Presentation on theme: "Genesis 6:1-8. Genesis 6:1-3 1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters."— Presentation transcript:
Genesis 6:1-3 1 When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the L ORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” (NIV)
Genesis 6:2 Three possibilities: 1.The sons of princes or kings (Jewish Scholars) 2.Rebellious angels who sinned (I/II Peter, Jude) 3.The Sethites (godly men), and the daughters of Cain (ungodly women) 4.(Also, could the Sethite men, and the daughters of Cain, have been demon possessed, which resulted in the deranged offspring of Genesis 6:4, through genetic engineering, etc?)
Genesis 6:2 If favor of the argument that fallen angels cohabitated with women: 1.The ‘Sons of God’ always refer to angels 2.The writer seems to be conveying the thought that fallen angels were acting in opposition to God’s will. This is the interpretation by the Greek translators of the Septuagint (LXX), by Josephus, by the writer of the apocryphal book of Enoch (which is quoted by Jude, the half-brother of Jesus), and by all other ancient Jewish and early Christian writers up to the time of Augustine (died 430 AD)
Genesis 6:2 3.Many assume it is impossible for angels to have sexual relations with human women, and to father children by them. 4.It is true that the Lord Jesus said that ‘in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven’ (Matt. 22:30). 5.When Jesus said that angels of God in heaven do not marry, this does not necessarily mean that those who have been cast out of heaven were incapable of doing so.
Genesis 6:2 6.Satan had not forgotten God’s prophecy that a promised Seed of the Woman would one day destroy him. 7.Some commentaries reason that, since the phrase ‘took them wives’ is the same phrase as normally used throughout the OT for ‘taking a wife,’ there can be nothing involved here other than normal human marriage. (#3 option above where the Sethite men took Cainite women as wives)
Genesis 6:2 8. “If, for the sake of argument at least, we assume that the bene elohim (sons of Elohim/ God) were, indeed, angels, and that angels can assume such a total human form that they actually have male reproductive systems, then a grave question would have to be posed relative to the nature of the progeny that would result from their sexual intercourse with human women” (Morris, p. 167)
Genesis 6:2 9.This situation seems grotesque, and it seems doubtful that Almighty God would have allowed it at all, even if it were physiologically a realistic possibility (as Walvoord argues in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, OT) 10.If we hold to the doctrine of divine inspiration of Scripture, we can’t hold to the idea that the writer didn’t write what he meant to write---or that he simply got his facts confused.
Genesis 6:2 11.Rationalistic exegetes accept the plain meaning of these texts, and agree that it speaks of angels cohabiting with human women. But then, being rationalists, they maintain that since this sort of thing is impossible (in their theological position), the writer of Genesis was simply drawing on the myths and legends of demigods in various religious traditions.
Genesis 6:2 Conclusion 12.The Septuagint (LXX) (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament), renders the phrase ‘sons of God’ as ‘angels of God’ when it was translated This translation is preferred, in light of three NT passages This translation is preferred, in light of three NT passages Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4-6, I Peter 3:19-20 Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4-6, I Peter 3:19-20 This union of angel/humans sexually, if it were even possible, would seem theologically paradoxical, and grotesque in nature, but seems to be what is suggested This union of angel/humans sexually, if it were even possible, would seem theologically paradoxical, and grotesque in nature, but seems to be what is suggested
Conclusion: In light of NT texts in I/II Peter, and Jude, there seem to be evil, rebellious angels, who cohabitated with human women, and produced an evil generation of giants, who morally corrupted the entire earth, except for Noah, and three of his sons & their wives (8)
