlazaz (Semjaza), their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal, Asael (Azazel), Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaqlel, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens.

1 ENOCH 6

Note: Mount Hermon is a biblical location name which incidentally means to make taboo or to consecrate for destructive religious purposes. It is the same Semitic root from which the Arabic haram is derived, which also means forbidden or taboo. Mount Hermon was located in the infamous region known as Bashan, and was associated with giants (see Deu 3:8-11). David also depicts Mount Hermon as the antitype of Mount Zion in Psalms 68:15-16—the opposing mountain to the mountain of God, and in the cultures surrounding ancient Israel, Mount Hermon was widely believed to be a gateway to the underworld. The etymology of the word Bashan is debated, but the Ugaritic root bšn means serpent or dragon and in ancient non-biblical literature, Bashan is identified as "the place of the serpent." Bashan was also the capital of Ba'al worship, who in Ugaritic sources, was believed to be the leader of the Rephaim—a proper noun recorded in the Bible describing a race of giants...

And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them. And they taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.

1 ENOCH 7

And Azazel taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all coloring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjaza taught enchantments and root−cuttings, Armaros the resolving of enchantments, Baraqijal taught astrology, Kokabel the constellations, Ezeqeel the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiel the signs of the earth, Shamsiel the signs of the sun, and Sariel the course of the moon. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven.

1 ENOCH 8

Chapter 9 then details the archangels Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel emploring God to take action against the sinful Watchers and their spawn. Here, Azazel in particular is blamed for teaching "all unrighteousness on earth" and revealing "the eternal secrets which were in heaven," and Semjaza for abusing his authority, leading the Watchers to "defile themselves" with women, giving rise to a wicked and bloodthirsty race of giants who were terrorizing and slaughtering mankind. Chapter 10 then begins several chapters of God's response and judgment against all this sin and lawlessness, and it was of truly biblical proportions. I'll quote a few pertinent passages which address the consequences for the earth, the Watchers, and their giant offspring.

"Then said the Most High, the Holy and Great One spake, and sent Uriel to the son of Lamech and said to him, "Go to Noah and tell him in my name 'Hide thyself!' and reveal to him the end that is approaching, that the whole earth will be destroyed, and a deluge is about to come upon the whole earth, and will destroy all that is on it. And now instruct him that he may escape and his seed may be preserved for all the generations of the world." And again the Lord said to Raphael, "Bind Azazel hand and foot and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert—which is in Dudael—and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there forever, and cover his face that he may not see light. And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire. And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel, to him ascribe all sin."

1 ENOCH 10:1-9

Note: This is most likely why in the book of Leviticus, the ritual of the scapegoat is depicted as sending the goat of blame out into the desert for Azazel (Lev 16:8-10) as he too in these traditions performed the role of a scapegoat of sorts as well as being known to be locked up in an abyss below the desert.

And the Lord said unto Michael, "Go, bind Samlazaz (Semjaza) and his associates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves with them in all their uncleanness. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgement and of their consummation, till the judgement that is for ever and ever is consummated. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire and to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever.

1 ENOCH 10:11-14

And now, the giants, who are produced from the spirits and flesh, shall be called evil spirits upon the earth, and on the earth shall be their dwelling. Evil spirits have proceeded from their bodies; because they are born from men and from the Watchers is their beginning and primal origin; they shall be evil spirits on earth, and evil spirits shall they be called. And the spirits of the giants afflict, oppress, destroy, attack, do battle, and work destruction on the earth, and cause trouble. They take no food, but nevertheless hunger and thirst, and cause offences. And these spirits shall rise up against the children of men and against the women, because they have proceeded from them.

1 ENOCH 15:8-12

To recap, the Book of Enoch states that the flood was a direct response to the sin of the Watchers and their giant spawn. This aligns with the Genesis account which describes the "sons of God" having relations with the "daughters of man" and conceiving the Nephilim right before then introducing Noah and the flood. Enoch goes on to describe the judgment of God against the Watchers, condemning them to watch their sons die, and then binding them in utter darkness until the great day of judgment when they will then be thrown into the eternal fire. This concept is clearly a precursor to similar passages in the New Testament with 2nd Peter and Jude directly drawing from Enoch in their writings. Finally, we get to yet another paradigm-shifting concept with the giants themselves being condemned to die, but due to them being part spiritual beings born of the earth, their spirits will roam the earth without peace, becoming evil spirits which continue to be a plague upon humanity until the day of judgment.

Immediate Implications

While most modern Christians simply categorize all spiritual beings into two categories—angels being good and demons being evil—there is little to no explanation as to why some evil spiritual beings seem to be regional or territorial spirits with authority, such as the prince of Persia or the prince of Greece, and why others seem to be personal, seeking to possess and torment individuals. It is this latter type of spirit which the Sumerians called the Udug and the Akkadians called the Utukku, but they have gone by many names in virtually every single human culture and civilization. The Ancient Near Eastern understanding provides a framework which addresses these nuances, explaining that there are different types of spirits—those who were originally created in the heavenlies but rebelled and were cast down to the earth, and those who were originally created on the earth, born of women, and had physical bodies.

