George Lujack wrote an article titled, DID ANGELS MARRY AND CROSSBREED WITH HUMAN WOMEN? (GEN. 6:1-4) on his Scripture Truth Ministries site’s THEOLOGICAL QUESTIONS ANSWERED section. His bio includes, “…serves as the managing editor for CowgerNation.com, a political / religious content online news network…was raised as a Lutheran Protestant (protesting Catholic), but rejected the faith of his upbringing and became a non-denominational, biblical Christian. He modified his faith to being an independent Messianic believer…”
Having written contextually relevant books as those which follow (with more linked at the end of the review), I thought to review it form an iron sharpening iron perspective—the issue with which is that when we sharpen iron with iron, someone tends to get cut:
What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology
Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010
The Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries: Over a Millennia’s Worth of Comments on Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Satan, the Devil, Demons, the Serpent and the Dragon
He begins by noting, “Many believe and teach that the sons of God mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4 were angels who came down from heaven, married human women, and had crossbreed hybrid children with them known as the Nephilim (giants).”
The, “Many” commence with that the original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christians commentators, starting in BC days, who held to the Angel view, as I proved in my book On the Genesis 6 Affair’s Sons of God: Angels or Not?: A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim.
He quotes that which I term the Gen 6 affair thusly:
GENESIS 6:1-4 (NKJV):
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And YHWH (the Lord) said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” The Nephilim (giants) were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
He wrote, “Nephilim (giants)” and inserted, “(giants)” into the quotation. My standard questions for anyone using that term are: what is the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles? What is your usage? Do those two usages agree?
Fortunately, he provided the answer to the second question upfront, “Men of giant physical stature” yet, this means that the answer to the third question is, “No” since in English Bibles it merely renders (does not even translate) Nephilim in 2 verses or Repha/im in 98% of all others and so never even hints at anything to do with any sort of height whatsoever.
Also, he stated that abruptly since he provided us no reason to think of Nephilim as even being something as vaguely generically subjective as of, “giant physical stature”: besides, that is, that he misused the term giants so that he committed a word-concept fallacy.
He went on to write, “Men of giant physical stature lived both before and after the global flood (Genesis 6:4; Deuteronomy 2:10-12, 20-23). After the flood, giants appear as descendants of Canaan, one of Ham’s sons, who were living in Canaan when Moses sent agents to spy out the land (Numbers 13:1-2, 32-33).”
At this point, he has not elucidated how and why this is even a noteworthy issue (again, besides his misunderstanding of the relevant linguistics—about which you can read my book Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010). He also committed a category error of sorts since the men of allegedly giant physical stature pre-flood were supposedly Nephilim but post-flood they were well, we will have to see how he argues it but based on his citations he is appealing to:
1) The Rephaim tribe and their Anakim clan about whom the only contextually relevant thing we are told is that they were, “tall” (Deut 2) and which is just as vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as giants) and is subjective to the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft. in those days. Thus, those, “Men of giant physical stature” were taller than that by an unknown margin.
2) Nephilim due to his appeal to Numbers 13:33 but that is merely one unreliable sentence from one unreliable evil report by 10 unreliable guys whom God rebuked: the dirty little secret is that since we have no reliable physical description of Nephilim then their height is a non-issue and that alone debunks 99% of un-biblical Nephilology—the modern branch of which is just un-biblical neo-theo sci-fi tall-tales.
He follows up with:
Og, King of Bashan, was the last recorded giant east of the Jordan River (Joshua 12:4; 13:12). After Joshua’s conquest of Canaan (Joshua 11:21-22), a few giants continued living in the Philistine cities of Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod.
These giants terrorized Israel from the time they entered into Canaan until late in the reign of King David. One of those giants was Goliath, who was killed by David. King David and his ‘mighty men’ encountered three other giants (2 Samuel 21:16-22; 1 Chronicles 20:4-8).
Some claim that these giants were the offspring of angels mating with human women, based on a misunderstanding of Genesis. Some claim that these giants were the offspring of angels mating with human women, based on a misunderstanding of Genesis.
