Sons of God - Removing The Fog of Religion

Go to content

Sons of God

Studies and Doctrine > First Book of Science
Sons of God
Presented by Your servant, Dan

Sons of God – Genesis 6:4 -- explained (2001 -- Upate: 2020)
The following is a commentary of Genesis 6.  It seems the imaginations of some Evangelical Christians is running wild, promoting the idea that the remark, “sons of God”, somehow translates to “angels of God”.  It is the purpose of this article and commentary a return to sanity for those who chose to see the truth.  First let’s cover a few things to set up the reason for this study, article, opinion piece -- whatever, you call it, it is written in the Spirit of Truth.  A reader sent me an email thanking me for giving him a hard spiritual slap across the face.  Why?  Because he said it woke him up.  He said that he was traveling down that road of myth turned into truth.  I hope and pray that you too find this article on this subject, not only fascinating but a wake up, or at least a caution and remember, just because someone is recognized as someone great, and super knowledgeable, within the Christian Communities does not mean they know what they are talking about.  Do your home work, grow in knowldege of Him, our Savior, YaHshua, and the light will shine, exposing those who have gone off track and even a few Wolves among the Sheep may be spotted.  Read on, Brothers and Sisters, and all seekers of the Truth, and welcome.  

Get your bibles out, check the Scriptures, pray, ask for guidance, listen to what the Spirit has to say, see if what I am sharing it true or not.  I have not great letters of learning, so do not take what I am saying to mean anything unless it rings true with His Word, not mine, but His.  All those on the Side of our Savior, the Anointed YaHshua, step over to this side and see for yourself.  

Why is this important?
A very basic and simple reason:  The teaching that angels could take human women, marry them (marry?) and procreate producing children of extraordinary size, demeans and reduces the importance of what our Heavenly Father did in Creating YaHshua, His First Born son of the flesh.  The false teaching means that rebellious angels had this ability all along, able to procreate through flesh and blood women would mean that the birth of our Savior, by spiritual means, is no big deal. While the God of Heaven “created” the fetus in the virgin girl, Mary, then graced this fetus with His Holy Spirit, these teachers saying that “angels”, fallen angels, not less, actually have the ability to copulate. as male and female can, and are able to impregnate human women, would be one way of doing their creator one better -- If that were possible, but it is not, and you will see why, that is, if you do not see now.
Our Savior clearly tells us that “angels” are neither male nor female, they are a different species, for lack of a better word.  The Angels do not marry and do not give in marriage -- according to those teachers who are fogging up the religious minds of others, angels do marry women, or have married human women -- shades of pagan myth.   Angels do have the ability to reveal themselves, in person or in vision or dreams and they appear as neither male nor female -- some have appeared as human as you or I, so goes the warning to treat strangers with respect.  

(Heb 13:2)  Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

Anyone experiencing an angelic encounter always sees them as males, that is, from our physical point of view, they are not women with long flowing hair, and they are not sporting graceful wings, like birds -- at least, not the Angels that have been entertained (hosted, met in coversation), they appear in a common form, the appearance of a man.   Certainly, that they are not recognizable from an every day common guy, shlould be some kind of a warning -- in a vision or dream, however, to see them in their natural, original form, well, that is another matter. The Apostle John was communication with one, not on the streets or in passing, or at a dinner, or chapel, or on the beach but in a personal vision and after quit a few sessions, this Angel appeared to John in his natural form and immediately John thought He was talking to a god, and fell to his knees in an attitude of worship -- he was scolded for this and warned to stay true to YaHshua and the worship of God the Father.  In defense of the Apostle, the image before him was so specular and overpowering his senses that while he knew we are not to worship Angels, his first response was that he was facing the Glory of our Creator and being so shaken, it would be natural for him or anyone to fall down into a position of worship -- he was soon corrected.  

(Rev 19:10)  And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See you do it not: I am your fellowservant, and of your brethren that have the testimony of YaHshua: worship God (The Father): for the testimony of YaHshua is the spirit of prophecy.