As such, these spirits hunger, thirst, and have appetites which cannot be satiated without a body. And so, these evil spirits of the dead giants continue their reign of terror which began before the flood in the days of Jared. Also note that in the Bible, these evil spirits are often called unclean spirits. We typically understand this phrase to only mean defiled, but there is another meaning of the word in Jewish usage—that which is of a mixed or impure nature.

“You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made

of two kinds of material."

LEVITICUS 19:19 (ESV)

"You shall not sow your vineyard with two kinds of seed, lest the whole yield be forfeited, the crop that you have sown and the yield of the vineyard. You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together. You shall not wear cloth of wool and linen mixed together."

DEUTERONOMY 22:9-11 (ESV)

The intertestamental Book of Enoch is obviously a much more detailed account than the brief Genesis passage. But as recent archaeology has discovered of the cultural prevalence of these Ancient Near Eastern myths, it is understandable why Genesis didn't feel the need to elaborate—it simply assumed the reader was intimately familiar with the story. But after the conquests of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC, the cultural influence began to shift toward Greece, and then Rome. It is in this cultural context that the Book of Enoch seems to have been written, preserving the ancient Mesopotamian backdrop and narrative. What then becomes quite clear is that both Genesis and Enoch address the inversion of truth and correctly depict the state of the world before the flood not as idyllic, but catastrophic, and the divine beings responsible not as heroic sages, but as haughty fools who continued the Edenic tradition of leading humanity astray with the promise of wisdom and knowledge.

Textual Reliability

Regardless, these ancient Jewish traditions and manuscripts quite clearly expound upon the brevity of the biblical passage and leave no room for doubt that these “sons of God” were indeed angelic beings, not simply sons of Seth. The only question is that of the credibility and reliability of these manuscripts. To address that question, we must realize that the book of Enoch was almost universally accepted by the church up until around the 4th Century AD when its supernatural content started to offend the sensibilities of the time. Church fathers such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen all supported and approved of the book of Enoch while the epistle of Barnabas (a letter written by Paul's companion) quotes Enoch three times and twice refers to it as Scripture (Bar 4:3, 16:5-6).

Furthermore, according to Dr. Jay Winter, a historian and former professor at Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Yale University, there are over a hundred phrases in the New Testament which come directly from the book of Enoch, including quotes of Jesus. Both 2nd Peter and Jude appear to draw heavily from this apocryphal book and Jude 1:14-15 is a direct quote from it. In fact, Dr. Michael Heiser, an Ancient Near Eastern, biblical, and Semitic scholar, wrote a book titled Reversing Hermon detailing just how profound an impact the Book of Enoch had on the New Testament. So, it would appear the biblical authors were intimately familiar with and accepted these Nephilim traditions as true and the Book of Enoch was nearly as well regarded as Scripture for over five-hundreds years. In fact, the Ethiopian orthodox church regards both the books of Enoch and Jubilees as canon.

Due to the fact that the Book of Enoch so clearly influenced Scripture and is quoted by Scripture, it is hard to dismiss merely on the grounds that it is not considered canon by most of the church. The apocryphal books of 1st and 2nd Maccabees aren’t considered canon by much of the church either, but no one disputes the historical events that they record. Apocryphal books' reliability needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and in the case of Enoch, it clearly should be taken quite seriously.

Theological Significance

By now you may be tempted to wonder if any of this matters. But, according to major redemption themes in the Bible, it would actually matter quite a bit. Remember that Boaz was a type of Christ as a kinsman redeemer in the book of Ruth which foreshadowed the fact that God had to become one of us in order to redeem us. Redemption is about bloodlines. The Old Testament documents lineages, genealogies, and bloodlines assiduously as they are of great theological importance. The bloodline of Adam was tainted with sin, which is why Christ (called the last Adam in 1 Co 15:22) had to be born of a virgin as He could not be of Adam’s lineage (prophesied in Gen 3:15). The bloodline of Cain was wiped out in the flood while the bloodline of Seth was preserved through Noah and his sons. The bloodline of Abraham was prophesied to be a blessing to all nations and through it the savior would be born. Christ had to become kinsman of us in order to become the redeemer for us, and we can only receive that redemption by His blood.

We then become adopted into His lineage and bloodline as we reject the lineage and bloodline of Adam. Sin brought death into the world, but God redeemed death to bring about redemption for humanity—for if man were immortal, then we would be eternally damned in our sin, just like the fallen angels. So God, in His wisdom and mercy, removed the Tree of Life from fallen man’s reach (Gen 3:22-24) until his sin had been atoned for so that he would have eternal life rather than eternal damnation (Rev 2:7, Rev 22:2, 14).

Because the savior must be a kinsmen redeemer, meaning that He must be related to us by blood, only mankind can be redeemed (1 Co 15:21, Rom 5:8-21). Angels are eternal beings, a different kind, and therefore when they sinned, they were eternally damned—there can be no redemption for them. Revelation 21 shows us that both mankind and angelic beings will be in the new heavens and new earth of eternity—those of the human kind who received righteousness, and those of the angelic kind who remained righteous. But only the bloodline of Adam can be redeemed.