Read biblically contextually, he really meant, “Og, King of Bashan, was the last recorded Repha…a few Rephaim continued…These Rephaim terrorized Israel…One of those Rephaim was Goliath…three [actually four: Goliath’s sons] other Rephaim.”
Unsure why he referenced Og (besides his misunderstanding of the usage of giants) since we do not have a physical description of him.
The Masoretic text has Goliath at just shy of 10 ft. Yet, the earlier Septuagint/LXX and the earlier Dead Sea Scrolls and the earlier Flavius Josephus all have him at just shy of 7 ft. (compared to 5.0-5.3 ft.) so that is the preponderance of the earliest data.
As for, “Some claim that these giants were the offspring of angels mating with human women” well that is a mashing up of categories again since Nephilim were, “offspring of angels mating with human women” but Rephaim were not: Nephilim were strictly pre-flood hybrids, Rephaim were strictly post-flood humans, and there is zero correlation between them.
That seemed to not be on point regarding the question he was supposed to be answering but he gets on point by admitting, “Although God sometimes refers to angels as His sons (Job 38:7)” about which I will detail that Job 38:7, as one example, shows us that sons of God can refer to non-human beings (which the LXX has as, “Angeloi”: plural of, “Angelos”) since they, at the very least, witnessed the creation of the Earth.
Yet, he goes on to note, “the term ‘sons of God’ in Genesis 6 is not exclusively used for angelic beings” which is accurate. Yet, that does not mean that it does no refer to Angels (the only “angelic beings”) therein.
Continuing:
WHO WERE THE SONS OF GOD OF GENESIS 6?
The term “sons of God” can refer to either angels or human beings…
ANGELS ARE SPIRIT BEINGS; HUMAN BEINGS ARE FLESH AND BLOOD
EPHESIANS 6:12 (NKJV):
FOR WE DO NOT WRESTLE AGAINST FLESH AND BLOOD, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, AGAINST SPIRITUAL HOSTS OF WICKEDNESS in the heavenly places.
HEBREWS 1:14 (NIV):
Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?
Angels were created as spirit beings. As spirit beings, they cannot mate with humans. Humans exist in the physical realm and angels exist in the spiritual realm, which may also be in another dimension. Fallen angels, or demons, can influence and possess human beings and we wrestle with their influence over us, but we do not wrestle physically, in the flesh, with them. Holy angels serve as ministering spirits for us.
This combined another linguistics error along with another category error.
He sought to butters that, “ANGELS ARE SPIRIT BEINGS” via a quote about against whom and what we wrestle whom/which are not, “FLESH AND BLOOD” so that, “principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness” consist of, “SPIRITUAL HOSTS” who interestingly are, “OF WICKEDNESS” and also, “in the heavenly places” with the KJV (and some six other English versions) having, “high places.”
Firstly, he is appealing to one single English word for the assertion that, “ANGELS ARE SPIRIT BEINGS” and it is a poorly translated one from the one version he quotes.
Secondly, the, “principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness” are surely references to spirit beings but they are not Angels proper, technically speaking.
Heb 1 refers to Angels and by checking various English versions we can see that out of 64 readily available ones, 45 do not refer to Angles as spirits but as winds.
And that is not because translators just flipped a coin, it is because Heb 1 is quoting (and then playing off of) Psalm 104:4 (were 47 out of 64 have winds) and the entire context of the Psalm demands that we translate as winds and not spirits since the entire context of the Psalm is constant references and correlations to natural phenomena.
Moreover, and most importantly, Angels are always described as looking like human males, performing physical actions, and without indication that such is not their ontology—see my book What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology. We cannot weight every single description of Angels against one single poorly translated English word and claim that the single poorly translated English word outweighs every single description of Angels.
Faced with this, some (as Lujack does) opt for merely asserting that Angels take on human bodies when they interact with us but there is literally zero biblical indication of that. See, what they do is begin with an un-biblical man-made Angelology tradition about Angels as a faulty premise, then encounter the biblical fact that they are always described as looking like human males, performing physical actions, and without indication that such is not their ontology so, they wedge the Angels take on human bodies mere assertion between those so as to attempt to make it work. Yet, that is merely putting a band-aid where one is not needed so it does not work.