Genesis 6:2 Q: What about other passages, such as Luke 3:38, which concludes the genealogy of Mary with “the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam,[who was] the son of God”? A: Several factors appear when considering the doctrine of sonship. Sonship involves an actual begetting on the part of parents, resulting in legitimate sonship and legitimate parenthood if done lawfully. (Chafer, V. VII, p. 290). (Note the latitude of the OT use of the term ‘son’, and the importance of context in Biblical interpretation) Note also that most translations omit the past tense verb ‘was’ when translating this passage, which occurs only here in the genealogical record of Luke 3
Genesis 6:2 Q: What about other passages which describe Christians as ‘sons of God’? A: Christians are not sons of God on the same plane of being as Jesus Christ. (Heb. 1:6). He is unique in that He alone can be the full revealer of the Father to men (John 1:14-18) and the Mediator between God and men (John 3:16-18; I John 4:9) The Bible recognizes the usual meaning of the word adoption, which is the placing of one rightfully outside blood ties into the position of a legal child in the family
Genesis 6:2 “The spiritual use of the word adoption signifies the placing of a newborn child…into the position of privilege and responsibility attached to an adult son. Here an important distinction appears between two Greek words, namely, teknion---used to denote little children who are under the authority of parents, tutors, and governors (John 13:33)---and vios---used to denote an adult son. Since spiritual adoption occurs at the time one is saved and thus becomes a child of God, there is no childhood period recognized in the Christian’s experience. (‘Babes in Christ’ in I Cor. 3:1 has no relation to immaturity, but to an unspiritual or carnal state)” (Chafer, V. VII, p. 10)
Genesis 6:2 “Adoption (huiothesia, ‘placing as a son’) is not so much a word of relationship as of position. The believer’s relation to God as a child results from the new birth (John 1:12-13), whereas adoption is the act of God whereby one [who] already is a child, through redemption from the law, placed in the position of an adult son (Gal. 4:1-5). The indwelling Spirit gives the realization of this in the believer’s present experience (Gal. 4:6); but the full manifestation of the believer’s sonship awaits the resurrection, change, and translation of the saints, which is called ‘the redemption of the body’ (Rom. 8:23; I Thess. 4:14-17; Eph. 1:14; I John 3:2 ) (Scofield Reference Bible, p. 1250, edited).
Genesis 6:2 Q: How does Jesus differ as the ‘only begotten Son of God’? A: There are five ‘sonships’ of Christ: a.The Son of God, declared as the only begotten who is the unique Son, the first-begotten from all eternity (Matt. 16:16). The only begotten Son is that association in the Godhead which can be best illustrated to man by the relationship of father and son. Certain theories are to be rejected, namely, that Christ is a begotten Son because of the incarnation (physical birth), that Christ became a begotten Son by the resurrection (following death), that Christ is the begotten Son only by title, or that He can be the begotten Son by official position. He is the first of those begotten by God and therefore pre-eminent or before all others who ever will be begotten. (LS Chafer, V VII, p. 245, edited)
Genesis 6:2 b.The Son of Adam, the Son of man. The human aspect of Christ’s sonship is revealed in Matt. 8:20 c.The Son of Abraham, as it relates to the Abrahamic covenant (Matt. 1:1) d.The Son of David, as it relates to the Davidic covenant (Matt. 21:9) e.The Son of Mary, as He relates to His birth at the incarnation where He received a human body without male involvement (Matt. 1:25)
3 Then the L ORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal (flesh) ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years.” (NIV-a moderate paraphrase) 3 Then G OD said, “I’m not going to breathe life into men and women endlessly. Eventually they’re going to die; from now on they can expect a life span of 120 years.” (The Message---a paraphrase) 3 Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years” (NASB)
Genesis 6:3 Q: When God said “My spirit shall not always strive with man,” does He mean the Holy Spirit, or the spirit which He has breathed into mankind’s body? A-1: The most natural reading would be ‘the Holy Spirit’ in His ministry of ‘convicting the world of sin, righteousness and judgment’ (John 16:8) The Hebrew word used for ‘strive’ is dowon (‘to judge’, ‘to defend’, or ‘to dispute’, ‘to plead’, or ‘to quarrel’), which is used only here in the Bible, and knowing that does not help to clarify the meaning.