(Col 2:18)  Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he (or she) has not seen, vainly puffed up by his (or her) fleshly mind,

Notice, voluntary humility, that is, fake humility.  I have seen priest and preachers dripping with this fake humility, but to some it appears as such honesty of the heart but is not, it is only a show to convince the ....  Well, to convince those who will be convinced that they are sincere and therefore, are humbly truthful.  Have you ever had one of those feelings about someone who is preaching and dancing and pounding the bible and ever so humbly praying and you get that feeling that you don't like it?  You fight agains such feelings, after all, this is a man of god, or a minister who is much more schooled than you, right?  That, as you know, is called a gut feeling, and that is the spirit in you sending up warnings. But, hey, everyone has to make a living, right?

The worship of Angels, giving them credit for being lawful in taking wives from among human women, just drips of absurdity.  Angels dealing with the physical people of God appear in view and in a manner with male attributes but to suggest they have the same sex parts as we humans is to ignore what our Savior told us concerning “marriage”, for what is the purpose of marriage if not to have children?  Yet, those who teach this absurd doctrine, do teach that these rebel angels made honest women of those they took by marrying them -- just one absurdity after another.

(Mat 22:29-30)  YaHshua answered and said unto them, You do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Not understanding the “power of God” to create as opposed to the way we humans do it, our Savior YaHshua clearly states that this will cease and not be necessary after the Resurrection – Notice, the comparison with the “angels” – they do not marry.  Put this together with Paul’s teaching and we get a complete picture.  

(Gal 3:28)  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in the Christ YaHshua.

Let’s move on with a verse by verse commentary, as we strive to remove the Fog of Religion, covering the minds of those who find this more than fascinating --

(Gen 6:1)  And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them

Comment: You will notice the wording here includes the whole earth, not some island of valley, but the whole earth, mankind was multiplying.  “And daughters were born to them” would only seem natural, so why this remark, as if it needs to be said?  Certainly if men are multiplying there would be women and sons and daughters.  I do not have the answer for this wording and can only speculate.  It is possible there were two types of men on earth at this time and this particular branch of men were being singled out by acknowledging their rapid growth in numbers.  We do have reason to suggest this.  In Genesis chapter 1 we read about the creation, then in Genesis 2 it changes – in the original creation everything is finished, and men and women are told to multiply, be fruitful and speard out over the earth, but then in Chapter Two everything changes.  

The creation if finished but now YaHWeH is making a Garden, on an already created earth, in a location noted for its rivers.  Once He has finished the Garden He then makes a man, a single man, and puts him in the Garden, then some time later he puts the man to sleep and from him He creates a woman -- a true miracle of and in the physical flesh, but both are of the same kind, both are called, Adam or man -- Genesis 5:2.  All of this appears to be far removed from the account in the First Chapter – two creations of men?  If this is a possibility, and it seems to be just that, then that would explain the odd wording found in this first verse of Genesis 6.  It is not an issue of “salvation” and not being presented a doctrine of any kind, only speculation.

(Gen 6:2)  That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Comment: Who could these "sons of God" possibly be?  Going back to a time before this -- men (we have seen that this would include women, a revealed in Gen 5:2) began to call upon upon, as in worship in the Name YHWH --

Genesis 4:26, Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time men began to call on the Name of the YaHWeH.
These would be the forerunners of what would follow, later, even after the Great Flood, when other men and woman would be called sons of god, by the fact that they held YaHWeH to be their Creator, essentially, their Father, by way of creation -- John 1:12, 1 John 3:2, Matthew 5:9, Romans 8:14; 9:26, Galatians 3:26-27; 4:6, Romans 8:15 -- Hosea 1:10 -- it is indisputable, those who follow and profess and confess YaHWeH/YaHshua, are the sons and daughters (mankind) of the Living God.

The verse in Genesis 6 and the verses following that verse #2,  has been abused so many times it is hard to know where to begin, in the unraveling of this lie about angels marrying human women -- just saying that, sounds about as dumb as it gets.  But, as you have seen, from the first comment, it is not hard to dispel the idea, or teaching, that the “sons of God” is not talking about angles -- much less fallen angels having sex with human women -- that may be exciting for some to imagine, but it is a lie, a big fat lie.  For one thing if this were the case they would not be called “sons of God” but rather, “demons of Satan”, or even, “fallen angels”.  