The reason that jumping from Angels proper to, “principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness” is that although it is not specifically specified, those would surely be demons: demons are fallen Angels but in a technically unique way. While the bodies of fallen Angles are incarcerated in Tartarus (2 Peter 2) their bodies roam the Earth as demons—for a biblical elucidation, please see my article Demons Ex Machina: What are Demons?— Earth and the heavenly and/or high places likely refers to Satan being the, “prince of the power of the air” (Eph 2:2) and/or refers to the high places where idols had long been worshipped.
Thus, since it is un-biblical to assert, “Angels were created as spirit beings. As spirit beings, they cannot mate with humans” we can see that, “Humans exist in the physical realm and angels exist in the spiritual realm” (whatever that is) and also the physical realm.
The only way that, “Fallen angels…can influence and possess human beings” is that they are demons and so are, temporarily, disembodied—which also means that demons seemingly did not even exist yet during pre-flood days.
Continuing, George Lujack quoted and commented thusly:
GENESIS 6:4 (NKJV):
There were Nephilim (giants) on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
The children born to the sons of God and daughters of men were not classified as hybrids, a crossbreed between angels and men, but mighty men, men of renown.
Only Yeshua (Jesus) the only begotten Son of God, who has all creative power, has ever crossed the gap between spirit and flesh, resulting in His birth as Yeshua Messiah (Jesus Christ) – Philippians 2:7-8.
To believe that angels crossed the boundary of being spirit beings to become flesh and blood and then married and mated with human women and the resulting offspring were Nephilim (giants) is not reasonable. God would have had to have permitted it.
Kinds reproduce after their own kinds. This is a hard scientific truth that righty refutes Darwinian Evolution Theory. The spirit-kind cannot mate and impregnate mankind. Only God has crossed that boundary through Yeshua (Jesus) taking on human flesh. It can be argued that angels and humans are the same kind of being, but we are composed of different substance, as angels are spirit beings and humans are flesh and blood beings.
Scripture and science do not support the theory that angels mated and married human women. Proponents of angels mating with women resulting in hybrid Nephilim giant offspring use the rightly rejected, non-Scripture books of Enoch to support their theory.
After one rejects that they were Angels, sure, one can then conclude, “not classified as hybrids, a crossbreed between angels and men” but that is the point of contention and we have seen various examples of how his rejection is premised on various fallacies.
As for, “but mighty men, men of renown” indeed and yet he failed to inform his readers that humans, Angels, Nephilim, and even God are all referred to as man/men.
“Yeshua (Jesus) the only” physically, “begotten Son of God” being a result of, as, “the angel answered” Mary, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you” (Luke 1, ESV). We are not told how God created Angels, besides that He appears to speak things into existence so that Angels are His sons just as was Adam, for example, whom God formed from the stuff of the Earth.
Note that what he considers, “not reasonable” is not a standard but is a subjective opinion and that, based on fallacious argumentation. As for, “God would have had to have permitted it” well, is it not up to Lujack to demand what God would and would not allow: would God not allow Adam and Eve to eat from the forbidden tree that He, Himself, put in the garden?
God allows, if we have to put it that way, many terribly horrible sins: He allowed those marriages and the resultant offspring even while condemning those acts.
Indeed, “Kinds reproduce after their own kinds” but he is stating that based on his faulty Angelology, “The spirit-kind cannot mate and impregnate mankind” while oddly, at the same time admitting, “It can be argued that angels and humans are the same kind of being” yet then falling back on the fallacy that, “angels are spirit beings and humans are flesh and blood beings” so that then, on his view, how can we possibly still be, “the same kind of being.”
The way that it can logically, and bio-logically, and theo-logically (or Angelo-logically), “be argued that angels and humans are the same kind of being” is by noting that, again, Angels are always described as looking like human males, performing physical actions, and without indication that such is not their ontology. Along with that we were created, “a little lower” (Psa 8) than them, and we can reproduce with them so, by definition, we are of the same basic kind.
As for, “Proponents of angels mating with women resulting in hybrid Nephilim giant offspring use the rightly rejected, non-Scripture books of Enoch to support their theory”: that is prejudiciously painting with a broad brushed broom since I am a proponent of that view and have said literally hundreds of times that 1 Enoch is Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah, and I wrote a whole book about it In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch.
