Category Days of Noah

The spies’ report determined the next forty years for the Israelites. Their lack of trust in what God could do denied them the opportunity to see the hand of God work in their lifetime. However, we must not discount the facts of their report. They first of all mention that the people of the land were stronger than they were. It is a land that devours its inhabitants and “all the people that we saw in it are of great height“. There were not just a few tall people there – but all of the people were enormous. In fact these people were so tall and large that the Israelites likened themselves to grasshoppers compared to these Nephilim “and we were like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight” (Numbers 13:33).

Having first described the people of the land, they then mention them by name “the descendants of Anak came from the giants [Nephilim],” (Numbers 13:33). Notice that Joshua and Caleb do not deny the report. They simply have the faith that God will do what he said. The Nephilim are the reason why the children of Israel did not possess the land right after leaving Egypt. The presence of the Nephilim disheartened the spies who consequently gave a bad report. God, though very upset at the people’s lack of trust, nevertheless agreed with the description of the people of the land being of a great height and also agreed with the comparison of the Israelites appearing like grasshoppers. Though years later, in Amos 2:9 God says:

Yet it was I who destroyed the Amorite before them, Whose height was like the height of the cedars, And he was as strong as the oaks; Yet I destroyed his fruit above And his roots beneath, (Amos 2:9).

God’s endorsement is significant; He states the height of the Amorites was like the cedars and God also likens the tail of the mighty Behemoth [i] to a cedar in Job 40. “Look now at the behemoth, which I made along with you; He eats grass like an ox. See now, his strength is in his hips, and his power is in his stomach muscles. He moves his tail like a cedar,” (Job 40:15-18). God is clearly not saying that his tail was merely stiff for any tree might be used to communicate that message. However, the cedar is a tree that was renown in the ancient world and the cedars of Lebanon were famous for their immense height. According to one source cedar trees can grow anywhere from 40-85 feet tall [ii] and the cedar of Lebanon being among the tallest. In my book The First Six Days, I discuss size of the tail of the mighty behemoth because God there likens it to a cedar of Lebanon. “God states what his bones are like […] the picture is given that the bones of this creature were of immense strength implying that the creature itself was extremely big to need such strong bones.” [iii]

The description fits the Sauropod class of dinosaurs extremely well and the dinosaur with the longest tail is thought to be the Diplodocus. One source suggests that the tail [iv] may have been up to 46 feet long! God’s description of the behemoth is not an exaggeration but consistent with what we currently understand about dinosaurs. It could be that the cedars that Job was associated with measured more in the 40-60 foot range. Thus, just to be as conservative as possible – if we assume the minimum height of the cedar that God had in mind was only 40 feet then we have a likely maximum height for the Amorites. How can we calculate the minimum height of these giants (at that time)?

Size of a Cubit in Moses’ Day

Moses describes the size of the bed of King Og of Bashan, who, as we saw, was one of the Nephilim.

For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of the Rephaim [NKJV Giants]; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbah of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man, (Deuteronomy 3:11 JPS).

Moses clearly says that this man’s bed was nine cubits but just how big is a cubit? According to the Oxford Dictionary a cubit was:

1. The part of the arm from the elbow downward; the forearm.

2. An ancient measure of length derived from the forearm; varying at different times and places, but usually 18 to 22 inches. The Roman cubit was 17.4 inches; the Egyptian 20.64 inches.

Tim Lovett, an expert on ancient shipbuilding, reviewed the references for cubits from around the world in order to get a firm understanding of how long the cubit was that Noah used in the Ark. [v] He notes that the shortest was the Greek Short Cubit of 14 inches (356 millimeters) and among the longest were the Persian (Royal) cubit of 25.2 inches (640 millimeters) and the Arabic (Hashimi) of 25.56 inches (649 millimeters). The cubit varied over the centuries by as much as nearly one foot! However, we can be quite confident of the measure that was being referred to concerning King Og. Clearly, the Greek, Persian and Arabic Empires were not around in Moses’ day, so that immediately eliminates their running in this race; the only empire that fits is Egypt.

Moses had just come out of Egypt and Stephen in Acts 7:22 tells us that Moses was “learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians.” Since we have no record of God instituting a new form of measurement, we can safely conclude that any measurements given would then be in the one that all of the people of Israel would have been familiar with. In fact, considering that they were slaves forced to make bricks and to build store houses, measurements would have been very important for them. The most natural and in fact only measurement that they could have known was the Egyptian. Thus when Moses says that Og’s bed measured nine cubits long we are obligated to calculate using the Egyptian standard of that day.

Tim Lovett notes that the original Royal Egyptian [vi] cubit had a range of 20.62 inches (523.75 millimeters) to 20.65 inches (525 millimeters) while the average was 20.63/4 (524.00 millimeters). This is corroborated by two places in the Scriptures which make reference to this older and longer cubit. King Solomon used the older measure where we read in 2 Chronicles 3:3: “The length was sixty cubits (by cubits according to the former measure).” In Ezekiel’s vision of the future temple the measurement that will be employed will be apparently the older and hence longer measure. “These are the measurements of the altar in cubits (the cubit is one cubit and a handbreadth)”, (Ezekiel 43:13).

Figure 4 – Egyptian Royal Cubit

Therefore we can confidently conclude that the cubit Moses was referring to was in fact the Egyptian Royal cubit which was 20.63 inches. [vii]

Multiplying 20.63 inches, (524.00 millimeters) by nine (cubits) we arrive at 185.67 inches (4716 millimeters) for the total length of his bed. Converted into our measurements, it was almost fifteen feet six inches (15.47 feet 4.716 meters) long and its width six feet ten inches (6.87 feet, 2.094 meters)! This is one massive bed! Moses also mentions that the bed was made of iron which would preclude the idea that a small man with a big ego slept on it otherwise there would be no need to mention the fact that the bed was physically strong (of iron) in order to support someone of such enormous proportions. Thus we can assume that Og must have been slightly shorter than the bed that he slept on and therefore make him roughly 15 feet (4.55 meters) tall!

However, it is plausible that by “bed” Moses in fact meant his final bed – that is his sarcophagus (coffin). This would make sense from the fact that: a) there is no unique word for sarcophagus in Hebrew other than bed and b) this “bed” was apparently on display “Is it not in Rabbah of the people of Ammon?” (Deuteronomy 3:11). It would seem strange to just have the bed of their former king lying around apparently on display. However, being able to visit the sarcophagus of their fallen king is very plausible. If that is the case, then it would suggest that the “bed” was not for nightly sleeping but was made just big enough for his body to be placed in. Thus, those dimensions more aptly describe the true size of this Rephaim king who measured nearly fifteen feet five inches tall and had a shoulder width of almost six feet ten inches.

Just How Tall Was That?

To get an idea of just how massive a person of this size was, consider the following chart. Note that the man on the left is six feet, the approximate height for most western men. Next to him stands Goliath measuring about 10’ 4”tall, the twelve foot man then doubles today’s man and finally King Og, who measured some fifteen feet tall dwarfed today’s average man!

