In "Genesis 6:verse 1-4" what does "mighty men which were of old, men of renown" mean?

Question

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 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. 3 And the Lord 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". 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

Answer 1

The King James translation of the Hebrew "nephilim" in Genesis 6:4 is a regrettable one. There is still debate among scholars as to exactly what nephilim refers to. The term is only used one more time in the Old Testament (Numbers 13:33) and this reference is to normal people of powerful stature. The best interpretation of Genesis 6:1-3 (the offspring) is that men and women in general were having children and the population of earth was increasing. "Sons of God" ("bene Elohim") is used elsewhere in the Old Testament to refer to men in general. The reference in Gen. 6:1-3 has no direct relation to the nephilim of verse 6. Scholars do have many different ideas about the nephilim and the many issues this difficult passages raises can not be explored here. Suffice to say the nephilim were human beings who were renowned for their physical stature, exploits, and leadership.

Answer 2

Some believe that these "mighty men" are the mythical heroes of Sumer and Assyria. One popular story engraved in clay tablets is the Epic of Gilgamesh, which includes a flood story and a character that seems to be the precursor for Noah. They believed this heroic, and immortal, generation, was produced from angelic male and human female genes.

Check out this question for a further discussion of the "120 years" that God chose for the maximum age for humans. I see no evidence that this statement relates to the 120 years it took Noah to build the Ark. It may have only been 100 years. Imagine a century to build a big boat.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap1ud4dnWxjT7JNfrJNE2PLsy6IX?qid=20070814170729AA8TeeQ

.

Answer 3

One understanding of the passage is this. In this passage the sons of God refer to a group of fallen angels that took on human form and mated with human women. Their offspring were a human-angel hybrid that contaminated the human race. These hybrids were the so called mighty men, men of renown. This was not a complement.

The next thing we read about in scripture is the great wickedness of man and God's decision to blot out man from the earth in a great flood. Only Noah and his family would survive the flood in the ark he built at God's command.

The flood had the effect of wiping out the human-angel hybrids that God found to be an abomination. Apparently Noah and his family were pure from the contamination.

Answer 4

The sons of God are angels. They took human women for sex and gave birth to half breed angels some were giants some had power through Satan.
I'm sure this played a big part in Him deciding to give the world a washing.

Answer 5

It is my understanding that the term "sons of God" refer to angels (possibly fallen angels in this case). The term is seen elsewhere in the bible like when the men were thrown into the fire and there was an "extra" figure in there. This interbreeding in Gen 6 was one of the provocations of the flood.

Answer 6

Sons of God = Angels (the Fallen Kind) Daughters of men = Women Collectively = Parents of the Nephilim

Answer 7

My understanding is that the sons of God are the decendants of Adam, through Seth. The daughters of men where the decendants of Cain. Who according to the book of Jude was of that wicked one. So Cain was not refered to as a son of God. But apparently the daughters of Cain were beautiful, even as they are today, and the sons of God where smitten by them and took them as wifes hence all the human race has been tainted in their flesh with the nature of Cain. If you follow Cains geneology you see that they were very smart, builders of cities, worker of metals, created musical instruments etc. Thus the combination of both natures made them powerful men in all manner of ways.

Answer 8

Google: nephilim

Answer 9

You can look up all that on this site:

http://www.heavenlydoctrines.org

Answer 10

I don't believe that the Genesis 6 passage is referring to marriage between angels and human beings. And I don't believe that giants were the offspring of this union. Here is why . . .Angels?

First, let's deal with the two arguments which you said show that the "sons of God" have to be angels: (1) sons of God are distinct from mankind and (2) "sons of God" is used in Job to mean angels.

My reply would be:

(1) I think "sons of God" are distinguished from "the daughters" (of mankind), not "mankind" as you say. "Mankind" is a part of speech called a Hebrew genitive. This means it is a descriptive noun, not a primary noun in the phrase. The primary nouns are "sons" and "daughters." So God's sons are not distinct from mankind. God's sons are distinct from mankind's daughters.

(2) The term "son of God" is used in ancient literature and the Bible to mean three things (not just one):

angels (as you stated),
men in covenant relationship with God, and
kings.
For occurrences of "sons of God" referring to men (standing in a covenant relationship with God) see Deuteronomy 14:1; 32:4-5; Psalm 73:15; Hosea 1:10; Romans 8:14,19; Philippians 2:15; 1 John 3:1-2.

But the term "son of god" is also an ancient expression for human kings or rulers. For example, on a tablet discovered at Ugarit, called The Epic of Kret, the hero is called Kret who is said to be "a king" and "a son of God." You see echoes of this use in the Scripture where rulers and judges are called "gods": Psalm 138:1 (cf. verse 4); Psalm 82:6-7; Exodus 21:6; 22:8,9,28.

So this leaves us with two other equally good interpretations of this passage:

(1) That "sons of God" refers to the godly line of Seth (just mentioned in the chapter 5). Seth and his descendants had "walked with God" and been faithful, so they could be the "sons of God" referred to. But now this godly line of people decide to intermarry with the ungodly line of Cain (mentioned in chapter 4). The faithful become faithless.