We then come to, or go back to:
WHERE DID THE NEPHILIM (GIANTS) COME FROM?
Being that the Nephilim giants spoken of in Genesis 6:1-4 were men, according to Genesis 6:4, and were therefore not the hybrid crossbreed offspring between angels and women, a question arises as to where they came from. The Nephilim giants were the offspring of mankind who sprang forth from the original gene pool variation that God created within man.
ACTS 17:26 (NKJV):
And He has made from ONE BLOOD every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth.
All men were created from one blood, and Adam and Eve were capable of producing all the different varieties of mankind: tall (giants), short, muscular, fat, thin, dark-skinned, light-skinned, hairy, smooth-skinned, and all of the varieties of mankind in between.
Just as there are a wide variety of dogs breeds that originated from the original dog kind, God created mankind with the same type of variation possibilities. Today, we still see diversity among human beings in various regions of the world, within the same regions, and even within the same families. [endnote: Creation Science Evangelist Dr. Kent Hovind – “Where Do Different Races Come From?,” YouTube, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLvTIrgmPrI>.]
Another factor that allowed for gigantism amongst human beings was the higher oxygen levels that existed in the pre-flood Earth. Scientists know from air encased within fossilized life forms that the Earth once had a 35% oxygen level, compared to the modern-day level of about 20%. A richer oxygen content allowed for the greater growth of animals, the dinosaurs, and insects on Earth. Man, known as the Nephilim (giants), also grew to much larger proportions as a result of the higher oxygen levels that existed on the pre-flood Earth. [endnote: Creation Science Evangelist Dr. Kent Hovind – “Theories about Pre-Flood Life, Humans, Animals, Earth and Atmosphere – Noah’s Flood,” YouTube, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXM73ohfFDE>]
I already noted how he has not informed his readers about everyone to whom man/men applies so that, “Nephilim…were men…therefore not the hybrid crossbreed” is a non-sequitur of a faulty conclusion based on a myopic premise.
Indeed, “He has made from ONE BLOOD every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth” so that includes the daughters of men and shows that Nephilim were not part of what God made—keep in mind that they did not come into existence until, “men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them.”
As we have also seen, there is literally zero reason to appeal to gigantism since there is zero reliable indication that, “Nephilim…grew to much larger proportions” even if (and that is a big IF) it is the case and was due to, “the higher oxygen levels that existed on the pre-flood Earth”—yet, then again, if Nephilim were George Lujack’s usage of giants due to those conditions shared by everyone alive in those days then if all people were giants then none of them were giants since they shared a standard range of heights and none were well, something vaguely generic about subjectively unusual height of some unknown level above the parochial average (and yes, that is how useless the common parlance usage of that modern English word is).
We then come to, or go back to:
WHO WERE THE ‘SONS OF GOD’ OF GENESIS 6:2,4?
When Scripture states that the ‘sons of God’ saw the daughters of men, and they took wives for themselves, it is a figurative reference to righteous men taking wives who were the ‘daughters of men,’ or daughters of demonically influenced sinful men. Sons of God cannot be a reference to demons or fallen angels, for then they would no longer be referred to by Scripture as ‘sons of God,’ but as demons or fallen angels. If the sons of God in Genesis 6 was a reference to angels, Scripture would plainly say so. The people, before the great flood, had rejected God and were under heavy demonic influence.
Note what opting for a late-comer of a view caused him to end up affirming, “righteous men taking wives who were the ‘daughters of men,’ or daughters of demonically influenced sinful men” thus, he actually ended up showing us that, on that view, “righteous men” were not righteous since they were such terrible sinners that their sin served as the premise for the flood: so, that is rather odd.
The, “daughters of demonically influenced sinful men” portion is clearly unevidenced but the view he is playing off of (the Sethite view) is based on myth and prejudice.
Note that George Lujack tells us what God is and is not allowed to say, “would no longer be referred to by Scripture as ‘sons of God’” but God is quite capable of deciding how to communicate without Lujack as an editor. Even when utterly rejecting God and worshipping idols, Israel was still called Israel. And perhaps with the single lyrical exception of Ps 82, fallen Angels are never again referred to as sons of God after they are identified in Gen 6. He reiterates, “righteous men, took wives of the pagan, sinful culture” which was not a righteous act.
