Greetings Mercury- Mike,
I think we might be getting a little off the “The Bible and Racism” topic, but just out of an interesting aside.
I like the points you’ve made. I have heard two main views on the “sons of God” as described in Scripture. And both have very different outcomes, since they are very different in their meanings. At least the out-workings derive from fundamentally contrasting experiences, and so result in a major variance of views regarding demons. That, in-turn, affects how we understand Satan and to what degree fallen angels have power in this world. I am looking at both views with open eyes and a pondering mind. I came to know view 1 first.
The 1st view, demons had sexual relations with human women, and produced off-spring. The off-spring were a hybrid human-demon creature and caused much trouble on earth pre-flood (makes one wonder whether demons still are able to sexually reproduce, they are eternal, if not-why? they also appear asexual, nowhere giving birth). This view has two angles in which it is described: demons had one-to-one sexual relations with human women, causing supernatural genetic mutations: demons possessed human men and through the human males having sexual relations with human women, they simply controlled the behaviour of those involved, resulting in wide spread immoral violence.
At either route the world became increasingly evil and God said, “I will blot out man…” And down with the super mutant Nephilim.
The 2nd view recognizes the “sons of God” as those born from the line of Seth. And adversely, those born from the line of Cain, were of the “daughters of men”. In other parts of Scripture referred to as children of disobedience. In general, the ungodly. This view recognizes Job 1:6 & 2:1 as “sons of God” relating to angels, yet, doesn’t determine that the term isn’t used to refer to men elsewhere. This idea comes from interpreting Genesis 4:26 as the kick-off of a godly branch of humans who leaned toward God. Unlike the ancestors of Cain.
“To Seth, to him also a son was born; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord.” Genesis 4:26 NASB
This is interesting since all of Genesis 5 in devoted to the “generations of Adam”, and it is all talking about Seth’s line alone. It even climaxes with Enoch. The great grandfather of Noah, imagine those family stories at the dinner table. “The man who walked with God; and was not, for God took him.” And this line of Seth appeared to be set apart, until just before the flood.
The twist: this is where view 2 goes another way. Now the “sons of God” are the good guys with wandering eyes." The daughters of men were beautiful", becomes a willing lust to pursue relationships outside of their own line of those of the “sons of God”. And as with the Israelites in Numbers 25, the lure of sexual attraction draws away Noah’s generation into what became the epitome of human sin. That including demonic activity inspiring the whole mess. And so, God brought destruction.
Jude touches on this patterned, godless way of mankind’s history, when comparing them to the ungodly persons of the early church days:
“Woe to them! For they have gone the way of Cain, and for pay they have rushed headlong into the error of Balaam, and perished in the rebellion of Korah.” Jude 1:11 NASB
In Luke’s genealogy of Jesus, he speaks using an ancient written way to align a people with God. And so, son of God, meaning from God or as what may be in the Genesis 6 account as “sons of God”, the line of those who worshipped God as opposed to the other strain of the ones who fell away? Notice the names mentioned.
“…the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.” Luke 3:37b-38 NASB
The Nephilim are mentioned, as the sons of Anak, in Numbers 13:33. This would either indicate the Nephilim were a reference to giant men in general, or some how the demon off-spring out-lasted the flood? This may also indicate that the Genesis reference to Nephilim is about giants who, “were on the earth in those days” but not the children of demons. They may have been of the bloodline of Cains people and produced warriors unlike anything we can imagine?
So how should we read this passage? View 1 gives demons physical power over humans and makes them able to procreate. View 2 limits Satan’s realm to temptation and natural phenomena but leaves them as spiritual entities, not physical. Both views make clear the involvement of demons in the brokenness of mankind.
“Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.The Nephilim 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.” Genesis 6:1-4 NASB
Since Genesis 3:1, Satan has been fallen and busy at tempting humans. And it appears that he was joined by the demons from day one? At least that is the impression I have been given. Jude 6 seems to reference sexual lust of angels, seeking “strange flesh”, like the free spirit of Sodom & Gomorrah; not saying they actually procreated. Even the lusting was sufficient for God’s wrath. Perhaps view 1b? 2 Peter 2:4-10 mentions fallen angels being placed in bondage for their evil and gives other ancient examples of serious sin causing God’s wrath- doesn’t say the angels procreated, but they obviously had incited the wickedness?
1 Peter 3:18-22 is speaking of the “spirits”, and that passage has at least 5 differing interpretations. The two I consider possible are: Jesus is preaching the gospel to the human race that died during the flood or to fallen angels locked in prison waiting Judgement Day. Either way, those who hear His gospel are under conviction for their unrepentant ways leading to death. For them, repentance isn’t an option, the gospel is judgement.
I am undecided as to which way I lean. Though my instinct tells me that demons do not have any ability to sexually reproduce. And view 1 does tend to stray into much to do with sensational stories, I do like stories. I will see where the Lord leads me on this one.
And, I too believe the curse against Ham ended with Canaan. And that curse had nothing to do with skin tone. Racism is a wicked evil thing.
Good night all.