Next, we have the clear statement that these “sons of God” took wives – they married these daughters of men.  Angels do not marry, just as our Lord, YaHshua, made clear -- For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven – the comparison does not need any interpretation and is clear, but apparently the words of our Lord, YaHshua, upsets the desire of some to continue in this false teaching continuing to say these “sons of God” that took wives were angels.  When confronted with this verse they tried to skirt it, even though it is coming from the one that should know, our Savior, YaHshua.  Finally, one of the better names among the Evangelical teachers came up with a solution to this problem and figured out a way around what our Savior was teaching.  This teacher of men said that while puzzling over this point of disagreement from our Savior it sudden struck him that these were “angels in heaven” not on earth – problem solved, our Savior, according to this genius, was talking about angles in heaven and not about angels on earth.  So, according to this kind of thinking whatever happens in heaven is not what happens on earth.   Now we can all ignore what our Savior was teaching.  This is ridiculous reasoning but that is the best they have while trying to teach a doctrine of demons, the angels of the Devil.

 The odd fact that it is mentioned the “daughters of men” were “fair” or “beautiful” to look at suggest, as in verse one (see comment above), that there is perhaps two types of men on earth.  First we see a type of men in the first creation.  Elohim (plural for more than one) creates the Heavens and the Earth and mankind and tells them to multiply.  Then a second man is created, called Adam, separate from the others, being placed in a Garden apart from the others.  Now, if this speculation has any merit we can see one group of men, looking at the daughters of another group and marrying out of their class.  This has nothing to do with fallen angels, not one word here about angels, only about “men”.
  It is also possible the Sons of God were faithful followers of YaHWeH, at one point, and by desiring to marry outside of their faith, and doing just that, the wickedness and rebellion against their Creator was complete for all mankind.  Look at the New Covenant, our Lord and Savior YaHshua, making it possible for us, as believers, to become “children of God” and as “children”, sons and daughters.  This is backed up by the New Covenant writings :

(Rom 8:14 -16) For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For you have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but you have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Faulty reasoning:
An Angel of YaHWeH, Gabriel, visited Mary and Joseph and told them the Name they were to name our Savior -- and it was not, that is NOT JESUS.

The King James, government commission an approved bible to be translated into the English language, and along the way they inserted a false name, a name the Angel Gabriel never mentioned, the false name -- from the Latin, IESVS, later changed to JESUS, pronounced as GeezUs, and as HeyZeus by others -- still, a Name not familiar to Gabriel and the Name He delivered to Mary and Joseph.  The Name delivered by the Angel Gabriel was YaHshua.  This name is found in the King James government commissioned bible, in the English Torah as JOSHUA, a transliteration of the Hebrew name given to our Savior.  Instead of using this Name they, the translators, substituted a name inherited from the Roman Church, the Latin name, IESVS. [Wonder how this false name is pronounced in Latin?  Wonder not more, go to this link - His Name Pronounced]

The example in faulty reasoning can be seen when we take the name of the Angel Gabriel, the angel that  delivered our Savior's Name, YaHshua (Joshua) to Mary and Joseph -- If we take the name Gabriel, which means, "man of God", or "man of El", and we apply the same faulty thinking and reasoning that those teaching that the "sons of God" , verbiage found in Genesis 6, means angels, we could just as easily point out that a High Ranking Angel, Gabriel, or "Man of God" could, using the same rasoning, mean that angels are actually men and not heavenly beings at all.  And too, then,  "daughters of men" were actually daughters of angels -- see where all of this kind of twisting ends up?  Is anyone suggesting this?  No, not at all but the same reasoning is used when it comes to the Genesis 6, "sons of God" expression.  This is an extreme example, to be sure, but an example that is just as sound (twisted), maybe mores so, than the faulty reasoning that the "sons of God" means "angels of God".  

Strong's Hebrew/Greek Dictionary -- H1403 - Gabrale -- G1043 - Gabriel -- "man of God" .

Can you see where this kind of reasoning goes crazy?  That should be the end of it, but it is not.  As those teaching false doctrines such as this go on to say the Giants (nephilim) were the children of these "sons of god" -- Not sons of YaHWeH, but the sons of God, the Angels. So, when did our Creator ever call an angel His son?  Remember too, the term man is very broad, and both Adam and Eve were called, Adam, or man, yet, we know that the two a different, of the same kind or species, but different -- a compatible difference, but different.  Angels may also be included, perhaps, in this as a Spirit form or shape of mankind -- not that they are like us, but we are like them, and both, ultimately in the image of our Creator --

(Heb 1:5) For unto which of the angels said He at any time, You are My Son, this day have I begotten you? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? (When?  Never!)