So, we’ve established that bloodlines are very important in scripture and we’ve scratched the surface as to why, but what does this have to do with the Nephilim? The answer is, quite simply, everything. Christ had to become man, a kinsmen redeemer, but what would happen if the redeemable, mortal bloodline of man intermixed with that of nonredeemable eternal angelic beings? Satan’s plan may be multi-faceted, but every attack pushes toward a common goal—the corruption of mankind and preventing God’s redemptive plan from being fulfilled. That’s why the Jews have been persecuted throughout history, why Jesus was crucified (which really backfired), why the Eastern Gate was blocked up, and why the Antichrist will wage war against Israel—all to thwart God’s redemptive plan. By the sons of God having sexual relations with human women, it produced a mixed breed, a corrupted, unclean bloodline, and therefore could have subverted God’s redemptive plan.

It is important to note that the brief mention of the Nephilim in Genesis comes literally a single breath before God announces the flood as judgement. That event, which went hand-in-hand with the earth being corrupted and full of violence (Enoch expounds on this in greater detail), seems to have been an abomination to God and triggered a catastrophic cleansing of the earth. In the biblical text, sometime after the Nephilim appeared in the days of Jared, God pronounced His judgement of the flood in the days of Noah and set the date for it—120 years from that day—which allowed Noah enough time to warn everyone and call them to repentance as well as build the ark. What is incredible, but completely overlooked, is the major reason why God chose Noah to preserve the human race. Let's look at Genesis 6 again:

These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God. And Noah had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight, and the earth was filled with violence. And God saw the earth, and behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth. 

GENESIS 6:9-12 (ESV)    

Here, Scripture says that Noah was both righteous and "blameless in his generation." A better translation would be "perfect in his generations" (KJV) as the Hebrew word translated as "blameless" here is tamiym, which is the same word used for sacrificial animals in Levitical law. It means pure, without blemish, perfect, undefiled, and whole. The context of this passage is dealing with Noah's "generations" or his genealogy and descendants—his bloodline. Genesis claims Noah and his immediate children were, like sacrificial animals, genetically pure without spot or blemish. It then contrasts that bloodline with that of all other flesh, which had been "corrupted" (Hebrew shachath, meaning to decay, ruin, destroy, lose, mar, perish, or waste).

If this seems like a bit of a stretch of Scripture, you only have to look to the Jewish traditions and apocryphal texts to remove all doubt. In the Book of Enoch and also in Jubilees, the texts claim that not only the human bloodline had been corrupted by the Nephilim, but even the animal kingdom had been corrupted (mixed), which is why it was so important for God to select two of every kind, which would reproduce after their kind, to enter the ark for preservation. Even Genesis hints at this reality when it states "all flesh" were corrupted (not just mankind).

But God’s plan was not foiled by these Watchers or their offspring. The great deluge wiped the slate clean and helped ensure that only the righteous and mortal human bloodline of Seth was preserved. However, this judgment, while it seems to have largely dealt with the Nephilim problem, did not eradicate them completely. Again, Genesis 6:4 states that in those days and after, the Nephilim roamed the earth. They crop back up here and there, most notably as the descendants of Anak in the Old Testament, the most famous of which being Goliath.

Giants in the Land

While scripture does not explicitly identify Goliath as being a descendant of the Nephilim, it does state that Goliath was a giant (as were his three brothers) and that he was from Gath (1 Sam 17:4). Gath was one of the cities of Anak’s descendants that was not destroyed by Joshua (Jos 11:22). As the sons of Anak are "part of the Nephilim" according to Numbers, their bloodline would have been preserved there. Rabbinic tradition connects these dots and holds that Goliath was of Nephilim descent as giants are always associated with evil and the demonic. This is clearly demonstrated in the case here as Scripture attributes three sets of sixes (his height was six cubits and a span, his spear head weighed 600 shekels and he had six fingers and toes) to Goliath, which is associated with the spirit of antichrist.

This identification as an antichrist figure is not without warrant. Not only did Goliath speak arrogant words and blaspheme Israel and God (1 Sam 17:8-10, 1 Sam 17:43-45) and was thought to be undefeatable in battle, but according to Rabbinic tradition, Goliath was the Philistine who stole the Ark of the Covenant (1 Sam 4) and placed it in the temple of Dagon. This is a foreshadow of the actions prophesied of the Antichrist when he will speak arrogant words and blaspheme God (Rev 13:5-6), be thought to be undefeatable in battle (Rev 13:4) and enter into the Holy of Holies (where the Ark of the Covenant would be kept) and defy God by setting up the “abomination of desolation” (Mat 24:15). But while Goliath may be the most famous, he isn't the only—the Old Testament is full of giants.