We must point out that the giants that inhabited the land were not just tall men like basketball players of today. Nor were the ancient Israelites significantly shorter than today and thus upon seeing men over six or seven feet they thought them to be giants as some liberal theologians would suggest! King Og was at least 2.5 times taller than a man measuring six feet tall. These measurements are conceivable if indeed fallen angels took women and procreated the Nephilim according to Genesis 6. However, these measurements are illogical in light of the sons of Seth and daughters of man theory because a godly person and a non-godly person will not have children 15 feet tall! However, demons and humans would presumably produce such enormous children.

How Heavy Was King Og?

Let’s just consider the implications of a person that tall. Let’s assume that he would be equivalent to a man of 200 pounds – someone who is in shape, but not trying to be a professional athlete and is approximately 6 feet tall. We know that king Og of Bashan was 2.5 times taller – but how much heavier would he be? Galileo in the early 1600s considered the issue in relation to animals, but the principle is true for people as well. The Indian Institute of Astrophysics notes Galileo’s theorization concerning the relation of size to strength (of bone [m1] ) and structure:

Consider two animals of different sizes that are geometrically similar. If the larger is twice as long as the smaller animal, it is also twice as wide and twice as high. The larger creature outweighs its smaller counterpart eight times. (Indian Institute of Astrophysics 2006)

The above formula is 2 x 2 x 2 = 8. Therefore to calculate King Og’s weight we need the cube of 2.5 which is 15.625. That is to say that King Og of Bashan would have weighed 15.625 times more than a six foot man today and thus he would weigh (15.625 x 200 =) 3125 pounds (1420 kilograms). Considering that King Og was a warrior, we can presume that he could at least lift the equivalent of his own body weight (a 200 hundred pound man can potentially lift 400-500 pounds or 2 times his own body weight). Thus, even if he could only lift his own body weight, he still would have been able to lift two war horses (1500 pounds each) at once with its rider and throw it! In modern terms he could lift a midsize car!

A Land That Devours Its Inhabitants

The Israelites also said that it is a “land that devours its inhabitants”. It would be easy to suggest that they were simply exaggerating or using hyperbole. However, when we consider how much King Og must have eaten, we begin to see that they were giving an accurate description of what the giants were like! If we use the more conservative weight calculation then he would have needed to consume at least 22,657 calories per day just to stay alive as per the Basal Metabolic Rate [viii] which calculates, based on a person’s height and weight, how many calories they need to live if they are not doing any significant work per day. Let’s put that into perspective to see how he and the other giants his size were devouring the inhabitants, which were presumably animals and hopefully not humans.

First of all today’s average American eats about 4000 calories per day [m2]. In 1909 the average American was eating about 3500 calories per day – about 500 less than today [ix] (although the recommended daily calorie intake is only two thousand). King Og therefore was eating the amount equivalent to about six or seven modern Americans. However, how much was the average person in his day eating? While they didn’t leave us detailed records, based on their stature 5’6” to 5’7” and the type of food they had plus the fact that none of today’s sugars and processed foods were available, we can estimate that their calorie intake was about 1600 calories [x] per day. That means that King Og needed, just to stay alive, the same as approximately nine normal sized persons. However, if we convert his needs into pizzas he would need 12 – 12 inch pizzas (1840 calories each). If we convert that to cheeseburgers then he would need 63 cheeseburgers [xi] daily and converted into lamb he would consume an entire lamb about every two or three days [xii] just to just to maintain his daily basic needs. [m3] Just imagine if he were having a party or getting ready to go to war! Of course, all of these calculations are only for his Basil Metabolic Rate which is the minimum needed to stay alive each day.  His actual consumption was quite possibly double and that is assuming that he was not an overeater. Given the fact that he was a giant, he may have just kept eating and eating! He might have had the equivalent of over 30 pizzas or 150 cheeseburgers per day!

Generally the strongest people get first pick on their food preferences, it would be easy to see how just to feed one giant could easily require numerous animals, plants, fruits, plus water and wine. Therefore, the spies were not exaggerating when they said that it was a land that devours its inhabitants. The Nephilim were certainly eating continually and many animals must have been given to satisfy their nearly insatiable appetites. Therefore we can empathize with the Israelites and the fear they had of the inhabitants of the land who “devoured its inhabitants!” Nevertheless, how sad that they did not (and often we do not) take God at His Word when He exhorted them with these mighty words:

Therefore understand today that the LORD your God is He who goes over before you as a consuming fire. He will destroy them and bring them [the gigantic inhabitants] down before you; so you shall drive them out and destroy them quickly, as the LORD has said to you, (Deuteronomy 9:3).

Approximately 500 years later David would face the giant Goliath, who was also descended from the Rephaim (I Chronicles 20:5, 6). Goliath, measured a mere six cubits (20.6”x6 cubits = 10.3 feet [10’ 4”]). That means that Goliath was 1.72 times taller than a man of six feet. Again, using our cube formula for calculating weight, we need to find the cube of 1.72 which is 5.088 and multiplying that times our 200 lb. man Goliath would weigh 1068 lbs. Thus King Og weighed about 3100 lbs. and Goliath, who was one third shorter than Og, weighed approximately 1000 – they were two enormous people which simply underscores the reason the Israelites feared them. The biblical evidence is conclusive that the Nephilim were in fact men of extraordinary stature and that they descended from human mothers and fallen angel fathers.

Extra-Biblical Confirmation

Numbers 13 of Targum Jonathan states that the giants were masters of evil:

The country through which we have passed to explore it is a land that killeth its inhabitants with diseases; and all the people who are in it are giants, masters of evil ways. And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, of the race of the giants; (Targum Jonathan, Numbers 13, emphasis mine).

The Targum makes reference to the giants of the land as being of the same stock as those that perished in the flood, which again, would prove that they believed them to be Nephilim.

The Emthanaia dwelt in it of old, a people great and many, and mighty as the giants. The giants who dwelt in the plain of Geyonbere were also reputed as the giants who perished in the Flood; but the Moabites called them Emethanee, (Targum Jonathan, Deuteronomy 2, emphasis mine).

Lastly we see in Targum Jonathan how the ancient Jews believed and understood Moses’ saying that the Lord your God is “He who goes over before you as a consuming fire. He will destroy them and bring them down before you.” They understood it as a reference to His Shechinah which is also known as the Word. Notice that the giants were indeed bigger and mightier than the Israelites. In fact they were so great, God said that He personally would take care of them.

Hear, Israel: you are this day (about) to pass Jordan to enter in and possess (the country of) nations greater and stronger than you, and cities many, and fortified to the height of heaven. A people (are they) strong and tall as the giants whom you know, and of whom you have heard (say), Who can stand before the sons of the giants? Know, therefore, today that the Lord your God, whose glorious Shekinah goeth before you, whose Word is a consuming fire, will destroy them and drive them out before you; so shall you drive them out, and destroy them quickly, as the Lord your God hath said to you. (Targum Jonathan Deuteronomy 9, emphasis mine).