(Act 13:33) God has fulfilled the same unto us their children (children of Israel), in that He has raised up YaHshua, again as it is also written in the second psalm; You are My Son, this day have I begotten you (YaHshua, in fulfilling the promise).

(Psa 2:7) I will declare the decree: YHWH (YaHWeH) hath said unto me, You are my Son; this day have I begotten you.

Our Creator has never called an Angel His son.  Then, of course, someone will quote Job 1, "...sons of god",  a term used when the Angels gathered to together, apparently to give an accounting of what they were doing, or something like a board meeting.  Sons of God, in Job 1 is clearly a reference to the Angels gathered before the throne.  But wait, the verses we just read, say somthing completely different, giving us a heads up -- both cannot be right.  When you look at this verse in Job we see that "sons", according to the Hebrew could just as easily have been translated as "servants", and we do have a New Testament teaching, other than the verses just given, to support this, concerning the Angels  --

(Heb 1:14) Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

(Rev 19:10) And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of YaHshua: worship God: for the testimony of YaHshua is the spirit of prophecy.

We are not to worship angels, they are "servants" and "ministering spirits", not sons as those teachers of Genesis 6 teach concerning this term, "sons of God", thus it holds true, also, that this word for "sons" in Genesis could be translated as "servants of god", but would anyone then dare say this means "servant angels" then?  Think about it, if that were true they would not be called "servants" and not "sons" but "demons and devils" or at the least, "fallen angels" but the wording says not such thing.  As mentioned in another article and study on this same subject if we remove the fog of religion and reading the book of Job again we see that Satan is mentioned, separately from the others, and if these "sons of God" is meant for the angels gathered there it is not a reference to Satan, a fallen angel, his is mentioned apart from them and would not, nor his angels, qualify as "sons of God".

(Rev 12:7) And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

Satan has angels and they are not called "angels of god" and certainly not, "sons of god".  This verse in Revelation reveals the timing that Satan and his angles were cast out of Heaven.  This event occurred after our Savior was raised and returned to Heaven, restored to the Glory He had before.  This is the time the demon angels were denied any further access to the Heavenly throne, Satan and his angels no longer allowed to come in among the true "servants of God" -- and there was rejoicing in Heaven, when this happened, but sorrow expressed for the earth for Satan and his angels are not trapped on Earth, and they are not happy.   

(Rev 12:8-9) And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.  And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

(Gen 6:3)  And the LORD (YaHWeH) 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.

Comment: It appears the Spirit of the Living God, the Creator of all things was living with and struggling with man.  Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary, strive, H1777, Contend, minister, plead. From this verse we can determine that the Spirit of the Creator was dealing, in a personal way, with mankind but to no use as even with this, men continued down their wicked path.  By withdrawing His Spirit, ending the struggle between His spirit and the flesh the years of men were shortened.  The long ages of men prior to this may have been more due to His Spirit being so closely linked to the people of then than anything else.  It is no irony that from the time of this statement, 120 years later the great flood would cover the whole earth.  

(Gen 6:4)  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, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Comment: This is a real tricky verse, or so it seems for some.  When we read or hear what the teachers of the doctrine on Fallen Angels taking wives from among men, they suddenly jump over all good reasoning and tell us these “giants”, or in the Hebrew, “nephilim” are the product of the union between angels and beautiful human women.  Nearly all of the teachers of this false doctrine go to the Book of Enoch for this part of the tale, because your Bible clearly does not teach this, so they have to resort to outside sources, even if it is a source that has been discredited over and over again.  Read this verse in your own bible again – “…in those days…” there were “giants” or “nephilim”.  In what days? In the days that the “sons of God” were taking wives from among men.  In those same days there were “giants” but it never says these “giants” were men and it certainly does not say they were the “offspring” of fallen angels.  Only in the Book of Enoch is this suggest – no – stated as fact.  The Book of Enoch is a work of fiction from before Christ that has been reconstituted and embellished as a work of fact.  This book teaches – believe it or not – that these “nephilim” grew upwards to 240 feet tall.  
   It is very possible these “giants” were giant animals – bone are still being dug up proving that giant animals, “nephilim” if you will, roamed this earth and that is not disputed at all.  Here we have a clear statement that in the time of the fall of man, in the time these  “sons of God” were taking wives from among the population, as many as they chose (?) there were giant creatures roaming, not only at that time but afterward also.  
    From this union between the Sons of God and the daughters of common men the children did not become giants but men or rulers of renown.  There seems to be the suggestion that these unions led to some kind of unity among all people of the flesh and so their children become famous and of reputation, but look what happens – wickedness rules and they begin to move away from their Creator.  So far away they cannot return and it becomes necessary to act, to destroy the cancer that has spread to the point of no return. Still, no mention of angles in this.