Interestingly, after the flood, future generations of giants primarily crop up in the lineage of Ham—and especially his son Canaan, who was cursed by Noah (Gen 9:20-27). Though there is some debate as to why Noah cursed Canaan, the most logical and biblically consistent explanation is through that of another type of illicit sexual relationship: Ham slept with his mother while his father, Noah, was passed out from too much wine. This would account for why the son was cursed rather than Ham, as Canaan would have been an illegitimate child. This understanding is supported by other biblical texts which shed light on what the phrase "seeing" or "uncovering" someone's nakedness meant. It was a euphemism for shameful sexual relations, and "uncovering your father's nakedness" meant having sex with his wife.

You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife; it is your father's nakedness.

LEVITICUS 18:8 (ESV)

If a man lies with his father's wife, he has uncovered his father's nakedness...

LEVITICUS 20:11 (ESV)

‘Cursed be anyone who lies with his father's wife, because he has uncovered his father's nakedness...’

DEUTERONOMY 27:20 (ESV)

Ham was also the father of Cush, who then fathered the infamous giant and founder of the Tower of Babel, Nimrod (a descriptive name simply meaning the rebel). Later, scripture highlights the Anakim, or the sons of Anak as being Nephilim or giants. Following the genealogies in Scripture, we know that Anak was the son of Arba who was himself a giant Amorite and the Amorites were descendants of Canaan. A few other Nephilim sprung up out of the bloodline of Noah's other son, Japheth as well—most notably Goliath and his brothers who were Philistines. But interestingly, there are no biblical records of giants cropping up in the bloodline of Noah's second son. This is significant as Israel, the chosen people of God, were descendants of Shem (Shemites or Semites).

This begins to makes the Canaanite (descendants of Canaan) conquest make more sense in light of the Nephilim and Genesis chapter 6. God wanted to finish the task He began with the flood and eradicate the Nephilim bloodline. He then used the pure descendants of Shem to wipe out the aberrant, corrupted bloodlines of Ham and Japheth. When the Israelites spied out the land with Joshua and Caleb, their report was that the Nephilim were in the land and that they were like grasshoppers in their sight. Due to their lack of faith, God then had the Israelites wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that faithless generation died off—only Joshua and Caleb, who had faith God would give them victory, were allowed to enter.

But God wasn't just running down the clock. While the Israelites were cowering in the wilderness, God was cleaning house in Canaan. In Amos 2:9-10, God claims that He destroyed the Amorites, "though his height was like the height of cedars." Indeed, a generation later, when Joshua led the Israelites into Canaan, few giants remained. Joshua 11:21 states that there were some Anakim (giants) in a few scattered hill countries and in Hebron, Debir and Anab, which Joshua destroyed. But the next verse states that Joshua didn't complete the task—giants remained in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod. Those were the cities of the Philistines, which would come back and haunt Israel generations later until David slew Goliath of Gath and later killed off the remaining giants in the land with his mighty men. Hence, David finished the task which God started in Genesis 6—killing off the Nephilim bloodline. A man after God's own heart, indeed.

As the biblical scholar Dr. Michael Heiser has noted, though often characterized as a clean sweep, the Canaanite conquest actually only "utterly destroyed" tribes and regions (primarily the hill country) populated by the Anakim. The tribes, cities, or regions seemingly unconnected (not intermarried or interbred) with the Anakim were not commanded by God to be put to death or utterly wiped out, but simply to be driven out—relocated or removed from Israel's borders. This distinction and differentiation in fate and the reason why is often lost upon, or ignored by, modern readers.

Other Giants in Scripture

But the Amorites and Philistines weren't the only recorded populations of Nephilim in scripture, there were other notable events which included giants. As I've mentioned before, in Genesis 10:8-10, Nimrod, the builder king of the ancient world responsible for the Tower of Babel, was labeled a gibbor in Hebrew which means giant either literally or figuratively. In Nimrod's case, there is reason to take it literally. However, most English Bibles translate gibbor here as "mighty man," which would be a valid translation if other passages speaking of Nimrod were constrained to this figurative meaning. But scholars believe that Nimrod was known by many names in different ancient cultures, including Sargon by the Akkadians, the demigod Gilgamesh by the Sumerians, and is mentioned later in Genesis by the name Amraphel. In Genesis 14, Abraham is caught in the crossfire of several kings of the Rephaim, Emim and Zuzim who are at war with each other—Amraphel being named as one of them. Who are the Rephaim, Emim, and Zuzim? Thankfully we don't have to speculate—scripture spells it out for us in Deuteronomy.

The Emim formerly lived there, a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim. Like the Anakim they are also counted as Rephaim, but the Moabites call them Emim.

DEUTERONOMY 2:10-11 (ESV)

We already know that the Anakim were specifically identified as giants, but the word Rephaim is another proper name in Hebrew which the Anakim seem to be a subgroup of. Look up the Hebrew definition of the word and you'll find it means giant. Interestingly, the root word rapha also means shades or departed spirits—yet another association with the Hebrew concept of who the Nephilim were and the punishment they were condemned to in the apocryphal texts. Remember also that in Ugaritic texts, the Canaanite deity Ba'al was the leader of the Rephaim. So there can be no doubt or misinterpretation as to who these people were according to scripture. They were giants, and like the Anakim, were connected to the Nephilim.