Josephus and Baruch

We next turn to Josephus who described the giants as being extremely large and whose bones were still available even in his day.

For which reason they removed their camp to Hebron; and when they had taken it, they slew all the inhabitants. There were till then left the race of giants, who had bodies so large, and countenances so entirely different from other men, that they were surprising to the sight, and terrible to the hearing. The bones of these men are still shown to this very day, unlike to any credible relations of other men, (emphasis mine). [xiii]

Very much like Josephus, the writer of the book of Baruch mentions their fame and great height. “There were the giants famous from the beginning, that were of so great stature, and so expert in war.” (Baruch, Chapter 3:26).

Book of Jubilees

The book of Jubilees, from the Dead Sea Scrolls, also records the fact of the giants’ great height and even gives specific measurements. “But before they used to call the land of Gilead the land of the Rephaim; for it was the land of the Rephaim, and the Rephaim were born (there), giants whose height was ten, nine, eight down to seven cubits.” (emphasis mine). [xiv]

Tertullian

We last turn to the church father, Tertullian, who wrote that the giants’ bodies were still around in his day. He believed that their remains would contain the needed DNA (germs was the term of his day) to bring them to life again.

There are the carcasses of the giants of old time; it will be obvious enough that they are not absolutely decayed, for their bony frames are still extant. […] the lasting germs of that body which is to sprout into life again in the resurrection, (emphasis mine). [xv]

Biblical and Extra-Biblical Conclusions

Thus we can conclude that Nephilim and all of the other names that are in Scripture for them were not merely the offspring of a human father with a human mother. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the Nephilim came about as a result of the “good” sons of Seth turning “bad” and then connecting with the bad daughters of Cain. The ancient world believed until the time of Augustine about the Nephilim. Every ante-Nicene interpreter (Jewish and Christian) understood the sons of God to be angels who had sexual relations with women. The offspring of those relationships were the Nephilim. If there were demonic-human (Nephilim) hybrids in the days of Noah and afterwards then what will there be at the time of Jesus’ return?

Sons of God

Previously we saw that the sons of God were in fact fallen angels (demons) who had relations with the daughters of Adam. Their union produced unique offspring which the Bible refers to as Nephilim.

The Nephilim [hanephilim הַנְּפִילִ֛ים] 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 6:4 ESV).

The Hebrew word Nephilim comes from the root naphal meaning to fall. Gesenius in his Hebrew Lexicon notes: “Those who used to interpret the passage in Genesis of the fall of the angels, were accustomed to render [נְּפִילִ֛ים] fallers, rebels, apostates.” The Greek Septuagint, translated approximately 270 B.C. translates the word as “the giants” (oi gigantes οι γιγαντες). We find that this same word was used in classical Greek literature to refer to men or creatures that were half god and half man. [i] Jonathan M. Hall in his book Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity notes that gegenes in fact means “earth born”: “From the time of the Iliad, Erekhtheus was treated as a son of the earth, and Herodotus calls him gegenes (“earth-born”)” [ii] “gigantic” or “monstrous”.

In Greek mythology the Giants (from gegenes) were the children of Heaven (Uranos Ουρανός) and Earth (Gaea Γαία) (though some would argue that their father was Tartaros, the hell pit [iii]). “The giants of Greek mythology, or Gigantes (‘the earth-born‘) as they are called in the Greek tongue, were a class of oversized and ofttimes monstrous men who were closely related to the gods.” [iv] Consider also Kekrôps, who according to Apollodorus (iii. 14. § 1, &c.) was the first king of Attica, was known as “a gêgenês, the upper part of whose body was human, while the lower was that of a dragon.” [v]

If the translators of the Septuagint didn’t want us to think about demigods or men of enormous stature, they sure picked the wrong word! However, if by gegenes they understood hybrids between fallen angels (“the gods”) and women, then they chose the perfect word to describe these ungodly and unnatural creatures which parallels the biblical description of the sons of God (from the heavenlies) coming down to earth and fathering children. Considering the exposure those Alexandrian Jews must certainly have had to Greek literature and the numerous stories of giants, we would be completely ignoring their testimony if we were to understand the word as anything other than creatures who were hybrids of fallen angels and humans – who were also of colossal stature. In fact, in Greek mythology these Giants were sometimes 30 feet tall! If the translators had wanted to merely indicate that these men were the offspring of the godly line of Seth and the ungodly line of Cain, they should have chosen a different word.

Targum Jonathan translates Genesis 6:4 “Schamchazai and Uzziel, who fell from heaven, were on the earth in those days.” Shamchazai and Uzziel were fallen angels that we saw in the book of Enoch as being the ones that took the daughters of men. Targum Jonathan specifically adds “who fell from heaven” giving testimony to how they understood the word Nephilim. Targum Onkelos translates the verse in a similar fashion: “Giants were in the earth in those days; and also when, after that the sons of the mighty had gone in unto the daughters of men,” (Targum Onkelos, Genesis 6:4 emphasis mine). The interpretation of this verse is very consistent in the ancient witnesses: Demons came down from their habitation and took wives and from their sexual union came a race of giants which were hybrids: half-man and half-demon.

If one should ask how there could be Nephilim afterward when they were all destroyed in the flood the answer is simple: the fathers of the Nephilim were demons. While it appears that the demons that crossed the line when mingling with humans were thrown into the pit, other demons must have taken woman and had Nephilim with them after the flood. As a result we discovered that there were Nephilim in the land of Canaan when the children of Israel came to take possession of their Promised Land. Upon seeing the Nephilim they lost faith that God could win the battle for them and so they were taken back to the wilderness where they wandered for another forty years. When they came back to the land forty years later, the Nephilim were still there, but the children of Israel finally trusted in God.

According to the Bible, Who Were the Nephilim?

Looking at the ancient translations gives us a solid start as to what the word Nephilim means. Let’s now look at what else the Bible has to say about these gigantic half-man, half-demon hybrids. First of all we note that there are a series of verses which act as equations just like saying: A=B=C. Even though each letter is unique and has a different name, the value is the same for all. For example four quarters are equal to ten dimes, which are equal to one dollar. In the same way the verses concerning the Nephilim show us that they were known by different names in different countries, but they were equal and one and the same.

The following table demonstrates the equation of giants to each other that appears in Scripture. In the left column is the name given to a group of giants (starting with the Nephilim) with an equal sign to the name of the corresponding giants in another place. The right column gives the truncated portion of Scripture that proves the relationship. The complete verses are given in appendix four for review (ESV is used for clarity of the names).

Table: Correlation of Names of Nephilim

The Amorites

In addition to the verses above, we see that Abraham was the first to encounter the Rephaim, Zuzim (presumably the Zamzummim) and Emim in the land. They remained there through the days of Joshua and Judges.

