Biblegems #265
Last week’s post, “Giants—Myth or
History,” generated some excellent questions. These questions will be addressed
in this and subsequent posts.
Question: On identifying the “sons of God” (Gen. 6:1-4) as angels:
Is
it not the clearer indication in Matthew 22:30 from our Lord that angels are
sexless? Is there any Biblical reference to the ability of angels to have sex
at all, let alone match human chromosomes? Where does it say that the sons of
God were fallen angels? Where does it say that angels can impregnate?
There
are three theories on the identity of the “sons
of God” in Genesis 6:1-4, all of them controversial.
Theory
1: Fallen Angels
Theory
2: Godly descendants of Seth
Theory
3: Dynastic Rulers (Dynastic Rulers is the weakest, biblically.)
Identifying
the “sons of God” as fallen angels
has been a widely held position throughout church history.[i]
This
has been challenged in recent times, based on the theory that angels are sexless,
incapable of interbreeding with humans. Billy Graham popularized this theory in
his book, “Angels: God’s Secret Agents.”[ii] He interprets Matthew 22:30 to mean:
“The Bible teaches that angels are sexless.” Here is the passage:
Matt.
22:30 At
the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will
be like the angels in heaven.
This
verse actually says nothing regarding angel gender or biology. What Jesus teaches
here is that there will be no marriage
ceremonies among the resurrected people of God, just as there are no
marriage ceremonies for angels.
To assume
this means that angels and resurrected humans are sexless goes beyond the
meaning of the text. The Bible teaches that God designed the male / female
nature of mankind as an “image” in
the created realm of God, who is Spirit (Gen. 1:27). Nowhere does Scripture suggest that humanity becomes
gender-neutral in the resurrection.
Additionally,
the term “sons of God” is used only
of angels in the Old Testament (Job 1; Job 38:7; Ps. 29:1; Ps. 89:7). The Septuagint
(Greek translation) of Genesis 6:1-4 translates “sons of God” as “angels.”
In the New Testament, Jude 6-7 specifically mentions “…the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but
abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with
everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and
Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and
perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of
eternal fire.”
Only Genesis
6:1-4 matches Jude’s description of angels committing immoral acts similar to
that taking place in Sodom and Gomorrah.
Peter also
refers to these disobedient “spirits”
that God has since ”imprisoned”:
2
Pet. 3:19-20 “…the imprisoned
spirits—to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the
days of Noah while the ark was being built.”
Finally, angels
often change into human form in Scripture. Who is to say that genetic
duplication is not involved, especially given the biblical evidence above supporting
the interpretation that the “sons of God”
are fallen angels?
How appropriate
that Jesus “…has gone into heaven and is
at God’s right hand with angels,
authorities and powers in submission to him” (1Pet. 3:22).
[i] Supported
by Philo, Josephus, Justin, Ambrose, the apocryphal book of Enoch, Delitzsch,
Driver, Cassuto, Henry Morris, von Rad, Speiser. See: Chronological and
Background Charts of the Old Testament, 1978, The Zondrvan Corporation. Pg. 35
[ii] Angels:
God’s Secret Agents. Billy Graham, Doubleday & Company, Inc. Garden City,
New York. 1975. pg 33