In Genesis 10, that means that kings of races of giants were at war with each other, which echoes the apocryphal texts' description of their behavior prior to the flood as well. If somehow you're still unconvinced the Rephaim were giants, Deuteronomy actually gives an approximate measurement of one of their kings—the infamous king Og of Bashan. Remember Bashan was the region surrounding Mount Hermon, known as "the land of the serpent" and associated with both the underworld, and with giants. In Deuteronomy 3:11, Scripture details the size and construction of king Og's bed—measuring 9 cubits long (13' 6"), 4 cubits wide (6'), and made of solid iron. The bed would need to be rather robust as a roughly 13 foot tall individual would have probably weighed around 800 pounds.

With that connection in mind, these other giant kings back in Genesis 10 captured Abraham's nephew, Lot. Abraham would have none of that, so he led 318 men to pursue the giant kings and their armies to reclaim him. Abraham defeated the kings, brought back Lot, all the people who were taken from Sodom and Gomorrah, as well as all the loot—which he gave to the other giant kings as a bit of a peace offering. So, according to the Bible, Abraham battled against giants and won handily. That casts a new light on a patriarch we often view as rather meek and mild.

So while English translations may obfuscate the appearances of giants in scripture, it is clear that they were present in populations all over the Ancient Near East and their bloodlines were pretty clearly identified. One final interesting point is that the most famous giants in Scripture—of the Philistine people group—are believed to have originally come from Crete. Coincidentally that is also where the legend of the Greek Titans originated—the primeval giants who were sons of earth and sky.

Post-Flood Nephilim Origin

But the revelations in the extra-biblical texts help answer one of the persistent questions people have about the Nephilim. That being, if the flood wiped out everyone not on the ark, and Noah and his wife and children were not of the Nephilim bloodline, how did giants crop back up after the flood? There are two major theories that address that question. The first is that fallen angelic beings once again took on flesh and reproduced with women after the flood. Though it is the most common argument, I find this theory less likely simply because of the strict judgement and wrath the Genesis 6 event incurred. Not only were the Nephilim themselves slaughtered and then swept clean by the flood, but an exceedingly harsh punishment was executed upon the fallen Watchers who produced them according to both the non-canonical texts as well as 2nd Peter and Jude. If a second incursion did happen, you would think there would be a mention or tradition of that significant event, as well as a second punishment by God—but there is no such record.

Clearly the severity of the punishment was meant to prevent a second occurrence. Being locked in utter darkness, solitary confinement style, for thousands of years awaiting your final judgement of being thrown into the eternal lake of fire would make any free-roaming Watcher think twice. That fact is alluded to in the Gospels when Jesus commands the legion of unclean spirits out of a man (Luke 8:27-39). They begged Jesus not to send them into the abyss, which was Sheol, or the pit—alluding to Tartarus where Azazel was locked up, not Hell. In other words, they begged Jesus for their freedom and not be locked up in chains in gloomy darkness—the punishment handed down to their fathers. So, that event seems to have left a lasting impression on the evil and unclean spirits of the dead giants. It would therefore probably have had the same effect on the Watchers themselves. In fact, the extra-biblical texts allude to this and state that the lustful Watchers were well aware that the punishment for their deed would be severe, so they bound themselves together by a curse so that none of them would back out and each would bear their share of the judgement.

This leaves the second theory, which postulates that the reason some giants popped up in future generations after the flood was due to genetics, not a second wave of angelic sexual relations producing pregnancies. This explanation fits the available evidence and texts much better. While the texts make it clear that Noah and his sons were "pure," no such claim is made of his sons' wives, which according to the apocryphal texts, seem to be weddings of necessity right before the flood rather than of choice. From there, it simply becomes an exercise of Punnett Squares and calculating the frequency of recessive traits cropping up in a population.

Because while the Genesis account is brief and gives no sense of how long the Nephilim roamed the earth, we know from Enoch that they were alive for at least 500 years as they were prophesied to be slaughtered in that timeframe. Given that Enoch states the Watchers descended on Mount Hermon in the days of Jared, we can estimate the Nephilim were probably around for 700-1,000 years before the deluge. This would give ample time for multiple generations of giants, with each successive generation inheriting and expressing less and less angelic genetics and traits. By the time of the flood, most of the Nephilim had killed each other in wars and battles according to these texts, but their corrupted bloodlines seem to have persisted, with at least Ham and Japheth's wives potentially being carriers.

So, although the Nephilim bloodline was not completely eradicated in the flood, it seems to crop up only sporadically in certain genetic subgroups afterward, and then be completely eradicated in the conquest of Canaan by Joshua and David, whose own descendant then begins a new bloodline of righteousness. The judgment of the flood and the chaining up of the Watchers responsible in utter darkness seems to have been a pretty effective deterrent of hybrid offspring. However, as we shall see, demonic sexual encounters have persisted in various shapes and forms throughout history.