(Gen 6:5)  And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Comment: This should be the nail that puts this to rest – “And God (YHWH) saw that the wickedness of MAN…”, not “angel” but of man, it was the mind (heart) of men that was “evil continually” – no mention of any angels, not even of Satan, none.  The problem with men is not angels taking their daughters to marry; the problem is with men or mankind.  Says so right here.

(Gen 6:6)  And it repented the LORD (YHWH) that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved Him at his heart.

Comment: If the creator of all things is sad, or “grieved” can it be compared with our grief?  His love is greater than our and His grief would also be greater.  We cannot imagine how much this hurt our Creator, and being forced to act as He did.  He had to stop the insanity, but He did not give up on us completely saving Noah to carry on – we, through Noah, are given a second chance and so, here we are today.  

(Gen 6:7)  And the LORD (YHWH) said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Comment: It repented Him for having made man (Strong’s H5162 – to be sorry).  And where are the angels in all of this?  They are not mentioned and how strange is that if the “sons of God” who started all of this trouble, as they teach it, are supposed to be bad behaving angels not being mentioned at all, not one word?

(Gen 6:8)  But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD (YaHWeH).

Comment: Here is the great mercy of our Creator.  Even though he regretted having made man, and being the Creator He had every right to end or prolong or to start over if He decided.  In this case He looked a Noah and decided to try again, on a smaller scale.  Everything was changed.  The Giant animals, mentioned earlier were buried in huge volumes of silt from the flood and are being uncovered today.  Animals in the far North have been found frozen in solid ice, Mammoth elephants and others from a time before the Ice.  The environment of the pre-flood days appear to have been much milder than now, tropical, even, the world over.

(Gen 6:10) And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
(Gen 6:11)  The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
(Gen 6:12)  And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.

Comment: We are told Noah had three sons, from these sons would come the people we are today.  It is repeated that the earth was corrupt and filled with violence.  And what does this last verse say?  "... for all FLESH had corrupted HIS way upon earth"  Not one mention of angels in any form.  These were the days of Noah, and of mankind, not of fallen angels.  Read it again, not one mention or even allusion to fallen angels.

(Gen 6:13)  And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

Comment: This is getting redundant but true – no mention of angel, good or bad.  Listen to what YaHWeH says to Noah, “…the earth is filled with violence through them …” and who is the “them”, who is it He is going to “destroy with the earth”?  Men, not angels and there is no mention whatsoever about man being corrupted by fallen angels.  Angels are not faulted for the fall of man, not once.
I would challenge any Bible teacher to show us where the angels, or even Satan, are given the responsibility for the Fall of man?  And to answer the question, Do angels marry? And prove it biblically.  It cannot be prove, of course, as there is not place in our Bibles that says, or teaches such a thing.  The only way this can be conjured up is by introducing outside sources and then the twisting of the Word.

Cross Species Failure --
There is an issue here that is rebellious against our Heavenly Father – cross species.  The idea that species can be cross bred happens only in the imaginations of men.  Only our Heavenly Father can do such a thing, not angels.  We read of such a creature in Ezekiel 1:5, a creature that transport the Throne of YaHWeH appearing to be composed of various types of animals and of man, but this is a spirit vehicle, created by the Creator of all things.  Among men He, our Creator, has determined this would not be possible, and nowhere are we clearly told that created angels have this ability, not one verse – only from the imaginations of men.
 Dogs cannot cross with cats, elephants with cow, etc., etc., etc., this only happens in the movies or in the writings and teachings of men attempting to make “fiction” fact –

(1Co 15:39-41)  All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another.  There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another.  NIV