We might as well argue that if the serpent was Satan and the dragon was Satan and the many titles attributed to Satan was Satan and, for that matter, if the Devil is Satan or if Satan is the Devil—or even Lucifer—then, “Scripture would plainly say so” and it does yet, only by piecing that together via the greater context expanding from words to sentences to chapters to books.
He then continues to ague fallaciously based on his myopic usage of men:
GOD DESTROYED MAN FROM THE EARTH, NOT HYBRID ANGEL-MEN
GENESIS 6:5-8 (NKJV):
Then YHWH (the Lord) saw that the WICKEDNESS OF MAN was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And YHWH (the Lord) was sorry that He had made MAN on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So YHWH (the Lord) said, “I will destroy MAN whom I have created from the face of the earth, both MAN and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” But Noah found grace in the eyes of YHWH (the Lord).
Due to man’s rejection of God’s ways and the demonic influence upon mankind, men’s thoughts and deeds were evil continually. No one but righteous-living Noah found grace in God’s eyes. YHWH (the Lord) God then decided to flood the Earth and rid it of evil, save Noah, his family, and the animals on the ark.
Yet, even if we want to hyperfocus on hum-man then that is in keeping with the entire Bible’s context since the Bible is more of an anthropological anthology rather than a theological one: it is about God’s interaction with us regarding our creation, fall, and redemption. Thus, no matter upon what subject the Bible touches, it very quickly and inevitably comes back to focusing on humanity: how it pertains to us, how it affected us, etc.
We will now turn to another subsection:
DID ANGELS KNOW WOMEN, AS MEN OF SODOM KNEW STRANGE FLESH?
JUDE 1:6-7 (NKJV):
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
People with a preconceived belief that angels mated with women in Genesis 6:1-2 may be inclined read their belief onto the Jude 1:6-7 verses, as supporting Scripture evidence that shows angels did not keep their heavenly abode and came to Earth to marry and mate with human women. They misinterpret these verses in the following manner…
JUDE 1:6-7 (NKJV) [INCORRECT UNDERSTANDING]:
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain [IN HEAVEN], but left their own abode [AND CAME DOWN TO EARTH TO MARRY AND MATE WITH DAUGHTERS OF MEN – GENESIS 6:1-2]. He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these [ANGELS], having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
The following is how Jude 1:6-7 should be understood.
JUDE 1:6-7 (NKJV) [WITH INTERPRETATION]:
And the angels who did not keep their proper domain [IN HEAVEN], but left their own abode [REBELLED AND CAME DOWN TO EARTH TO INFLUENCE AND POSSESS HUMAN BEINGS – LUKE 11:24-26], He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these [ANGELS], having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
The Jude 1:6-7 verses do not state that angels gave themselves over to sexual immorality, but that they merely left their heavenly abode to dwell elsewhere. Although angels, as spirit beings cannot mate with human beings, spirit beings can possess human beings.
The angels leaving their heavenly abode, coming to Earth, and influencing and possessing humans is analogous to the men of Sodom and Gomorrah giving themselves over to sexual immorality, exchanging the proper sexual use of women with strange flesh vile passion sexual desires for one another through homosexuality.
People with a preconceived belief that Angels did not mate with women in Genesis 6:1-2 may be inclined not read their belief onto the Jude 1:6-7 verses, as not supporting Scripture evidence that shows Angels did not keep their heavenly abode and came to Earth to marry and mate with human women. They misinterpret these verses in the following manner…
In order to support his interpretation of, “REBELLED AND CAME DOWN TO EARTH TO INFLUENCE AND POSSESS HUMAN BEINGS” he cited Luke 11:24-26 which reads, “When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, and finding none it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house swept and put in order. Then it goes and brings seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there. And the last state of that person is worse than the first.”
Thus, that citation was to a text that had nothing to say about what he implied is stated or referenced.