Otherworldly Sexual Encounters

Stories of spiritual beings who torment men and women at night with frightening but erotic sexual encounters literally go back to some of the earliest accounts in recorded history, with the Sumerians and Akkadians calling these beings Lilu (male) and Lilitu (female). It is from this backdrop of the Mesopotamian sex demons that the legend of Lilith formed, eventually making its way into Jewish traditions, and even garnering a mention in the book of Isaiah (Isa 34:14)—though her appearance there is obfuscated in English translations which usually render the word Lilith as night monster (NASB), night bird (ESV), or screech owl (KJV).

Besides the biblical, apocryphal, legendary, and ancient historical accounts of this phenomena, we also have evidence from more recent accounts. In early church history and throughout the Medieval period, there were cases of demons having sexual relations with women and men, typically at night, and against the victim’s will. A sex demon with male features, analogous to the Mesopotamian Lilu, was called an Incubus while a sex demon with female features, analogous to the Lilitu, was called a Succubus. Later European traditions in this vein—though diminished in their sexual undertones—included the Mare, from which the modern term nightmare is derived. Later traditions also used the term Cambion rather than Nephilim of any resultant offspring, which were much more dubious than the reports of the sexual encounters themselves.

But while there was much debate on the details and systems of classification of these encounters, they were widely recognized by the church. Even prominent church fathers such as Saint Augustine (354-430AD) and distinguished theologians such as Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274AD) weighed in on the topic. In his work De Civitate Dei, Augustine said,

Aquinas, in his work Summa Theologica, debated the mechanisms by which these encounters could operate in stating,

Aquinas, like most others, clearly was doubtful of the idea that demons were actually capable of producing offspring with humankind and therefore devised an alternative explanation. He hypothesized that demons appeared as Succubi to men in order to harvest their seed, and then turned around and appeared as Incubi to women in order to use that seed. However, he did not debate the veracity of the sexual encounters themselves. It is a bit ironic that Augustine acknowledged reports of Incubi when he was one of the church fathers who began to cast aspersion on the Book of Enoch. But as a result of the church slowly distancing itself from the supernatural Ancient Near Eastern view and adopting a more deist Western view, a shift in understanding and framework occurred which eventually altered the reporting of demonic sexual encounters quite dramatically.

Because in recent history, we have a plethora of cases involving alien abductions that include sexual abuse as well as the alleged harvesting of human sperm and eggs. Some abductees even claim that while aboard the "alien spacecraft" they saw specimens of human genetic hybrids in jars and tubes. But acknowledging the fact that an alarming majority of alien abductees become involved with the occult, it should be equally clear that these encounters are spiritual in nature. As our current culture is increasingly materialistic and rejects traditional religious beliefs and spirituality while accepting a naturalistic explanation of the universe around them, the only way they then can explain encounters with demons within their own paradigm is that they are alien life forms with greater technological advancements than that of our own species.

But these otherworldly visitors tip their hand occasionally when they give their names to their victims—typically by victims connecting with their former captors through occult practices. Unsurprisingly, they usually give names that are actually names of gods and goddesses of the Ancient Near East such as Ishtar and Molech. So either the exact same handful of aliens have been visiting Earth for thousands of years while constantly changing their appearance, aircraft, tactics and modus operandi, or these visitors are spiritual, eternal beings that revel in deception. The biblical text would strongly point to the latter, as would the modern evidence, because alien abduction case studies are nearly identical in description to demonic possession case studies.

So, it should be of no surprise that UFO researchers who have studied abduction cases have recognized that people of every nation, language, social status and religious belief except one are susceptible to alien abductions. Indeed, no one appears to be safe or immune to these experiences except, for some odd reason, Bible-believing Christians. UFO researchers have even found that anyone who happens to call upon the name of Jesus (usually as a last resort due to fear) during an alleged alien abduction has claimed that the abduction immediately and abruptly stops. This is a curiosity for UFO researchers, but shouldn't be for Christians—the name of Jesus is above all other names and in Him is power and authority over all things, including demonic beings.

This deception is a topic discussed at length in the article, Alien Theology, but Scripture is abundantly clear that only mankind can be redeemed and only mankind and angelic beings will be in eternity. In Genesis, God created life on Earth and Earth alone. Genesis records the creation of all the heavenly bodies (sun, moon, stars, galaxies, planets etc.) as well, but is also equally clear on their purpose—to provide light, signs, and seasons for those who dwell on Earth (Gen 1:14-19). Indeed, Earth is the centerpiece of God’s creation and the center of His attention (Gen 1:1, Isa 66:1 et al.). Scripture is also clear that man’s sin brought death not just to mankind, not just to the earth, but into all creation—the entire cosmos in Greek (Rom 8:19-22).

Despite this obvious and straight-forward reading of the Bible, many Westerners, including well-meaning Christians, believe in aliens. But tellingly, the secular and materialistic paradigm uses aliens as a substitute for spiritual beings. In popular culture, aliens are typically portrayed as so technologically and evolutionarily advanced, that they are practically supernatural. They are actually thought of as interdimensional beings—not merely extra-terrestrial ones. As such, they are not bound by the laws of the physical universe, including those governing mass, motion, or even mortality. In fact, our materialistic culture has rejected the idea of God and a spiritual reality to such a degree, that we reinterpret historical references to gods and spiritual beings as alien visitations.