• In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him came and defeated the Rephaim in Ashteroth-karnaim, the Zuzim in Ham, the Emim in Shaveh-kiriathaim, (Genesis 14:5, ESV, emphasis mine).
• In the land of the Perizzites and the Rephaim, (Joshua 17:15 ESV, emphasis mine).
• For you heard on that day how the Anakim were there, with great fortified cities. It may be that the Lord will be with me, and I shall drive them out just as the Lord said.” (Joshua 14:12 ESV, emphasis mine).
• The name of Hebron formerly was Kirjath Arba (Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim), (Joshua 14:15).

After the battle, which Abram led to rescue his nephew Lot, God showed up and promised to Abram that he would have a son and would inherit the land. He mentions something very interesting concerning the Amorites: “for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete,” (Genesis 15:16). Notice that the reason that his descendants will come back in the fourth generation is because of the iniquity of the Amorites suggesting that the Amorites, who were Nephilim, were performing great wickedness in the meantime.

We next encounter the Amorites just after Israel had received the Law at Mt Sinai. Within a year’s time, God led them up to the border of the Promised Land and God specifically mentioned that His Angel would go “before you and bring you in to the Amorites […] and I will cut them off. You shall not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do according to their works; but you shall utterly overthrow them and completely break down their sacred pillars, (Exodus 23:23, 24). We find that the Amorites were still in the land into the time of Judges from the passage “do not fear the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell” (Judges 6:10).

Finally the moment of truth for the Israelites after coming out of Egypt, was when they arrived at the border of the Promised Land, at Kadesh Barnea. They sent in spies to check out the land who returned saying that the land was all that God had said it was.

The Amalekites dwell in the land of the Negeb. The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country. And the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan.” But Caleb quieted the people before Moses and said, “Let us go up at once and occupy it, for we are well able to overcome it.” Then the men who had gone up with him said, “We are not able to go up against the people, for they are stronger than we are.” So they brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, “The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height. And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them” (Numbers 13:29-33, ESV).

The fact that God commanded the Israelites to destroy man woman and child becomes logical if we understand that (as the text says) all people in the land were not merely sons of Adam, but were a mix between the sons of God (demons) and human women just like in the days of Noah.

Read More

The Bible is replete with evidence that the sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 are fallen angels (demons). All of the ancient Jewish and Ante-Nicene Christian commentators believed the “sons of God” to be referring to demons (fallen angels).

Augustine of Hippo

The first, as far as we can see, to definitively deny the sons of God as being angels was Augustine of Hippo of the fifth century, approximately seventy five years after the drafting of the Nicene Creed. Augustine did much to spiritualize the history of the Bible and twist a simple straightforward reading of the Bible. His method of Bible interpretation made a profound impact and his legacy remains even to this day. Many centuries after Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, a doctor of the Catholic Church in the 13th century, quotes in his magnum opus, Summa Theologica, from Augustine’s work City of God (De Civ. Dei xv) concerning the sons of Seth:

Many persons affirm that they have had the experience, or have heard from such as have experienced it, that the Satyrs and Fauns, whom the common folk call incubi, have often presented themselves before women, and have sought and procured intercourse with them. Hence it is folly to deny it. But God’s holy angels could not fall in such fashion before the deluge. Hence by the sons of God are to be understood the sons of Seth, who were good; while by the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain. [i] Nor is it to be wondered at that giants should be born of them; for they were not all giants, albeit there were many more before than after the deluge. Still if some are occasionally begotten from demons, it is not from the seed of such demons, nor from their assumed bodies, but from the seed of men taken for the purpose; as when the demon assumes first the form of a woman, and afterwards of a man; just as they take the seed of other things for other generating purposes, as Augustine says (De Trin. iii), so that the person born is not the child of a demon, but of a man, [ii] (emphasis mine).

Just as Augustine fallaciously suggested the sons of God were the so called “godly line of Seth,” the daughters of men have been labeled as being from the “ungodly line of Cain”. Augustine says, “By the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain,” (Augustine as quoted in Summa Theologica, Aquinas). We must ask the important question – where in Scripture does it say such a thing? Augustine makes the claim above that Scripture designates those daughters as coming from the race of Cain, but just where do we see that? The answer is that we simply do not. It was first tentatively considered by Julius Africanus and then completely invented by Augustine and then repeated by all who would follow in his footsteps ever since. If the term “sons of God” refers to the “sons of Seth” as so many suggest, then why does the text not simply state it? Unfortunately neither Augustine nor Aquinas substantiates the claim. They simply presume their statement to be true and offer no biblical proof. Augustine states that “Scripture designates” that the daughters of men “sprang from the race of Cain”. But where in Scripture does it say that? Sadly, their unbiblical assertion has left its mark in the modern day creating a great deal of confusion regarding what the Bible literally teaches.

Calvin’s Interpretation

John Calvin in the 17th century carried on the tradition started by Augustine that the sons of God are in fact the sons of Seth. He states in his commentary:

The principle is to be kept in memory, that the world was then as if divided into two parts; because the family of Seth cherished the pure and lawful worship of God, from which the rest had fallen. Now, although all mankind had been formed for the worship of God, and therefore sincere religion ought everywhere to have reigned; yet since the greater part had prostituted itself, either to an entire contempt of God, or to depraved superstitions; it was fitting that the small portion which God had adopted, by special privilege, to himself, should remain separate from others. It was, therefore, base ingratitude in the posterity of Seth, to mingle themselves with the children of Cain, and with other profane races; because they voluntarily deprived themselves of the inestimable grace of God. For it was an intolerable profanation, to pervert, and to confound, the order appointed by God. It seems at first sight frivolous, that the sons of God should be so severely condemned, for having chosen for themselves beautiful wives from the daughters of men. But we must know first, that it is not a light crime to violate a distinction established by the Lord; secondly, that for the worshippers of God to be separated from profane nations, was a sacred appointment which ought reverently to have been observed, in order that a Church of God might exist upon earth; thirdly, that the disease was desperate, seeing that men rejected the remedy divinely prescribed for them. In short, Moses points it out as the most extreme disorder; when the sons of the pious, whom God had separated to himself from others, as a peculiar and hidden treasure, became degenerate, (emphasis mine). [iii]

Calvin rightly describes the world as being wicked, but he vainly asserts that the world had been “divided into two parts.” Where do we see such an idea in the Bible? He also introduces his deterministic philosophy of predestination by stating that apparently the sons of Seth were adopted by “special privilege.” His denial of who the sons of God truly were creates a tremendous amount of confusion that has clouded the interpretation of the text for potentially millions of people over the centuries. Furthermore, nowhere do we see that the daughters of men are from the so called ungodly line of Cain.

Calvin continues with his unbiblical prohibition of inter-class marriages. Notice that again he does not offer any biblical support for any of his positions. He does not seek to prove his point with Scripture but with opinion and conjecture. Having simply asserted his position, Calvin then ridicules the ‘sons of God as demons [m1] ‘ interpretation.