For some odd reason, George Lujack did not interact with 2 Peter 2:
God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell [Tartarus] and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the sensual conduct of the wicked (for as that righteous man lived among them day after day, he was tormenting his righteous soul over their lawless deeds that he saw and heard)…
Thus, Jude and 2 Peter 2 combined refer to a sin of Angels, place that sin to pre-flood days and correlate it to sexual sin which occurred after the Angels, “left their first estate,” after which they were incarcerated, and there is only a one-time fall/sin of Angels in the Bible.
So, if they are not referring to the Gen 6 affair, we have no idea to what sin they were referring and taking those specific combined points and reducing them to a generic assertion of, “REBELLED AND CAME DOWN TO EARTH TO INFLUENCE AND POSSESS HUMAN BEINGS” along with an irrelevant citation does not change that fact.
He then goes back to, “Angels or demons cannot conceive children with human beings. Only Yeshua Messiah (Jesus Christ), among the heavenly host, has crossed the boundary between spirit and flesh to take on human flesh” indeed since, “Angels” are not the ones who, “crossed the boundary between spirit and flesh” and, “demons” are also not the ones who, “crossed the boundary between spirit and flesh.” You see, he is correct without knowing why and this examples how someone can come to correct conclusions even based on faulty premises.
He then continues advancing his category error so that it does not actually advance his view at all, “ANGELS / DEMONS / UNCLEAN SPIRITS CAN DWELL IN AND POSSESS MAN; THEY CANNOT MARRY AND MATE WITH WOMEN / DAUGHTERS OF MEN” Angels did, demons/unclean spirits did not and cannot.
He then asks and answers:
WHAT ABOUT THE TWO ANGELIC MESSENGERS THAT MET WITH LOT?
GENESIS 19:1-2 (NKJV):
Now the TWO ANGELS came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground. And he said, “Here now, my lords, please turn in to your servant’s house and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you may rise early and go on your way.”
Hebraic translations use the word messengers, not angels in Genesis 19:1-2.
GENESIS 19:1-2 (HSV):
Now the TWO MESSENGERS came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. And when Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground, and he said, “Look, please my masters, please turn in to your servant’s house and spend the night, and wash your feet, and rise early and go on your way.”
Assuming that it was angelic messengers who came down from heaven to visit Sodom and meet with Lot, having taken on the appearance of human beings, this does not mean that fallen angels (demons) could have likewise come down from heaven and mated with women in Genesis 6:1-4. Fallen angels could not have harnessed the power of the Holy Spirit to put on the appearance of human beings, and then marry and mate with women, without the approval and consent of Almighty God.
Perhaps the most famous Hebraic translation is the Jewish Publication Society version (such as the 1917 one) and it reads Angels. Yet, we are still, “Assuming that it was angelic messengers” we come to the point I noted above which is that there is no indication (in the entire Bible) of, “having taken on the appearance of human beings.”
Yet, he relies on that non-biblical assertion to support, “this does not mean that fallen angels (demons) could have likewise” done that since, “Fallen angels could not have harnessed the power of the Holy Spirit to put on the appearance of human beings, and then marry and mate with women, without the approval and consent of Almighty God” and he is right again whilst arguing wrongly: God did not consent rather, He incarcerated them physically (which is part of why the likes of the Gen 6 affair has never happened again).
Moreover, he added, “Demons cannot physically assault us” which is tantamount to that they cannot physically mate with us. He also asserted, “In order for demons to do anything to us, they must first get the consent of God, which is exactly what happened in the story of Job. Satan wagered against God…” I am unsure we can take one single example to conclude that any and all such doings of demons must first be God-allowed. I am even more unsure how one example of a non-demon informs us about all demons.
Satan is not an Angel, he is a Cherub (Ezek 28), there is no indication he was personally physically involved in the Gen 6 affair, he is still a physical being, he is not a demon, etc.
George Lujack added, “In order to believe that angels married women and brought forth children with them, known as the Nephilim giants, you would have to believe that angels had supernatural divine power of themselves, something that even Yeshua (Jesus) does not possess.” He based the latter statement on what he quoted thusly, “JOHN 5:19,30 (NKJV): ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, THE SON CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner.’ …‘I CAN OF MYSELF DO NOTHING’” (brackets by Lujack).