This is especially true in the cases of ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt and an entire sub-culture has grown around the idea of the Anunnaki being aliens who came and enslaved humanity for thousands of years. Whereas ancient man believed the physical celestial bodies to represent a spiritual reality which he worshipped, modern materialistic man believes spiritual beings to represent a physical celestial reality which he worships. The error on both accounts being a conflation of the heavens.

However, these phenomena do raise the question that if the fallen angels who perpetrated these sexual acts before the flood were all chained in darkness, what spiritual beings are mimicking their behavior now? The Book of Enoch offers some insight, explaining that the evil spirits we commonly call demons are actually the disembodied spirits of the dead giants which were born of those fallen angels, and that they will continue to terrorize humanity until the day of judgement. While their fathers are bound in darkness until the day of judgement, they are sentenced to wander with an insatiable hunger, and an unquenchable thirst, full only of lust and appetite, doomed to roam to and fro on the earth without peace. Of course this should sound familiar because nearly every civilization throughout human history has developed concepts of hungry ghosts and wandering spirits who are unable to rest or enter the afterlife. Judaism and Christianity properly identify these spirits as not being the departed souls of human beings, but Enoch gives a much more clear explanation as to what they are, how they came to exist, and why they behave in such a manner.

That is not to say that all of the reports of these strange encounters from antiquity to modernity are true—it is very likely that many (possibly even most) are cries for attention or the result of an overactive imagination steeped in cultural beliefs. But in light of the biblical narrative and the historical prevalence and persistence of these accounts, it is much more difficult to dismiss all the evidence than to reconcile it. Though cultural contexts and perceptions have changed—particularly in Western nations—and therefore our rationalizations and explanations have changed, these frightening and often sexually invasive encounters remain. What are we to make of them if we deny the biblical account of the Nephilim and instead interpret Genesis (and indeed the rest of the Bible) in ways which we are simply more comfortable with?

Common Objections

There are at least four different interpretations of the Genesis 6 passage regarding the Nephilim and all of them have their proponents. I have presented the two most popular in this article: the argument that the "sons of God" were fallen angels and the argument that they were the male descendants of Seth. There are at least two others, though they are both much less popular. One view is that fallen angels simply possessed men and had relations with women vicariously through them (similar to Thomas Aquinas' view), while the other is that godly men simply took ungodly wives. Both views are compromises between the two main views that this article has discussed and therefore bring the worst of both arguments to the table. I will not go into the details of these minority-held arguments, but I will address the main arguments against the fallen angels view which I have put forth here.

All Nations Came from Adam

One argument critics use is from Acts 17:26 which states that all nations (Greek ethnos, meaning people groups) came from one man or one blood (depending on the manuscript and translation). They argue that this verse would not be true if some men were descendants or of the bloodline of fallen angels. At first glance this verse does seem to be a serious blow to the Watcher view, but it can be resolved and harmonized pretty easily. All nations or people groups have indeed descended from Adam and Eve (and later, Noah and family), but this does not preclude Nephilim from intermixing within those people groups.

In Revelation 7:9, we see people from every tribe, nation, and tongue in the throne room worshiping God, but that does not mean that every single family will be present. In the same way, all nations and tribes can be of the Adamic bloodline while Nephilim can be small aberrant families within those populations. The sons of Anak were only a small family line within the greater Philistine people group, after all. Even during the height of Nephilim offspring before the flood they were not described in Jewish traditions as going off and starting their own nation or city, but intermixed within the existing people groups. It was, in fact, the intermixing that was such a problem. So, Acts 17:26 is correct in saying that all people groups are descended from Adam even though some individual families within those people groups may have been Nephilim or descendants of Nephilim. Furthermore, Acts was written roughly a thousand years after David. So, even if there were entire people groups comprised of Nephilim, they had already been eradicated by the time of its writing, making its statement true.

Spirits Aren't Physical 

While I maintain that the textual, historical, and theological evidence, by far, best fits the view that the "sons of God" in Genesis chapter 6 were fallen angels who took on human form, there are arguments against this view. One is that demons are never ascribed the ability to take on human form in scripture. This is technically true, especially if we accept that demons are actually the disembodied spirits of the Nephilim. But we do know that angelic beings took on human form in the Bible and we also know that the Watchers were simply fallen angelic beings, so there is no reason to think that they are any less in ability or capability—particularly as Satan is traditionally regarded as the greatest of all the angels. I would tend to agree that demons, in the Enoch framework and explanation, do not have this ability, which would explain why the accounts of sex demons and alien sexual encounters all have a more ethereal, dream-like quality to them. They are psychologically and emotionally traumatizing, but lack the physical or biological byproducts, namely offspring.