That ancient figment, concerning the intercourse of angels with women, is abundantly refuted by its own absurdity; and it is surprising that learned men should formerly have been fascinated by ravings so gross and prodigious. The opinion also of the Chaldean paraphrase is frigid; namely, that promiscuous marriages between the sons of nobles, and the daughters of plebeians, is condemned. Moses, then, does not distinguish the sons of God from the daughters of men, because they were of dissimilar nature, or of different origin; but because they were the sons of God by adoption, whom he had set apart for himself; while the rest remained in their original condition, (Calvin Commentary Genesis 6:1 emphasis mine).

We have already seen how “sons of God” is used in Scripture – furthermore that there were no human “sons of God” before the resurrection of Jesus. However Calvin introduces great confusion into the text by dogmatically declaring that God’s terms are very capricious and that they sometimes mean one thing in one context and quite another someplace else. The simple biblical definition, as we have seen, is that sons of God are direct creations of God. Calvin is unable to define sons of God because of bad exegesis.

Should anyone object, that they who had shamefully departed from the faith, and the obedience which God required, were unworthy to be accounted the sons of God; the answer is easy, that the honor is not ascribed to them, but to the grace of God, which had hitherto been conspicuous in their families. For when Scripture speaks of the sons of God, sometimes it has respect to eternal election, which extends only to the lawful heirs; sometimes to external vocations according to which many wolves are within the fold; and though in fact, they are strangers, yet they obtain the name of sons, until the Lord shall disown them. Yea, even by giving them a title so honorable, Moses reproves their ingratitude, because, leaving their heavenly Father, they prostituted themselves as deserters, (emphasis mine). [iv]

Now, to support his presuppositions, he must explain away the giants (Nephilim) that are introduced in Genesis 6:4 and are the result of the sons of God (or as he would say the sons of Seth) and the daughters of men (or as he would say the daughters of Cain).

Moses does not indeed say, that they were of extraordinary stature, but only that they were robust. Elsewhere, I acknowledge, the same word denotes vastness of stature, which was formidable to those who explored the land of Canaan, (Jos 13:33.) But Moses does not distinguish those of whom he speaks in this place, from other men, so much by the size of their bodies, as by their robberies and their lust of dominion, (emphasis mine). [v]

He downplays the fact that the fruit of the union between the sons of God and daughters of men were men of extraordinary size. He simply asserts that they were “great” in their evil. His interpretation is unfounded and he is not completely honest here for the word (Nephilim) used in both places is exactly the same. Calvin and numerous others turn to Genesis 4:26 in order to substantiate their case. Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary is very typical of those that leap to the conclusion that sons of God must be referring to the Sons of Seth.

Observe the different expressions: sons of God, and daughters of men. If you turn to Gen 4:26 you there discover that the children of Seth are said to call on the name of the Lord; including both sons and daughters; and hence, therefore, these are meant by the sons of God. [vi]

They suggest that this passage in some way proves that the term “sons of God” is really a hidden meaning for sons of Seth. Let’s take a look at the passage to see if their claims are valid.

Seth and His Sons

Seth appears a total of seven times in both the Old Testament and the New Testament (NKJV). We get a brief glimpse of his life by stringing together all of the passages [vii] that speak of him.

And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth […], and as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on the name of the LORD, (Genesis 4:25-26).

And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. Seth lived one hundred and five years, and begot Enosh. After he begot Enosh, Seth lived eight hundred and seven years, and had sons and daughters. So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died. (Genesis 5:3-4, 6-8).

Here 130 years after creation, Adam has a son named Seth; then 105 years after that Seth had a son named Enosh. Thus we learn that a total of 235 years after creation men began to call upon the name of the Lord. The Hebrew term for Lord is YHWH which is the personal name of God. God told Moses: “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty [El Shaddai שַׁדָּ֑י אֵ֣ל], but by My name LORD [YHWH יְהוָה] I was not known to them,” (Exodus 6:3). Thus to think that this was the first time that humans began to worship the Lord is unfounded. Rather we simply read that they began to use his personal name at that point for some purpose. While it appears to have begun with a son of Seth, we should not infer that it was limited to that line. After all, the Hebrew text very literally says az hukhal likro beshem YHWH [בְּשֵׁ֥ם יְהוָֽה לִקְרֹ֖א הוּחַ֔ל אָ֣ז] “then was begun (the) calling by (with, in) the name YHWH” (translation mine). The term hukhal (הוּחַל) is the passive (hophal) of begin. The subject of the verb hukhal is “calling” (likro’ לִקְרֹא). The word “men” does not even appear in the text. Thus we see that apparently, up until that point, men were not invoking God by His proper name. It could be that they didn’t know it, though we cannot be sure. Nevertheless this reading of the verse does not in any way substantiate the notion that Seth’s sons were the sons of God. Another reading is possible which may clarify the passage.

A Possible Translation

Conversely, the verb hukhal (הוּחַל) comes from the root (חלל) the basic meaning is “to profane, defile, pollute, desecrate, begin” according to Brown Driver Briggs’ [viii] Lexicon of the Hebrew Bible. Thus, the alternative reading would be “then calling by the name of YHWH was profaned”. This alternative reading actually finds endorsement by the ancient Aramaic Targumim. Targum Onkelos interprets the passage as:

And to Sheth also was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. Then in his days the sons of men desisted [חָלוּ] (or forbore) from praying in the name of the Lord, (Genesis 4:26, Targum Onkelos, emphasis mine).

Targum Jonathan is similar though it amplifies that reading even more:

And to Sheth also was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. That was the generation in whose days they began to err [למטעי], and to make themselves idols, and surnamed their idols by the name of the Word of the Lord, (Genesis 4:26, Targum Jonathan, emphasis mine).

While neither “began” nor “profane” supports the sons of Seth theory, the latter would seem to make more sense in light of the entire story of the Bible. The divine name seems to have been known from the very beginning of creation. Adam was familiar with it because he heard the voice of the LORD (YHWH) God in the garden after he had sinned. Calling by the name of the Lord was until that time respected and honored but it was in the days of Enosh when calling by the name of the Lord was defiled. God then destroyed the world because of the continual wickedness. Noah retains knowledge of the name and then apparently at the tower of Babel the name is forgotten or lost. God chooses not to reveal His name again until Moses has the encounter at the burning bush.

The Sons of Seth Were Not Sons of God

Regardless of which reading we take, there is simply no evidence whatsoever to support the concept that Genesis 4:26 can be used to interpret the sons of God as the sons of Seth. There is no indication that Seth’s sons were somehow more godly than the rest of humanity. Furthermore, it must not be missed that Adam lived another 800 years after begetting Seth and that he had sons and daughters. Likewise “Seth lived eight hundred and seven years and had sons and daughters,” (Genesis 5:7). All of the sons and daughters of Seth as well as the sons and daughters of Cain were in fact sons (and daughters) of Adam. Technically speaking every human ever born on this planet is a son or daughter of Adam; the Hebrew language uses the term to mean “human”. Thus the text is driving home the point that there are two dissimilar groups: the daughters of Adam on the one hand and the sons of God on the other. To suggest that the daughters of men were actually the daughters of Cain is fanciful. Rather, the daughters of Adam are contrasted with the sons of God: the daughters of men were human and the sons of God were not.