In that case, my wife and I must have supernatural divine power of ourselves since we used to not have children but we now do.
Lujack wrote, “Yeshua (Jesus) can do no supernatural works of Himself (John 5:20), but can only do such works through the power of the Father, Almighty God.”
In that case, my wife and I can only do such works through the power of the Father, Almighty God.
Yet, just as God does not approve of illicit so called marriages beyond allowing them, he also did not approve of Angel with human marriage.
Ironically, as we have seen time and again, he overlooking many scripture truths and opined, “Those who believe and preach that the Nephilim giants of Genesis 6:1-4 were the offspring result of fallen angels (sons of God) mating with women (daughters of men) are overlooking many Scripture truths.”
He then loops back to, “ANGELS CAN APPEAR AS MEN WHEN SENT ON A MISSION FROM GOD. HEBREWS 13:2 (NKJV): Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some have unwittingly entertained angels.” See, again, he takes, “APPEAR AS” to mean to do something they are never once said to do rather than accepting that such is just how they ontologically physically are.
By asserting, “Angels mating with women resulting in Nephilim giants is a fear-mongering doctrine of demons” he just claimed that the original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christians commentators, starting in BC days, was a doctrine of demons even when he has been shown to be mistaken on various levels and Angel view proponents can argue by actually appealing to actual biblical statements.
Oddly, he argued, “When mankind rebelled and fell into sin, resulting in a change in character to both man and animals, God still protected man by placing a fear instinct of man in all animals. To believe that God would leave women vulnerable to sexual assault and marriage from demons is not consistent with the character of God…Almighty God would never have allowed demons to prey on women, take them captive, rape them, and marry them.”
Again, he is right by accident (since he mistakenly refers to demons) but is really arguing that, essentially, no one or no thing should have ever been able to sexual assault and illicit marry since God would not leave any of mankind vulnerable. And yet, all of post-fall human history shows that implication is fallacious.
He argues, “Almighty God would have had to have been asleep at the controls while angels rebelled against Him and decided to come down to Earth” but should we likewise argue that, “Almighty God would have had to have been asleep at the controls while Satan rebelled against Him and decided to come down to Earth” to beguile Eve in the garden?
Yet, he continued that point with, “utilize His Holy Spirit power to take on human flesh, impose themselves on women, marry them, and have children with them” and yet, his vulnerability assertion was just debunked.
Furthermore, “Then, as the story goes, while God allowed this to continue unabated, one day He decided that He would destroy all flesh, because He was sorry that He created man and was also sorry that He allowed rebellious angels to mate with women, which resulted in evil Nephilim (giant) offspring proliferating on the Earth.” Should we likewise argue, “Then, as the story of the garden goes, while God allowed this beguilement of Eve to continue unabated, one day He decided that He would interfere,” etc.?
Yes, God allows things to happen even when He then prevents them from continuing to happen.
Continuing:
WILL THERE BE A RETURN OF THE NEPHILIM (GIANTS)?
There are a lot of hucksters peddling books and making films that are filled with sensationalized, fear-inducing, fascinating tales, not only of angels mating with women resulting in Nephilim giants that existed in times past, but are also promoting the idea that demons are returning to Earth to mate with women and create Nephilim giants in the end times.
Satan and the demons will indeed be coming to earth in the end times, but they will not be taking women for wives, mating with them, and having Nephilim (giant) babies with them.
As far as I can tell, the concept of a, “RETURN OF THE NEPHILIM (GIANTS)” is some sort of weird, paranoid, modern day, North American, Evangelical conspiracy theory with zero evidential support of any sort.
As for, “hucksters peddling books and making films” indeed, I term them pop-Nephilologists who make a living by selling un-biblical tall-tales to Christians. I have devoted some of my books toward debunking them, such as Nephilim and Giants: Believe It or Not!: Ancient and Neo-Theo-Sci-Fi Tall Tales and Nephilim and Giants as per Pop-Researchers: A Comprehensive Consideration of the claims of I.D.E. Thomas, Chuck Missler, Dante Fortson, Derek Gilbert, Brian Godawa, Patrick Heron, Thomas Horn, Ken Johnson, L.A. Marzulli, Josh Peck, CK Quarterman, Steve Quayle, Rob Skiba, Gary Wayne, Jim Wilhelmsen, et al.