Spirits Don't Have DNA 

But along that line of logic, another argument is that fallen angels are also purely spiritual beings and therefore have no physical DNA to pass on in order to produce any offspring. This is probably true if they only existed in spiritual form, but if they took on human form as angels did several times in scripture, then we must assume they were more than just visions or hollow bodies with flesh draped over them. But even if they were just skinned spirits, how were they able to manifest skin? Even skin contains blood, biology, and DNA, so this argument is a bit absurd. I cannot tell you how a powerful spiritual being is able to manifest itself as a physical being, but I can tell you that the Bible says that it is both possible and that it has happened—lest we disregard the biblical accounts of Abraham, Lot, Jacob, and others.

It is also critically important to note that there is one theologically irrefutable example of a spiritual being producing offspring with a human woman in scripture—the conception of Jesus. So, if a Christian argues that spirit and flesh are incapable of reproducing, they are unwittingly denying the very foundation of their own faith. Now, I am not equating the two here as the circumstances and details are vastly different. God did not take on human form and come to Mary to have relations with her. But obviously God is a spirit and therefore according to this argument, He does not have physical DNA necessary to form a zygote. However, Jesus was not the son of a man—God had to have provided the other half of the genetic information to Mary's egg in order for her to bear a child. The unique miracle here is the virgin birth—no sexual relations took place. However, that unique asexual miracle does not preclude spiritual beings from being able to sexually transmit DNA to a woman, as was the case with the Watchers.

Spirits Don't have Flesh 

Finally, the argument that critics of the fallen angels view purport to be the strongest against it comes from Jesus’ own words in Luke.

But they were startled and frightened and thought they saw a spirit. And he said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, "Have you anything here to eat?" They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them.

LUKE 24:37-43 (ESV)

Critics argue that Jesus said that spirits do not have flesh and bone and that this point was the major evidence of the miracle of the resurrection. Therefore, to assert that spirits can have flesh and bone would call into question the miracle of Christ’s resurrection and indeed the veracity of His words here in Luke. If this is actually the strongest argument against the Watcher view, it is robust, indeed. Clearly Jesus was reassuring His disciples that He was not a ghost, similar to when they feared Him when He walked on the water (Mat 14:26). Certainly a spirit—especially of an earthly dead human being—does not have flesh and bone, but Jesus did not say that a heavenly spiritual being cannot manifest flesh and bone. The Books of Enoch, Jubilees, and Giants do not claim that disembodied spirits had sexual relations with women, they claim angelic beings took on human form, just as other, non-controversial passages of scripture clearly describe, and then had relations with women.

If Jesus is claiming that spiritual beings cannot manifest flesh and bone, then He would be contradicting several biblical passages that claim angels did just that. And what about God’s own appearance to Jacob in Genesis 32:24-30? Jacob wrestled with a man all night and as a result, forever walked with a limp. Surely no one would argue he was wrestling with air, but with a physical, flesh and bone manifestation of a spiritual being which had real, physical consequences.

This argument gets even more absurd when you realize that just a few verses earlier in Luke 24:31, Jesus vanishes from sight and afterward, in Luke 24:51, ascended into heaven. In other words, though Jesus had flesh and bone at times, He was also a spiritual being who could disappear, walk through walls, and float into heaven, which would contradict His own words according to this argument. The miracle of the resurrection was not that Jesus had flesh and bone—after all, others had been resurrected both before Jesus and by Jesus and they had corporeal bodies as well (Lazarus being the most famous example).

Indeed, what made Jesus’ resurrection unique was the fact that He predicted it, performed it Himself, afterward was a glorified physical and spiritual being, and after His resurrection, He never tasted death again. No other man has ever been able to accomplish those feats. Jesus is called the firstborn of the resurrection (1 Co 15:20, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5) not because He was the first to ever be resurrected, but because He was the first to be resurrected permanently in a glorified eternal and immortal body and to have conquered death rather than to be resurrected temporarily—as Lazarus was—only to later succumb to death again.

Ancient Insights for the Modern Era 

So while there are certainly opponents of the fallen angel interpretation of Genesis 6, I hope that enough evidence has been produced, and plausible refutations of their arguments provided in this article to at least spark a curiosity which will hopefully lead to further research, critical thinking, and prayer on the reader's part. At the very least, I hope that you will read all of the scriptural (and even apocryphal) references I have included as I am confident that they will challenge you, regardless if you agree or disagree with the view presented. Scripture has an incredible and uncanny knack for taking us by surprise and opening our eyes to truths and wonders which we were ignorant of just moments earlier.

So, if nothing else, my prayer is that this investigation has encouraged you to dive into the Bible and its Ancient Near Eastern cultural context, and make some discoveries of your own. But Western societies have been slowly moving away from the supernatural realities described in Scripture for over 1,500 years, and though the Watchers and the Nephilim may be an affront to modern sensibilities, they may also be the shock necessary to bring us back to our spiritual senses and a proper understanding of the worldview Scripture was written in. A worldview where spiritual beings don't just watch, but also walk among us...

Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some

have entertained angels unawares.

HEBREWS 13:2 (ESV)