Furthermore, we can in no way infer that all of these sons and daughters remained so godly that they would be distinguished from the sons of Cain. After all, only eight people were saved out of the entire world. These sons of Seth must not have been so godly after all. Simply put, the sons of God do not refer to the lineage of Seth, but to direct creations of God, which before the redeeming work of Christ was limited to Adam himself and to angels. Therefore, the sons of God in Genesis six refers to fallen angels who had relations with human women.

Read More Articles Here.

[viii] Brown Driver Briggs (BDB) Hebrew English Lexicon provides the following definition. The most common definition is “1. to profane, defile, pollute, desecrate, begin”. BDB then goes on to give the various forms of how the root is used in each of the binyanim (verbal paradigms). In the a. (Niphal) it means to: 1. to profane oneself, defile oneself, pollute oneself; b. ritually; c. sexually; 1. to be polluted, be defiled; d. (Piel): 1. to profane, make common, defile, pollute; 2. to violate the honour of, dishonour; 3. to violate (a covenant); 4. to treat as common; e. (Pual) to profane (name of God); f. (Hiphil): 1. to let be profaned; 2. to begin; g. (Hophal) to be begun” (emphasis mine). The Hophal is simply the passive of the Hiphil – therefore, if the Hiphil occasionally means to let be profaned then the one occurrence of the Hophal might also be translated as profaned rather than begin.

We have explored half of the promise given so many years ago – that “he” that is the Messiah-Jesus, would bruise the serpent’s head. Jesus came in the flesh from Heaven by way of the Holy Spirit who mixed with the seed of woman. If this was true of “her seed,” then according the hermeneutical consistency, the seed of the serpent ought to be interpreted in like manner. What this means is that since Jesus (in his bodily incarnation) was a genetic mix between the heavenly (Holy Spirit) and earthly (Mary), the same ought to be for the other part of the verse and therefore true of Satan’s seed; that is to say that he (and his angels) would mix his (genetic) seed (gametes) with a human thereby creating a hybrid between the demonic and human. The Bible calls this kind of progeny Nephilim – that is, fallen ones. We will explore in detail in this section just what happened in the days of Noah and in part 3 what is happening now and how events will culminate at the time of Jesus’ coming.

[Notes will be included in final version – sign up to be notified on right]

Jesus gave his disciples an important key to understanding what the last days would be like – they would be like the sudden destruction that came upon the earth in the days of Noah.

But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be, (Matthew 24:37-39).
What happened in the days of Noah has a direct correlation as to what we ought to expect in the last days. The inhabitants of the earth had been warned repeatedly by Noah, the preacher of righteousness, but they failed to listen. Peter, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, makes this revelation concerning the days of Noah and the destruction that came: “the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water,” (1 Peter 3:20). In his second epistle Peter writes:

For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell[tartarosas ταρταρώσας the underworld prison]  and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly, (2 Peter 2:4-5).

Jesus and Peter are telling us more than just the swiftness of the destruction that came upon the earth. Their words give us clues to the condition of the world at that time. We must not miss that the first century Jew, without any apparent exception, believed that in the days of Noah, demons (sons of God) came down to earth and had relations with women spawning a race of demonic-human hybrids (the proof will be given in the following chapters).

Thus, to fully understand Jesus’ statement “as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be,” we must first understand what life was like in Noah’s days. If we fail to understand what this passage means, we will not only miss some very significant historical issues but also our view of the end times will be lacking as well. First of all, let’s analyze the text and build our comprehension one level at a time.

When humankind began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God [benei haelohim בְנֵי־הָאֱלֹהִים] saw that the daughters of humankind [banot haadam הָאָדָם בְּנוֹת] were beautiful. Thus they took wives for themselves from any they chose. So the LORD said, “My spirit will not remain in humankind indefinitely, since they are mortal. They will remain for 120 more years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days (and also after this) when the sons of God were having sexual relations with the daughters of humankind, who gave birth to their children. They were the mighty heroes of old, the famous men. But the LORD saw that the wickedness of humankind had become great on the earth. Every inclination of the thoughts of their minds was only evil all the time. The LORD regretted that he had made humankind on the earth, and he was highly offended. So the LORD said, “I will wipe humankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth – everything from humankind to animals, including creatures that move on the ground and birds of the air, for I regret that I have made them,” (Genesis 6:1-7 NET).

At the time of Noah (and the subsequent judgment), the population of the earth grew dramatically. The text says that men (adam – this is a general Hebrew expression for men in general, who are of course, sons of Adam in a literal sense) increased in numbers; there were conceivably over ten billion people [i] at the time! As a natural consequence, daughters were born to the race in general but then another group took notice of these female humans, namely, the sons of God. The sons of God took them and fathered offspring known as Nephilim. To understand what was happening then we need to clearly identify the sons of God.

The Sons of God

The phrase the “sons of God” appears ten times in the Bible (NKJV), twice in Genesis six, three times in the book of Job and five times in the New Testament (which we already examined). In Hebrew this phrase benei haelohim (בְּנֵ֣י הָאֱלֹהִ֔ים) appears four times while benei elohim (אֱלֹהִֽים בְּנֵ֥י) appears once in Job 38:7 – the only variation is the definite article. God responds to Job’s request to show up and explain the meaning of the tremendous suffering that Job has just endured (chapter 38:7) by asking where he was in the beginning: “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:7).

God makes reference to the fact that Job was not there when He laid the foundation of the earth and the implication is that no human was there for that matter. Therefore we see from the usage here that “sons of God” refers to angels. This is backed by the Septuagint which translates all three of the Job passages as “angels” instead of the Hebrew sons of God – evidently the Jews who translated Job into Greek from Hebrew felt that sons of God were angels and not humans. [ii] The NET Bible commentary confirms this understanding: “In the Book of Job the phrase clearly refers to angelic beings,” (NET Bible Commentary Genesis 6:2). In the beginning of the book of Job we read:

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. And the LORD said to Satan, “From where do you come?” So Satan answered the LORD and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it.” (Job 1:6-7)

Again, we note that the Septuagint has translated “sons of God” as “the angels of God” (oi angeloi tou theou οι αγγελοι του θεου). To the ancient Jew at least, this phrase was clearly talking about angelic beings. The fact that Satan appeared among their number would suggest that these “sons of God” are fallen angels. After all, from what we read concerning angels in both the Old Testament: (Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, etc.) and New Testament (especially Revelation), angels (that is the good ones) already have access to the presence of God. Thus, to state that one day they came before the Lord, would seem a bit odd unless it referred to demons. We should also remember that the term (malakh מַלְאַ֧ךְ) in Hebrew and (angelos αγγελος) in Greek both generally mean “messenger.” The messenger can be either good or bad and can be earthly (a man) or heavenly (an angelic being). Jesus at the judgment of the nations ” will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels [tois angelois τοις αγγελοις],’ (Matthew 25:41). If the devil has angels and they are cast into the lake of fire, then they cannot be good angels. Thus they are fallen angels also known as demons.

