What Scripture says
Genesis 6:1–4 is one of the most puzzling passages in the Bible:
“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… 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)
God then announces the flood (Genesis 6:5–7).
Related passages:
- “Sons of God” refers to heavenly beings elsewhere in the Old Testament: they present themselves before God (Job 1:6, Job 2:1) and shouted for joy at creation (Job 38:7). Compare Psalm 82:1, where God judges “in the midst of the gods”, and Psalm 89:6–7.
- Nephilim appear again when Israelite spies describe tall people in Canaan: “there we saw the Nephilim… and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers” (Numbers 13:33).
- Angels who sinned are mentioned in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6–7, which link their sin with Sodom’s pursuit of “strange flesh”.
- Angels and marriage. Jesus says that in the resurrection people “neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven” (Matthew 22:30).
What the evidence says
Context
There are three main views. Each has had serious defenders.
1. Fallen angels
Heavenly beings took human wives, and their children were the Nephilim.
- For: It is the oldest known interpretation, found in 1 Enoch (3rd century BC), Jubilees, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Josephus and the early Greek translation of the Old Testament (some copies read “angels of God”). Most early Christian writers held it, including Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Tertullian. It fits the use of “sons of God” in Job. Jude 6–7 and 2 Peter 2:4 seem to allude to it.
- Against: Jesus says angels don’t marry (Matthew 22:30). Supporters reply that he speaks of angels “in heaven”, not rebels who left their position. Others find the idea of angels fathering children hard to accept.
- Today: Defended by scholars such as Michael Heiser and many Old Testament scholars who read the text in its ancient setting.
2. The line of Seth
The godly descendants of Seth married the ungodly descendants of Cain, corrupting the line.
- For: It avoids angel–human unions. It fits the contrast between Cain’s line (Genesis 4) and Seth’s (Genesis 5) that comes just before. God’s judgment falls on humans, which fits human sin.
- Against: Genesis 6 never mentions Seth or Cain. “Daughters of man” most naturally means human women generally, not one family line. It doesn’t explain why the children would be “mighty men”.
- History: Became popular from the 4th century, through writers such as Julius Africanus, Augustine and later the Reformers.
3. Ancient kings
“Sons of God” was a title for rulers in the ancient Near East. Tyrant kings took whatever women they wanted, building harems, and claimed divine status.
- For: Kings were sometimes called sons of a god in the ancient world. It fits the theme of human pride and violence leading to the flood. Some Jewish interpreters, such as the Aramaic translations (Targums), took it this way.
- Against: “Sons of God” is rarely used of kings in the Bible itself.
- Today: Defended by scholars such as John Walton.
| View | Who are the “sons of God”? | Oldest support |
|---|---|---|
| Fallen angels | Heavenly beings | 1 Enoch, Jubilees, most early Christians |
| Line of Seth | Seth’s godly descendants | Julius Africanus, Augustine |
| Ancient kings | Tyrant rulers | Some Jewish Aramaic translations |
Who were the Nephilim?
“Nephilim” may come from the Hebrew word for “to fall”, so “fallen ones”, though this is debated. The Greek translation rendered it gigantes (giants). Numbers 13:33 links them with very tall people. But Genesis itself only calls them “mighty men… men of renown”. A further puzzle: they existed “also afterward” (Genesis 6:4), and appear in Numbers 13, even though the flood destroyed everyone outside the ark. Some suggest the spies used the name loosely, for people who seemed like the giants of old.
Where they meet
Every view agrees on the passage’s point: humanity’s corruption had spread so far, through pride, violence and boundary-crossing, that judgment was coming. The Nephilim story explains why the flood followed (Genesis 6:5–7).
What’s still open
- Which of the three views is right. Scholars across traditions hold each one.
- How the Nephilim could appear “also afterward” if the flood destroyed them.
- What “Nephilim” means.
Bottom line
Three views have serious support: fallen angels with human women (the oldest, also in Enoch), Seth’s line marrying Cain’s line, or ancient kings. The text doesn’t settle it, so this is rated Debated.