Genesis 6:3 A-2: Could it be speaking of the divine life that God has put into each human being, and God is about to withdraw that spirit from all mankind (except Noah & family), putting an end to their immoral, unethical conduct. (K & D, p. 135) “Men, says God, have proved themselves by their erring and straying, to be flesh, i.e. given up to the flesh, and incapable of being ruled by the Spirit of God and led back to the divine goal of their life” (K & D, p. 136)
Genesis 6:3 A-2: ‘flesh’ – () in the NT, denotes not merely the natural corporeality of mankind, but his materiality as rendered ungodly by sin. (K & D, p. 136) (Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 1, p. 103) A-2: ‘flesh’ – (σ ά ρκας) in the NT, denotes not merely the natural corporeality of mankind, but his materiality as rendered ungodly by sin. (K & D, p. 136) (Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 1, p. 103) Man has become no better than the animals: he is dominated exclusively by the flesh, no longer concerned with God but only with his own bodily appetites, just as the animals. (Morris, p. 171) 6:13 – “the end of all flesh is come before me” 7:21 – “all flesh died…”
Genesis 6:3 A-2: ‘flesh’ – () A-2: ‘flesh’ – (σ ά ρκας) Paul uses the word ‘flesh’ as a type of the conflict between the believer’s spirit (as illumined and energized by God’s Spirit) and his flesh, the natural, and carnal nature with which he was born Romans 8:5 – “For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, [set their minds on] the things of the Spirit”
Genesis 6:3 A-2: ‘flesh’ – () A-2: ‘flesh’ – (σ ά ρκας) Galatians 5:16-21 – “But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh, for the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envyings, drunkenness, carousings, and things like these, of which I forewarn you just as I have forewarned you that those who practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God”
Genesis 6:3 A-2: ‘flesh’ – () A-2: ‘flesh’ – (σ ά ρκας) I Corinthians 6:9-11 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you; but you were washed…sanctified…justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God” FornicatorsNor idolators Nor adulterersNor effeminate Nor homosexualsNor thieves Nor the covetousNor drunkards Nor revilersNor swindlers
Genesis 6:3 A-2: ‘flesh’ – () A-2: ‘flesh’ – (σ ά ρκας) I Corinthians 2:14 “But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.” I Corinthians 3:2-3 “I gave you [spiritual] milk to drink, not solid [spiritual] food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?”
Genesis 6:3 Q: Is Genesis 6:3 speaking of mankind in general, or Adam in particular? (the word ‘man’ is ‘Adam’ in Hebrew, and He may have still been alive when God spoke these words, perhaps in the days of Enoch’s preaching) A: Because of the world-wide cataclysmic Flood, He obviously meant all mankind, not just Adam, because all died in the Flood, except those on the Ark (8). Adam (and Eve, probably) had died 726 years previous to the Flood (at the age of 930; the Flood came at 1656, based on the genealogical chart in Genesis 5).
Genesis 6:3 Q: What is meant by ‘one hundred and twenty years’? Is it a reference to mankind’s future longevity? Probably, but Abraham lived 175 years (Gen. 25:7); but Moses lived 125 (Deuteronomy 31:2) Is it a reference to mankind’s future longevity? Probably, but Abraham lived 175 years (Gen. 25:7); but Moses lived 125 (Deuteronomy 31:2) Is it a reference to the time yet remaining before the coming of the Flood? Possibly, but who would have been the preacher who declared the message? Methusaleh? Enoch was gone. Noah? God may have allowed 120 years of preaching that some might be saved (none were) (2 Peter 3:9) Is it a reference to the time yet remaining before the coming of the Flood? Possibly, but who would have been the preacher who declared the message? Methusaleh? Enoch was gone. Noah? God may have allowed 120 years of preaching that some might be saved (none were) (2 Peter 3:9) Is it a reference to the time between the prophecy, and the time left before Adam dies? Doubtful Is it a reference to the time between the prophecy, and the time left before Adam dies? Doubtful
Genesis 6:3 Q: What does it mean when the LORD emphasized that man was also ‘flesh’? A: Probably, it is referring to the fact that mankind has a three-part nature, body (flesh), soul (emotions), and spirit. Since the witness of God’s Spirit to man’s spirit has been rejected, there was no purpose to be served any longer in maintaining his physical life and continued multiplication. Mankind had become no better than the animals
Genesis 6:3 Q: What does “one hundred and twenty years”? A: Could it refer to one of the preachers of righteousness warning those living on the earth at the time that judgment was coming ‘in one hundred and twenty years’ and to repent? If this is the case, and we know that God is not willing that any should perish (I Peter 3:20), it would be sufficient time for even infants to grow to maturity and repent.