From the references in Job, and how the term is translated in both the Septuagint and Targumim, we conclude that the term “sons of God” is referring to angelic beings (good or bad). The fact that Satan appeared with the sons of God and the fact that Jesus refers to the devil and his angels, leads us to further conclude that the reference in Genesis chapter six is talking about fallen angels (demons).

The New English Translation (NET Bible) commentary discusses the three different positions commonly held and emphasizes that the “angel” interpretation is favorable over the others.

There are three major interpretations of the phrase here. (1) In the Book of Job the phrase clearly refers to angelic beings. In Genesis 6 the “sons of God” are distinct from “humankind,” suggesting they were not human. This is consistent with the use of the phrase in Job. Since the passage speaks of these beings cohabiting with women, they must have taken physical form or possessed the bodies of men. An early Jewish tradition preserved in 1 En. 6-7 elaborates on this angelic revolt and even names the ringleaders. (2) Not all scholars accept the angelic interpretation of the “sons of God,” however. Some argue that the “sons of God” were members of Seth’s line, traced back to God through Adam in Gen 5, while the “daughters of humankind” were descendants of Cain. But, as noted above, the text distinguishes the “sons of God” from humankind (which would include the Sethites as well as the Cainites) and suggests that the “daughters of humankind” are human women in general, not just Cainites. (3) Others identify the “sons of God” as powerful tyrants, perhaps demon-possessed, who viewed themselves as divine and, following the example of Lamech (see Gen 4:19), practiced polygamy. But usage of the phrase “sons of God” in Job militates against this view, (NET Notes Genesis 6:2, emphasis mine).

Neither Marry nor Are Given in Marriage

To some people, fallen angels having the ability to take physical form and procreate would seem to create a contradiction in Scripture. In Matthew 22:30 we read: “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.” This would seem to say that angels are not capable of having offspring and if that is the case, then Genesis 6 could certainly not be referring to fallen angels having some type of sexual relations with women. The parallel passage in Luke sheds more light on the text and seems to be a fuller rendering of what Jesus said on the subject whereas the Matthean and Markan accounts are abbreviated. In Luke we read:

but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection,” (Luke 20:35-36).

Notice that Jesus says that those who attain that age and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage “for they cannot die anymore.” The thrust of the passage is not the potential of sexual ability in heaven! Remember, the Sadducees, who denied the resurrection, were trying to pull a fast one on Jesus by asking whose wife [m1] the woman (having seven husbands) would be in heaven. The question and answer had nothing to do with the ability to pass on seed but rather to the fact that there is a resurrection of the dead; the new order is different than the here and now. God told Adam and Eve to be fruitful (that is to have sexual relations) and fill the earth. From Jesus’ words we see that there will be no need for any more procreation (to fill the earth) “for they cannot die anymore.” However, this verse cannot be used to prove that angelic beings lacked the ability to mingle their seed with the daughters of men. It would seem that they were merely forbidden to do so (as we will see from 2 Peter and Jude as well as extra-biblical sources).

Conclusion

We saw earlier that the term “sons of God” refers to angels and humans who are direct creations of God. Angels are all by definition sons of God since they do not have parents but were produced directly by God. We therefore conclude that the sons of God in Genesis 6 were in fact angels who had relations with the daughters of Adam. The text in Genesis 6 doesn’t say if they were good or bad angels but based on the flood that followed it is safe to assume that they were fallen angels.

Read More Articles on Corrupting The Image

Something ominous is coming upon the world:it is Satan’s final effort in the battle to destroy the image that man was created in, which has been raging since the beginning of time. If Satan can destroy the image, then he can avert his own destruction. [Editor’s note: All notations will be cited in the final report. The information is based on research contained in Douglas Hamp’s new book: Corrupting the Image: Satan’s War to Destroy the Image of God] God created man in His own image and likeness; when man sinned that image was corrupted, but not lost. However, as a result man cannot be with God in person since man’s genetic code (and spiritual composition) has been compromised (or corrupted). God sent His Son to give his life to correct the genetic (and moral) problem through the cross; the correction will be ultimately fulfilled when we receive our new bodies. However, there has also been a move on the enemy’s part to completely destroy what is left of the image. The principle verse of this book is found in the declaration of Genesis 3:15: her seed brought forth the Savior; Satan’s seed will bring the Destroyer. In other words, the serpent will one day mix his seed as a counterfeit of the incarnation (subsequent chapters will demonstrate this). Our aim therefore is to fully investigate the prophecy from the pages of the Bible, from a genetics perspective, from a historical perspective and finally its end times impact.

When the Image Was Corrupted

The story begins in the Garden of Eden and ends with the Lord’s second coming. Immediately after the sin of Adam and Eve, God declared that there would be hatred between the serpent and the woman. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed [זַרְעֲךָ] andher seed [זַרְעָהּ]; He shall bruise [יְשׁוּפְךָ] your head, and you shall bruise [תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ] His heel, (Genesis 3:15). This statement is often called the proto-Gospel in that it is the first declaration by God that He will make a way for man to be saved and for the devil to be destroyed. It not only speaks of good news for humans and bad news for Satan, but also tells us something about how that redemption will be played out and how Satan has and will try to subvert God’s plans. God specifically declared that there would be hatred between Satan’s seed and the seed of the woman and that “He”, the offspring of her seed (Jesus) would strike the serpent [on] the head and that Satan would strike His heel. “Her seed” became a reality through the Lord Jesus and therefore, consistent Bible interpretation means that “your seed” (that is Satan’s seed) will be fulfilled in like manner. Ever since the fall in the Garden and in a manner similar to the virgin birth of Jesus, Satan has been trying to find a way for “his seed” to become a reality. He almost succeeded in the days of Noah when the sons of God (fallen angels) came down and took women as wives and engendered a race called the Nephilim, which were genetic hybrids (Genesis 6). The Nephilim were on the earth again and had overrun the land of Canaan while the children of Israel were in Egypt. Daniel spoke of a time when 10 kings would mingle (hybridize) themselves with the seed of men (Daniel 2:43). Lastly Jesus said that the last days would be like the conditions before the flood (Matthew 24:37). According to the Genesis prophecy, Satan will one day mix his seed with humanity to bring forth the Antichrist as a counterfeit of the incarnation of Jesus.