Well, maybe not just the doctrines of men --

(1Ti 4:1)  Now the Spirit speaks expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

This verse, just quoted, ties departing from the faith with those listening to false doctrines coming from devils.  This departing from the faith, is not a falling away but is all about those listening to these fake doctrines, and these teachings are coming from devils, Satan's demons.  The departing from the faith, as the context demonstrates, is not about people professing a belief and a baptism leaving the Church.  Nothing so visible as that, but by accepting these doctrines of devils have, in effect, left the truth of the Faith.  The truth is that our Lord came into this world by miraculous creation.  The lie is that rebel angels have always been able to procreate super babies by having sex with human women.  This makes a mockery of our Lord's Miracuous creation into the flesh.

So, just who would be teaching that spirit beings can procreate with flesh?  Only our Heavenly Father can and has ever done that, but what He did was to create a child, He did not do what those teaching the angels did.  How did He create this Child?

(Rom 4:17)  “… God, who quickens the dead, and calls those things which be not as though they were”.

Hear that?  All He has to do is say it and it is.  He calls things that never existed before into being.  He can create from nothing.  IN this case He created and placed His Holy Spirit, that part of His Spirit called the Word on this created child.  

(Psa 33:9)  For He spoke, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
(Psa 148:5)  Let them praise the Name of the LORD (YHWH): for He commanded, and they were created.

To suggest that angels, fallen angels, no less, have this kind of creative power is what led to the fall of the fallen angels – the idea they could rise above their Creator.  Satan and his angels find themselves contained on this earth and those in heaven rejoiced because that trouble maker is cast out and no longer tormenting those in Heaven, no more disruption in Heaven but now He and his angels are on this earth – Woe to us for Satan is here.

(Rev 12:7-8)  And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
(Rev 12:9)  And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

It is revealed in this chapter of Revelation we are given the time of this event and the casting out of Satan and his angels.  With this information we can see that the concept that Satan and his demon angels were cast to this earth and then, in their rebellion took human women as wives is false.  There are too many verses contradicting or questioning the “sons of God”, in Genesis 6 is fallen angels to build a doctrine such as this.  The prime reason to reject this teaching is the fact it is an insult to what our Heavenly Father did in bringing to us His Son, YaHshua, our Savior.  The suggestion that fallen angels can procreate and have children is further insult to the Gospel message.  This is a false doctrine from the influence of devils and demons.
 You can read all of the books and subjects entertaining this idea of the Nephilim as giant children spawned by spirit beings having sex with human women, women they saw as beautiful, so beautiful and fair they just had to marry them -- really?  As believers we accept YaHshua as our Savior – the Gospel message about Him and the coming Kingdom of God is what is important.  This false doctrine throws a shadow over the birth of our Savior, YaHshua and should be rejected.   This false doctrine is gleaned from the writing of the Super Rabbis of old compiled in what the Rabbis of today call the Oral Torah ­– well, it was “oral” until they put it into writing.
 According to the ancients the writings Moses received, known as the Torah (first 5 books of the Old Testament), were only a brief on the original Oral Torah passed down, orally, from Adam to each of the Great Rabbis of the past.  Supposedly this “oral” tradition filled in the apparent blanks left behind by the Torah of Moses – a kind of filling in between the lines – in advance, that is.  It is in these writings that the “sons of god” in Genesis 6 are said to be fallen angels and the reason for the fall and destruction of mankind.  The Apostles called these writing, “fables” and instructed us, the followers of YaHshua not to give them any attention.  However, today, many followers are being duped into accepting these Jewish fables as fact, as these false writings drip down through history and are taken by fiction writers, or authors and turned into works like that of the Book of Jasher, and the Book of Enoch.

