Genesis 6 – Pt 2 – Fallen Angels


Before I can really get into Genesis Chapter 6, there needs to be some back story regarding fallen angels. In my last post we concluded that the term B’nai Elohim refers to angels, and that Holy angels in heaven don’t marry. Since Genesis 6 tells us that angels did marry (human women, no less!), we must give solid evidence that there are evil angels that exist.


We all know that Satan was created by God as the most beautiful angel that had ever been created, that he became enraptured of his own beauty and wanted to raise himself up higher than God. For this, he was cast out of heaven. A portion of the angels, presumably also enraptured by his beauty, or simply rebellious, were also thrown out of heaven with him.


Isaiah 14:12

“How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low! You said in your heart,
‘I will ascend to heaven;
above the stars of God

I will set my throne on high;
I will sit on the mount of assembly
in the far reaches of the north;  I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High’ But you are brought down to Sheol,
to the far reaches of the pit”


Because of this he was cast from heaven:


Luke 10:18

“He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.”

Revelation 9:1

“The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. The star was given the key to the shaft of the Abyss”. 

Revelation 12:3-9

“Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth…” 

“…Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him”.  


Sucks to know there are powerful angels out there whose only thoughts are evil. But comforting to know there are two times as many powerful angels whose only thoughts are for our goodness.


The word “star” seems to be synonymous, or interchangeable with “angel”. Today the word star is interchangeable with “famous celebrity”. But waitasecond…


Genesis 6:4

“The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.” 


Weird! Next up… The Nephilim! Who/What were/are they?


2 responses to “Genesis 6 – Pt 2 – Fallen Angels

  1. Not sure we can say without a doubt that the term “sons of God” refer to angels. In the previous chapter, Adam is referred to as being created by God, while the others are listed with their fathers, showing that God was, on essence, the Patriarch of the family. This text most likely refers to Adam/Seth’s line marrying Cain’s line. Also, God’s people are referred to as the “sons of God” elsewhere in the Bible, but angels are never referred to as such. But don’t take my word for it… Look it up for yourself!

    • Hi Timmy,

      Thank you so much for stopping by my blog and for taking the time to comment! I have in fact looked it up myself and would love to share some of the insights with you.

      Yes, the Adam/Seth line of view is a popular one (taught in probably most seminary schools and churches). I actually wrote about this in Part 3 of this series on Genesis 6.

      There is controversy over whether the term “sons of God” refers to fallen angels or not. Many are taught that this passage refers to a failure to keep the “faithful” lines of Seth separate from the “worldly” line of Cain. Supposedly, after Cain murdered his brother Abel, Seth and his descendants remained godly while Cain and his descendants turned rebellious and ungodly. Those who follow this theory believe the term “sons of God” is referencing the line of Seth, and the term “daughters of men” is referencing the ungodly and rebellious line of Cain.

      However there is no scriptural basis for the Line of Seth view of Genesis 6. This theory has many unanswered questions and ignores a lot of information given to us in Genesis 6:

      1) It leaves no explanation as to why the children born in these couplings would be nephilim freaks. Many Godly people end up marrying and having kids with non-believers and they do not have monster-children.

      2) The events of Genesis 6 are echoed in the legends and myths of every ancient culture upon the earth: the ancient Greeks, the Egyptians, the Hindus, the South Sea Islanders, the American Indians, and virtually all the others.

      3) It presumes and adds to what is written in the bible without warrant. If the Lord had meant daughters of Cain, surely he would have written “daughters of Cain”. No where in the bible does it discuss the daughters of Cain being evil. The Line of Seth view is based on presumption.

      4) The “Angel” view of Genesis 6 has non-canonical support from many other ancient texts, such as the book of Enoch. The book of Enoch is in the Ethiopian bible still. It is quoted in the book of Peter and Jude (and other times in the bible). Jesus and the disciples would have studied the Book of Enoch along with the old testament prophets and the books of Moses.

      5) Before the Middle Ages, Jewish Rabbi’s, the Septuagint translators, early Christians ad the church fathers were taught the Angel view of Genesis 6 and believed the word as it was written. However, the Angel view became a subject of controversy and began to disrupt man-made doctrine which had begun to set up in the church at that time.

      Angel worship had begun in the medieval church.“Celibacy” had just been institutionalized by the church, and the “Angel” view was feared to impact these views (too much sex-talk). Celsus and Julian the Apostate had begun to use the Angel View to attack Christianity. So Julius Africanus sought more comfortable ground and resorted to the Sethite view. Cyril of Alexandria, and Augustine followed, and the theory prevailed during the Middle Ages. Rationalism began to prevail on the earth and still today many churches find the Angel view too disturbing to admit.

      6) Finally, “Sons of God” is translated from B’nai Elohim, which is consistently used in the bible to refer to angelic beings. It is never used of human beings in the Old Testament. In the very first blog in this series I discuss the various uses of B’nai Elohim in the bible.

      The term refers to direct creations of God. Angels are a direct creation of God. Human daughters were not, as they were naturally descended of man (direct creations of Adam). Adam was the only human being who was a direct creation of God, as you stated in your comment. The only time a human being in the bible is referred to as B’nai Elohim is when we become saved by the Lord Jesus Christ, and become “born again”, a new creation in Him (John 1:12-13, “Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God”.) The rest of the time, B’nai Elohim appears in scripture only of angelic beings (Job 1:6, Job 38:7, Psalm 29:1, Psalm 104:4, Hebrews 1:13-14, and Daniel 3: 25).

      So we can see that the term refers to angels, and we know that Genesis 6 refers only to FALLEN angels, because it describes them as marrying, and we know from scripture that angels who still reside in heaven DO NOT marry (Matthew 22:30, “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven” – also Mark 12:25).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s