The Promised Seeds

We can be confident that the “seed of the woman” is referring to the Messiah by the personal pronoun “he” (Hebrew: הוּא). This is not just talking collectively about mankind versus Satan (the serpent cf. Revelation 20:2) but rather is referring to what the Messiah would do to the work of Satan. This interpretation is testified to by many ancient Jewish and Christian commentators and modern scholars as well. Bible commentator Thomas Constable articulates well the importance of this most ancient of prophecies: This is a prophecy of the victory of the ultimate “Seed” of the woman (Messiah) over Satan (cf. Rev. 19:1-5; Gal. 3:16, 19; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8). Most interpreters have recognized this verse as the first biblical promise of the provision of salvation (the protoevangelium or “first gospel”). The rest of the book, in fact the whole Old Testament, proceeds to point ahead to that seed […] When that ‘seed’ is crushed, the head of the snake is crushed. Consequently more is at stake in this brief passage than the reader is at first aware of. A program is set forth. A plot is established that will take the author far beyond this or that snake and his ‘seed.’ It is what the snake and His ‘seed’ represent that lies at the center of the author’s focus. With that ‘one’ lies the ‘enmity’ that must be crushed, (Constable, Genesis 3:15, emphasis mine). [i] The Targum of Pseudo Jonathan, what we might think of as an ancient Jewish commentary [ii], says that this will take place in the days of Messiah: “and they shall make a remedy for the heel in the days of the King Meshiha.” The Targum of Onkelos, another ancient commentary of sorts, understood that both the serpent (Satan) and the woman would each have a son of promise: And I will put enmity between thee and between the woman, and between thy son andher son. He will remember thee, what thou didst to him (at) from the beginning, and thou shalt be observant unto him at the end, (Targum Onkelos Genesis 3:15, emphasis mine). From these two ancient sources we can understand that the remedy for the striking of the heel will center on the Messiah and also that her seed is referring to a son who is connected with Eve. [iii] However, “thy son”, is a reference to Satan’s son who, according to hermeneutical consistency, must also be a genetic descendant. Early Church Father Iranaeus, in his book Against Heresies, identified Jesus as the seed of the woman and antichrist as the seed of the serpent who would be trampled down by the Messiah: He, the sole of whose foot should be bitten, having power also to tread upon the enemy’s head; but the other biting, killing, and impeding the steps of man, until the seed did come appointed to tread down his head, — which was born of Mary, of whom the prophet speaks: “Thou shalt tread upon the asp and the basilisk; thou shalt trample down the lion and the dragon;” (Psa 91:13) — indicating that sin, which was set up and spread out against man, and which rendered him subject to death, should be deprived of its power, along with death, which rules [over men]; and that the lion, that is, antichrist, rampant against mankind in the latter days, should be trampled down by Him; and that He should bind “the dragon, that old serpent” (Rev 20:2) and subject him to the power of man, who had been conquered (Luke 10:19) so that all his might should be trodden down.  [iv] Note that Iranaeus identified the dragon of Psalm 91:13 (Hebrew tannin) as Satan in accord with Revelation 20:2 (“the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan”). However, he also identified the Antichrist who would come in the last days. Thus he sees in Genesis 3:15 both a reference to Satan’s ultimate demise and to the ones who come in Satan’s power. He later wrote concerning the incarnation of the Lord: “And the Lord summed up in Himself this enmity, when He was made man from a woman, and trod upon his [the serpent’s] head.” [v] The renowned commentators Keil and Delitzsch note that through Jesus’ incarnation, which will be through the seed of the woman, Adam can be restored to his original state. This spiritual seed culminated in Christ, in whom the Adamic family terminated, henceforward to be renewed by Christ as the second Adam, and restored by Him to its original exaltation and likeness to God. In this sense Christ is the seed of the woman, […] (Keil and Delitzsch Genesis 3:15 emphasis mine). Bible commentator Adam Clarke demonstrates his conviction that the serpent was in fact actuated by Satan and that the seed of the woman was the Lord Jesus. it is evident that Satan, who actuated this creature, is alone intended in this part of the prophetic declaration. […] the seed of the woman; the person is to come by the woman, and by her alone, without the concurrence of man. […] and it was in consequence of this purpose of God that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin; this, and this alone, is what is implied in the promise of the seed of the woman bruising the head of the serpent. (Clarke, Genesis 3:15).

The Bottom Line

We have seen that both Jewish and Christian interpreters are convinced that the reference to her seed found its culmination in the Messiah. We can write out the elements of Genesis 3:15 in the following way:

1. Enmity between Satan (serpent) and Eve
2. Enmity between Satan’s (your) seed and her seed (Christ)
3. Christ (He) will bruise Satan’s head
4. Satan (you) would bruise Christ’s (his) heel

We glean the following from the points above:

1. Enmity = antithetical, opposite, converse, contradictory
2. If “her seed” equals Christ, then “your seed” must be its antithesis, thus: antichrist
3. ”her seed” (Christ) is superior to “your seed” (Antichrist)
4. “your seed” (Antichrist) is inferior to “her seed” (Christ)

Point number two is the most significant of the four; her seed did in fact result in the incarnation of the Lord Jesus. Before we can adequately understand what is meant by “your seed” we must first see that Scripture clearly states that Jesus’ incarnation would be a union of the seed of the woman (Mary’s seed) and that of the Holy Spirit. Unraveling the Deception In order to unravel the deception that is now unfolding in the world, we must go back to the beginning; we must first grasp what Adam was like when he was created, what he lost both spiritually and genetically and how corruption through disobedience has caused us to be separated from God. From there we will be able to plumb the depths of the promise that the Seed of the Woman would bring redemption for man and with that in mind we will see how God will restore His perfect image in the believer via the new birth through the Seed of the Woman. Once we have understood the implications of the Seed of the Woman then we will focus on how Satan has been attempting to destroy the image of God throughout history (as described in the Bible and confirmed by extra-biblical evidence) and how he plans on imitating and counterfeiting God’s redemptive work in the ultimate hybrid of all time whom the Bible calls “the Beast” (Antichrist). Satan’s plan is already well underway and will be accomplished in part via transhumanism and the “alien” deception. These have both been made possible through the teaching of the theory of evolution which, at its core, denies there is a God – Satan has used this denial to pave the way philosophically for the acceptance of going to the next level of humanity and because man denies God, he believes he ought to continue evolving. The transhumanist movement boasts that man can direct his own destiny through the rewriting of his DNA code. Transhumanists seek to make man into gods by directing his own evolution. Rather than accepting that God originally created Man in His image and man is now fallen, but (through Jesus) will be restored to that original and unfallen image, the transhumanist insists that man can do it himself. In fact, Transhumanist Richard Seed audaciously declared: “We are going to become Gods, period […]” [vi] Man is ready to forsake the image of the Creator that created him. Satan will use man’s desire to be his own god to deceive him into believing the ultimate lie – that his fallen messengers are both the creators and saviors of man. He will not do this openly but will deceive mankind through demons which are masquerading as ”aliens” who are spreading the message that the inhabitants of the earth can evolve to be like them and obtain transcendent powers. Finally, the seed of the Serpent will come; he will be a man who will be greater than his fellows, who will understand sinister schemes and shall rise up and become the Antichrist.

Click here to read other articles from Corrupting the Image