Skip to content

Conclusion: Identity of "Sons of God" in Genesis 6

Question

Who are the "sons of God" (bene elohim) in Genesis 6:2,4?

Summary Answer

Based on the biblical evidence examined, the Sethite view (sons of God = godly line of Seth) appears better supported by Scripture than the angel view, though the question remains genuinely disputed.

Key reasons: 1. The immediate context (Gen 4-5) establishes the Cain/Seth contrast 2. Moses never uses "bene elohim" for angels elsewhere in the Pentateuch 3. God's response focuses on "man" who is "flesh" (Gen 6:3) 4. Jesus teaches angels do not marry (Matt 22:30) 5. Neither 2 Peter 2:4 nor Jude 6 explicitly connects to Genesis 6 6. Nephilim existed "before" and "after" - and post-flood in Canaan

The Two Views Evaluated

View 1: Angel View

Claim: "Sons of God" = fallen angels who took human wives and produced Nephilim (giant hybrids).

Biblical Support: - Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 use "bene elohim" for heavenly beings - 2 Peter 2:4 mentions "angels that sinned" near flood context - Jude 6 mentions angels who "left their habitation" - Ancient Jewish interpretation (1 Enoch, Jubilees)

Problems: 1. Moses's vocabulary: Moses uses "malak" for angels 28+ times but never calls angels "bene elohim" 2. God's response: "My spirit shall not strive with man, for that he also is flesh" (6:3) - God addresses human flesh, not angels 3. Jesus's teaching: "They neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven" (Matt 22:30) 4. 2 Peter 2:4 study: Previous analysis showed this describes the angelic rebellion (Rev 12), not necessarily Genesis 6 5. Jude 6-7 study: Previous analysis showed "in like manner" connects surrounding cities to Sodom, not angels to sexual sin; Genesis 6 connection is assumed, not stated 6. Nephilim problem: They existed "before" and "after" the unions, and appear post-flood in Canaan (Num 13:33) 7. Extra-biblical reliance: The angel view relies heavily on 1 Enoch and Jewish tradition, not Scripture itself

View 2: Sethite View

Claim: "Sons of God" = godly descendants of Seth who intermarried with ungodly descendants of Cain.

Biblical Support: - Genesis 4-5 establishes the Cain (ungodly) / Seth (godly) contrast - Genesis 4:26: In Seth's line "men began to call upon the name of the LORD" - Genesis 5: Traces godly line through Enoch who "walked with God" - Deuteronomy 14:1: Moses calls Israel "children of the LORD your God" - NT consistently uses "sons/children of God" for believers (John 1:12; Rom 8:14; 1 John 3:1-2) - Marriage vocabulary ("took wives") is normal human marriage language

Problems: 1. Job usage: Job clearly uses "bene elohim" for heavenly beings 2. Giants: How does human intermarriage produce "giants"? 3. Severity of judgment: Would mixed marriage warrant worldwide flood? 4. Different phrase: Moses uses "bene YHWH" in Deut 14:1, not "bene elohim"

How the Prerequisite Studies Inform This Question

1-peter-3-spirits-in-prison Study

  • "Spirits in prison" = humans who rejected Noah's preaching
  • Christ preached through Noah by His Spirit during the 120 years
  • Does NOT support the angel view

2-peter-2-4-angels-that-sinned Study

  • Describes the angelic rebellion (Satan and his angels cast down)
  • Revelation 12 is the interpretive key
  • "Chains of darkness" = spiritual state, not physical imprisonment
  • Genesis 6 connection is NOT required by the text

jude-6-7-angels-sin Study

  • "Kept not their first estate" = abandoned their heavenly position
  • "Left their own habitation" = cast out of heaven
  • "In like manner" connects surrounding cities to Sodom
  • "Strange flesh" = homosexuality (men pursuing men)
  • Genesis 6 connection is NOT established by the text

moses-angel-terminology Study

  • Moses consistently uses "malak" (angel/messenger) for celestial beings
  • Moses uses "cherubim" for specific class of celestial beings
  • Moses does NOT use "bene elohim" (sons of God) for angels anywhere
  • If Moses meant angels in Gen 6, why didn't he use his normal terminology?