Indeed, “Satan and the demons will indeed be coming to earth in the end times, but they will not be taking women for wives, mating with them, and having Nephilim (giant) babies with them” and it will be more a case of that when the Abyss is opened during the Rev 9 timeline, demons will reinhabit their Angel bodies as they are released from their incarceration, wreak havoc on Earth, fight and lose a war in heaven, and be condemned.
He then loops back to, “GIGANTISM…In the pre-flood Earth, man lived as long as 969-years…oxygen levels on the Earth were higher…An oxygen rich atmosphere fueled human gigantism…as well as gigantism…due to a higher percentage of oxygen” so we are really just back to that if everyone was a giant then no one was since they were all subjectively average to each other—and, again, this is all irrelevant since we have no reliable physical description of Nephilim and the English Bibles’ usage of giants has nothing to do with height at all.
Biblically, Nephilim did not make it past the flood in any way, shape, or from yet, he answers, “DO NEPHILIM GIANTS EXIST TODAY?” with, “While most would say that Nephilim giants do not exist today, this is not the case at all” since by Nephilim he means, “very tall and large” (which are generically vague subjective terms) so to him, anyone who is whatever, “very tall and large” means is a Nephil.
He even argues, “God did not flood the Earth to rid the world of Nephilim (giants). Nephilim giants reemerged after the flood of Noah. God judged the Earth to rid the world of the wickedness of MAN. To believe that God flooded the earth to rid the Earth of the Nephilim (giants) is imposing a belief onto Scripture that isn’t supported in place of the real reason God flooded the Earth: because the wickedness of man was great.”
This is tricky since we have to dissect in in three ways:
1) “God did not flood the Earth to rid the world of Nephilim (giants)” of pop-Nephilologists since, “Nephilim giants reemerged after the flood of Noah” for which there is literally zero reliable indication: in part since God did not fail, did not miss a loophole, the flood was not much of a waste, etc., etc., etc. Also, we are told five times who survived the flood but Nephilim are not in any of those statements (Gen 7:7, 23; Heb 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20 & 2 Peter 2:5): yet, such is why some post-flood Nephilologists literally just invent un-biblical fantasy tall-tales about a second creation of Nephilim post-flood.
2) “God did not flood the Earth to rid the world of Nephilim (giants)” of Lujack so that, “very tall and large” people, “reemerged after the flood of Noah” which is a non-issue.
3) “God” most certainly did, “flood the Earth to rid the world of Nephilim (giants)” of the Bible based Angel view since they were part of the corrupt perfect storm package that included the trifecta of fallen Angels, fallen humans, and fallen Nephilim. Also, again there is no reliable indication, “Nephilim giants reemerged after the flood of Noah.”
“God judged the Earth to rid the world of the wickedness of MAN” which accounts for humans, Angels, and Nephilim.
Thus, “To believe that God flooded the earth to rid the Earth of the Nephilim (giants)” as an all-inclusive package, sans the eight in the ark, pertaining to any of those three views, “is” not in the least bit, “imposing a belief onto Scripture that isn’t supported in place of the real reason God flooded the Earth: because the wickedness of man was great.”
His odd (vaguely generically subjective), “very tall and large” view goes as far as that with which he closed his article:
When Yeshua (Jesus) returns and establishes His Millennial Kingdom on Earth, He will restore man’s lifespan to what it was before the flood of Noah. A child shall die, that is, will cease being a child at one hundred years old and then enter adulthood. When man’s lifespan is increased in the Millennial Kingdom, as it was before the flood, we may see a return of Nephilim giants, mighty men, men of renown, once again on the Earth.
So, he rightly denies a pop-Nephilologist view of a return of Nephilim but approves of his own view of a return of Nephilim.
Overall, we saw that his counter Angel view arguments fail since they are based on un-biblical Angelology, category errors, myopic points, appealing to irrelevant sources, etc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby.
If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out.
Here is my donate/paypal page.
You can comment here and/or on my Twitter/X page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.
Leave a Reply