Want more information on these two Books – which, by the way, appear to be of modern creation built upon Jewish tales, fables, from the past.  Go to this expose on the Book of Jasher and other links to the Exposing of the Book of Enoch --

Conclusion:  It is significant, however, to note that there is no Book of Jasher in Charesworth's Volumes of Pseudepigrapha. The reason is that there are no ancient copies of the Book of Jasher. The earliest version may be represented in translation in the 1840 version promoted by some Mormons or it may also be a fogery from 1625. If it is authentic it contains at best, Jewish midrash from the medieval period, but as the documentation show above shows, not even the original translators and publishers were certain of its authenticity.
In this book, Goodspeed discusses a number of “curious frauds that when they first appear  . . . are promptly unmasked; but a generation, or a century, later, long after their exposure has been forgotten, they are revived by somebody and make a fresh bid for acceptance” (viii).   Though ignored by scholars as unworthy of attention, such texts get peddled to the unsuspecting (or credulous) general public, and in these internet-days they can be touted around the world in a matters of weeks.  To his credit, Goodspeed took the time to research, describe, and examine critically a number of these items.  His book is no longer in print, but is worth perusing still.
Is the Book of Enoch really a lost book of the Bible?  A born-again Christian who has been reading the Bible for several years only needs to read the "Book of Enoch" briefly to know that something is very wrong.  There are so many obvious flaws with this alleged missing book of God's Word.  It is clear to me that someone copied from the Bible and wrote this garbage.  The same type of mumbo-jumbo can be readily observed in the Qur'an.  I do NOT believe that Enoch, who lived during the time period of Genesis, wrote this manuscript.  Evidently the King James translators didn't either, and for good reason.  The Devil is working relentlessly to corrupt God's Word, as he has been doing since the Garden of Eden, when he caused Eve to doubt God's Word.  Satan is so shrewd that he even tried to confuse our Lord by misinterpreting the Scriptures in Matthew 4:1-10.  In these apostate times, the Word of God is under attack like never before.  The reason why is simple... if Satan can pervert the Word of God into a lie, then he can control the masses!

There is an expression for documents purporting to be some long lost or hidden mystery writings -- Pseudepigrapha -- and it might help to understand this term and its meaning:

American Heritage Dictionary:
pseud-e-pig-ra-pha (soodi-pigr-f)pl.n. 1. Spurious writings, especially writings falsely attributed to biblical characters or times. 2. A body of texts written between 200 B.C. and A.D. 200 and spuriously ascribed to various prophets and kings of Hebrew Scriptures.[Greek, from neuter pl. of pseudepigraphos, falsely ascribed : pseudes, false. See PSEUDO- + epigraphein, to inscribe : epi-, epi- + graphein, to write. See gerbh-.]--pseud'e-pig'ra-phal (-r-fl). or pseud'ep-i-graph'ic (soodep-i-grafik). or pseud'ep-i-graph'i-cal (-i-kl). or pseud'e-pig'ra-phous (-r-fs). adj.

The origin of these spurious writings is from the Rabbi, extraordinaire, and Hebrew Sages, and even witch doctors of the same.  How can I say this?  Read the definition again and you see it has to do with a period of time involving the Hebrews.  When you find their writings of today, the Babylonian Talmud and the Jerusalem Talmud and the, newer writings called the, Midrash, we find the Rabbis of the Oral Torah and after were practicing Black Magic.  These ancient super religious leaders were allow to deal in black magic because they were the only ones able to control such things.  It is also the accusation of the enemies of the Christ that He used black magic to do the miracles He did, but, according to those critics, he was using this Black Magic to do evil.  However, the ancient Rabbis used Black Magic only for good.  What a contradiction, and it is from these sources the idea of Angels marrying human women and being the fathers of giants, known as the Nephilim, and the fall of mankind leading to the total destruction of the world.

Mid-rash (midrash) Mid-rash-im (mid-roshim, midra-shem). Any of a group of Jewish commentaries on the Hebrew Scriptures compiled between A.D. 400 and 1200 and based on exegesis, parable, and haggadic legend.[Late Hebrew midras, commentary, explanation, Midrash, from daras, to interpret.]

The fight for truth never ends.  One generation discovers the frauds and exposes the lies then a new generation comes on the scene and if the previous generation fails to remind the children following them about these “doctrines of devil”, giving heed to seducing spirits (1 Tim 4:1) then each succeeding generation may be more susceptible to these lying Spirits.  Remember, Satan, did not lie, totally, to Eve.  No, he discussed what was true then interjected a doubt, then a lie.  We need to stay in our own Bibles, listen to our own spirit and the spirit of our Savior to keep us in the clear, in the light, removing the religious fog of false teachings demeaning the act of Salvation by our Savior, YaHshua.
Peace, Dan
emial quesitons and comments to --
Back to content