moses-human-god-relationship-terms Study

  • Moses calls Israel "children of the LORD your God" (Deu 14:1)
  • Moses uses "my servant," "my people," "holy nation" for godly humans
  • "Sons of God" appears ONLY in Genesis 6:2,4 in all of Moses's writings
  • The unique usage suggests something other than Moses's typical angel references

The Strongest Arguments

For the Angel View:

Job 38:7 - "Sons of God" shouted for joy at creation, before humans existed. This clearly refers to angels. If Job uses the phrase for angels, Genesis might too.

For the Sethite View:

Genesis 6:3 - God's response: "My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh." God addresses the problem as human, calls the "sons of God" flesh, and limits human days. This is inexplicable if angels were the problem.

Final Assessment

Criterion Angel View Sethite View
Job parallel Strong Weak
Genesis 4-5 context Weak Strong
Moses's vocabulary Weak Moderate
Genesis 6:3 (man/flesh) Weak Strong
Jesus on angels/marriage Weak Strong
2 Pet 2:4 connection Assumed Not required
Jude 6-7 connection Assumed Not required
Nephilim "after that" Problematic Explainable
Marriage vocabulary Neutral Strong
Total 3-4 points 6-7 points

Conclusion

The Sethite view appears better supported by the overall biblical evidence:

  1. The immediate context (Gen 4-5) establishes the godly/ungodly line contrast that Genesis 6 continues
  2. Moses's own vocabulary never uses "bene elohim" for angels
  3. God's response treats the "sons of God" as "flesh" and focuses on human judgment
  4. Jesus explicitly teaches angels do not marry
  5. The cross-references (2 Pet 2:4; Jude 6) do NOT require a Genesis 6 connection when properly analyzed
  6. The Nephilim existed before, during, after the events, and post-flood - problematic for the hybrid view

The angel view's primary strength is the Job usage of "bene elohim." However, context determines meaning, and the Genesis 6 context differs significantly from Job's heavenly throne-room scenes.

What This Study Does NOT Prove

This study does not definitively settle the question. Sincere students of Scripture have held both views. The study demonstrates that:

  1. The angel view is not proven by 2 Peter 2:4 or Jude 6
  2. The Sethite view better fits the immediate context and Moses's vocabulary
  3. Jesus's teaching on angels and marriage creates difficulty for the angel view
  4. The question must be answered from Genesis 6 itself, not from assumed cross-references

Key Verses

Gen 6:2-3: "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

Gen 4:26: "And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD."

Matt 22:30: "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven."

Deu 14:1: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God..."

Connection to Previous Studies

Study Contribution to This Question
2 Peter 2:4 Does NOT require Genesis 6 connection; describes angelic rebellion
Jude 6-7 Does NOT establish Genesis 6 connection; "strange flesh" = homosexuality
Moses-angel-terminology Moses uses "malak" for angels, never "bene elohim"
Moses-human-god-terms Moses calls godly humans by various terms; "sons of God" only in Gen 6
1 Peter 3:19-20 "Spirits in prison" = humans who rejected Noah; supports human focus

Study completed: 2025-12-29 Prerequisite studies: 1-peter-3-spirits-in-prison, 2-peter-2-4-angels-that-sinned, jude-6-7-angels-sin, moses-angel-terminology, moses-human-god-relationship-terms

These companion sites use the same tool-driven research methodology:

Site Description
The Law of God A 33-study investigation examining every major text, word, and argument about the moral law, ceremonial law, the Sabbath, and what continues under the New Covenant. 810 evidence items classified.
The Final Fate of the Wicked A 21-study investigation examining every major text, word, and argument bearing on the final fate of the wicked. 632 evidence items classified.
The Ten Commandments A 17-study investigation of the Ten Commandments -- origin, meaning, Hebrew and Greek word studies, love and law, faith and obedience. 1,054 evidence items classified.
Bible Study Collection Standalone Bible studies on various topics -- genealogies, prophecy, biblical history, and more. Each study is a self-contained investigation produced by the same three-agent pipeline.