We conclude that which was begun part 1 which is a consideration of John Gill’s (1697-1771 AD) Exposition of the Old and New Testament pertaining to the issue of the Nephilim:
At long last, continuing where we left off from John Gill’s commentary on Genesis 6 itself:
…the souls of the saints before the resurrection, during their separate state, are in some sense like the angels, to which may be applied those words of Maimonides [Gill’s note, “Hilch. Teshuba, c. 8. sect. 2”], “In the world to come, there is no body, but the souls of the righteous only, without a body, “as the ministering angels”; and seeing there is no body, there is no eating nor drinking in it…
We have already considered the issue of eating and drinking in eternity and merely citing another who misinterprets the text, Rabbi Moses ben Maimon aka Maimonides aka Rambam (1135-1204 AD) does not help matters.
Gill continues thusly, “And according to the sense of the Jews, they will be like to the angels after the resurrection.” He, at least, makes a good point to the effect that “Christ, by making mention of angels, strikes at another notion of the Sadducees, that there were no angels, Act 23:8.”
Now, getting more to the point of the Genesis 6 affair, note that Gill’s premise is not the Bible but Arabic traditions:
According to the Arabic writers [Gill’s notes, “Elmacinus, Patricides apud Hottinger. Smegma, l. 1. c. viii. p. 226, 227, 228”], immediately after the death of Adam the family of Seth was separated from the family of Cain; Seth took his sons and their wives to a high mountain (Hermon), on the top of which Adam was buried, and Cain and all his sons lived in the valley beneath, where Abel was slain; and they on the mountain obtained a name for holiness and purity, and were so near the angels that they could hear their voices and join their hymns with them; and they, their wives and their children, went by the common name of the sons of God: and now these were adjured, by Seth and by succeeding patriarchs, by no means to go down from the mountain and join the Cainites; but notwithstanding in the times of Jared some did go down, it seems; and after that others, and at this time it became general; and being taken with the beauty of the daughters of Cain and his posterity, they did as follows…
And upon this Arabic tradition, Gill weaves his interpretation of the Biblical text as we pick up directly where the quote above leaves off:
…and they took them wives of all that they chose; not by force, as Aben Ezra and Ben Gersom interpret, for the Cainites being more numerous and powerful than they, it can hardly be thought that the one would attempt it, or the other suffer it; but they intermarried with them, which the Cainites might not be averse unto; they took to them wives as they fancied, which were pleasing to the flesh, without regard to their moral and civil character, and without the advice and consent of their parents, and without consulting God and his will in the matter; or they took women as they pleased, and were to their liking, and committed fornication, to which the Cainites were addicted; for they spent their time in singing and dancing, and in uncleanness, whereby the posterity of Seth or sons of God were allured to come down and join them, and commit fornication with them, as the Arabic writers (m) relate.
So much for the Bible’s contents, concepts and historical, cultural and grammatical contexts.
On Genesis 6:4, John Gill comments thusly (first ellipses in original):
There were giants in the earth in those days,…. That is, in the days before the sons of God took the daughters of men for wives, in such a general manner as before declared, or before the declension and apostasy became so universal; even in the times of Jared, as the Arabic writers [Gill’s note, “Elmacinus & Patricides apud Hottinger, p. 235, 236” also see the Book of Enoch 6:6] understand it, who say that these giants were begotten on the daughters of Cain by the children of Seth, who went down from the mountain to them in the days of Jared, see Gen 5:20 the word “Nephilim” comes from a word which signifies to fall; and these might be so called, either because they made their fear to fall upon men, or men, through fear, to fall before them, because of their height and strength; or rather because they fell and rushed on men with great violence, and oppressed them in a cruel and tyrannical manner; or, as some think, because they fell off and were apostates from the true religion, which is much better than to understand them of apostate angels, whom the Targum of Jonathan mentions by name, and calls them Schanchazai and Uziel, who fell from heaven, and were in the earth in those days: and also after that, which shows that the preceding clause respects giants in former times: when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, came into their houses and chambers, and lay with them: and they bare children unto them, or giants unto them, as may be supplied from the former clause; for the sense is, as there were giants before this general defection, so there were at this time, when there was a mixture of the Cainites and Sethites; which were the offspring of the sons of God, or posterity of Seth, mixing with the daughters of men, or the posterity of Cain; for this is not to be understood after the flood, as Aben Ezra, Ben Melech; and so they are described in the following words: the same became mighty men; for tallness and strength, for power and dominion, for tyranny and oppression: which were of old: like those that were of old before; or who in after times were spoken of, as in the days of old: men of renown, or “of name” (o); whose names were often made mention of, both for their size and for their wickedness; they were much talked of, and extolled for their exploits, and even wicked ones: they were famous men, or rather infamous; for some men get a name in the world, not for their goodness, but for their greatness, and sometimes for their great wickedness; which sense is countenanced by what follows:
that there were giants in these early times is confirmed by the testimony of many Heathen writers; such were the Titans that made war against Saturn, begotten by Ouranus, who were not only of bulky bodies, but of invincible strength, as Apollodorus (p) relates, and Berosus (q) speaks of a city about Lebanon, called Enos, which was a city of giants, who were men of vast bodies, and of great strength, inventors of arms and music, were cannibals, and exceedingly debauched.
Yes indeed, that was all one single sentence, you gotta love it!
But what we cannot love is John Gill’s reaching in each and every direction, except for the Bible’s own context, to weave a tapestry of seeking to elucidate that which the Bible does not imply.
Note that “giants were begotten on the daughters of Cain by the children of Seth” but just how do giants result from two humans producing offspring? One more time Gill admits knowledge, original and ancient, that “some think” that it “is much better than to understand them of apostate angels.”
John Gill states that “there were giants before” and specifies “this general defection” and that “so there were at this time, when there was a mixture of the Cainites and Sethites.”
He states this because Genesis 6:4 states that “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men.” The questions are when were “those days” and when was “after that”? Well, the text pinpoints the timeframe by specifying that it was “when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men.” Gill is stating that it there were giants before but the text states that there were giants at the time, as a result, of the Genesis 6 affair and afterwards but not before.
Lastly, note that Gill makes a good point in noting that the Bible affirms “the testimony of many Heathen writers” who also knew about giants, “such were the Titans.” Such shared legend and myth, as they came to be termed, resulted from the common history being dispensed as humanity populated the far reaches of the Earth after the Tower of Babel event.