Genesis 6:2

2. Sons of God There has been much dispute as to the nature and character of the “sons of God” mentioned in this section . Three different theories have been maintained in the Jewish and Christian Churches . The first, arising apparently from the Samaritan, which translates the phrase sons of mighty men, is found in the Targums of Jonathan and Onkelos, and was maintained by eminent Jewish commentators, like Aben Ezra and Rashi, but is now abandoned. A second view, which seems to have some countenance from the LXX, some copies of which read αγγελοι του θεου , instead of υιοι του θεου , makes the sons of God angels, as in Job 1:6; Job 2:1. The Alexandrian commentators, and Jews who fell under strong Greek influences, as Philo and Josephus, in their anxiety to bridge over the chasm between Judaism and heathenism, and many of the Rabbins and oldest Church Fathers, (Justin . , Clem . , Alex . , Tertul . , Cyp . , etc . ,) adopted this view; while others of the Rabbins, and Chrysostom and Augustine, vehemently opposed it . Modern commentators who regard the early history of Genesis as mythical, as well as some orthodox commentators, from Luther to Stier and Delitzsch, embrace this view . The third view, that of Chrysostom, Cyril, etc . , and now generally held, is, that the “sons of God” were the children of the godly Sethite line . Against the second view it may be conclusively urged 1) that we have had thus far no account of the creation of the angels, and the author would not for the first time mention them thus incidentally . 2) Our Lord expressly says (Matthew 22:30) that angels “neither marry nor are given in marriage . ” 3) Although in poetical pieces (as in Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Job 38:7; Psalms 29:1; Psalms 89:6) angels are styled sons of God, in pure historical composition this never occurs. On the other hand, godly men and the chosen race are expressly said to stand in this filial relation to God. Exodus 4:22-23, “Israel is my son;” Deuteronomy 14:1, “Ye are the children of the Lord your God;” also, Hosea 11:1; Hosea 11:4) It is not the corruption of angels but of men that forms the subject of the narrative . No judgment is pronounced upon angels, but a flood destroys the race of men. If the sin of angels is here recorded, it is inappropriate to follow it with an account of the punishment of men. 5) “Sons of God,” is a Hebrew idiom for “men in the likeness of God.” Noah (Genesis 5:32) is called the “son of five hundred years;” Abraham calls Eliezer (Genesis 15:3) “son of my house;” Rachel named her son Benoni, “son of my sorrow,” but Jacob called him Benjamin, “son of the right hand;” “sons of the prophets” (1 Kings 20:35, etc . ) are the disciples or followers of the prophets . “Son” thus has a latitude of meaning in the Hebrew idiom that specially fits it to convey the idea of the text, as is also seen in the New Testament phraseology, wherein “sons of God” and “born of God” are applied to true Christians. John 1:12-13.

Took them wives of all which they chose Sensuality, polygamy, and the intermarriage of the Sethite and Cainite families were the great causes of the “corruption” and “violence” that now filled the earth. These causes may have been centuries in operation, even from the time of Seth and of Cain. The author has separately described the fleshly and the godly race; and now, after his manner, he returns to take up events which were transpiring contemporaneously. From the time that “men began to multiply” the godly race did not keep itself wholly distinct, but the “sons of God” looked on the beauty of the “daughters of men,” rather than on their moral character, and took them wives of all which they chose, that is, took such and as many as carnal choice might prompt. The personal charms of the daughters of the Cainites are commemorated in the names of Lamech’s wives, (Genesis 4:19,) yet we are not to suppose that it was these women only that are intended by the daughters of men . The phrase is general, and means simply womankind . The word מֶכל from all, is noteworthy and emphatic. The choice was indiscriminate among those that were fair, selecting one or many, according to a carnal desire. Not the amours of angels, but family degradation, does the historian assign as the great cause of the antediluvian corruption. This is written for our instruction. It is a solemn warning against poisoning with sin the family fountain. See the Mosaic law, Deuteronomy 7:3-4, repeated by Joshua . Joshua 23:12. Thus Israel was led into apostasy in the desert, (Numbers 25:0,) and in the time of the judges. Judges 3:6. Thus Solomon fell, and Ezra and Nehemiah could not deliver the restored nation from idolatry till the people had put away their “strange wives . ” The anxiety of Abraham concerning the marriage of Isaac, and of Isaac and Rebekah for their sons Jacob and Esau, (Genesis 24:3; Genesis 26:34-35; Genesis 27:46,) will illustrate the text.