(2) That "sons of God" refers to rulers (kings, powerful men) who took whatever women they chose (whether the women were married or not married or even wanted to be married). This is an example of the sin of the time of Noah. Rulers abusing their power by means of violence (cf. Genesis 6:11-13).

Giants and the King James Version of the Bible

Some people believe the Nephilim of Genesis 6 were a race of giants. Where did this idea come from? Mostly from the King James Version of the Bible (abbreviated as "KJV") which translates Genesis 6:4 this way:

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. (KJV)

When the King James Version of the Bible was being translated, the translators didn't know what the Hebrew word "Nephilim" meant. So they relied (possibly) upon three sources:

A Greek translation of the Bible made around 250 BC (called the Septuagint or simply abbreviated as "LXX"). The LXX translated Nephilim as "giants."
Two Jewish books written between 150-80 B.C. called Enoch & Jubilees. These books say that a group of angels came to earth before the flood, had sexual relations with women, produced a race of giants, and the giants began to eat mankind.
Numbers 13:32. This is probably the major source for the KJV translation "giants" and may, in fact, be the source for Enoch, Jubilees, and the LXX. Numbers 13:32 is the other use of the word Nephilim in the Bible.
From my reading it appears that the Greek translators of the LXX had already lost the meaning of the word Nephilim. They probably tried to guess its meaning (wrongly in my opinion) based on Numbers 13:32. The books of Enoch & Jubilees are not considered inspired books (by either Jews, Catholics, or Protestants). They contain many fanciful stories and (in my opinion) this is just another bizarre story. Just so this reply doesn't get too long, I'll focus on Numbers 13:32.

Does Numbers 13:32 teach that the Nephilim are giants?

Here is the context. The Israelite spies have just returned from looking over the Promised Land. Ten of the spies don't want to go into the Promised Land, so they spread among the Israelites a bad report about the land. They said,

"The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them" (Numbers 13:32-33, New International Version).

Now we know that the Israelites did find some people of great size in the Promised Land. The Scriptures do refer to a few very tall people of which Goliath (2 Samuel 17) would have been one. Og, the king of Bashan, would be another (Deuteronomy 3:11). There is also a genetic group of tall people called the Anakites. They are descendants of a man called Anak.

In fact, Numbers 13 is the first mention of this person named Anak. He appears to be the ancestor for a tribe of "strong and tall people" (Deuteronomy 9:2) who lived along the southern part of Canaan. They held key cities like Hebron (Numbers 13:22). During the time of the conquest of the Promised Land they were defeated and driven back to the Mediterranean coastline, but some of their descendants were still around in King David's day (2 Samuel 21:15-22 - here called descendants of Rapha, but there is a Biblical connection between Rapha and Anak which is too hard to explain here). The giant Goliath was likely one of the descendants of Anak.

So does Numbers 13:32 mean that the Nephilim of Genesis 6 are people of great size?

There are three reasons why we should not hastily conclude that the giants that the Israelites found in Palestine are the same as the Nephilim of Genesis 6:

(1) The Nephilim (whoever they were) were destroyed in the worldwide flood, so the large people that the Israelites found in Palestine around 1400 BC could not be their descendants. The Bible is clear that "Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals... Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark." (Genesis 7:23). The Nephilim were "living things" and men (Genesis 6:4), so they didn't survive the flood. There is no way that their descendants could show up hundreds of years later in Palestine. The Nephilim didn't survive the flood and they didn't have any offspring that survived the flood.

(2) Numbers 13:32-33 is a quote of what the 10 spies said -- the spies who were panicking about going into Palestine. In other words, this verse records what the faithless spies said, not necessarily what was true in reality. These spies said that "All the people we saw there are of great size" (v. 32). That was a lie. Indeed, there were people of great size in the land, but not all of them were giants. So the phrase: "... the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim" may just be something the spies said to panic the people and keep them from following God into the promised land. We don't have to adopt the statement as being true at all. It was said by people in rebellion against God and trying to influence the people not to go into the land. These same men were soon struck down by God for spreading a bad report about the land (see Numbers 14:37).

(3) It is possible that the phrase: "... the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim" is not what the spies said, but is a parenthetical comment made by Moses when he wrote the book of Numbers. It is certainly not necessary to believe this. The comment could have easily been made by the lying spies. There is nothing in the Hebrew to tell us one way or the other. The Hebrew language didn't have parentheses. But for argument's sake let's say that Moses wrote this to explain the origins of Anak and his people. The first thing to note is what it is not saying: "the Nephilim are giants." That's backward. It is only saying, "... these giants (that is, the Anakites, a genetic group of tall people) come from the Nephilim."

This verse does not tell us anything about the height of Nephilim. We might conclude that the Nephilim being the ancestors of giants would have to be giants themselves, but that is not necessarily true at all. The cause of gigantism in our day is excessive secretion of growth hormone most often from a benign tumor on the pituitary gland . Was Anak the first to have this tumor and then pass on the predisposition of this tumor to his descendants? I don't know enough about genetics and pituitary tumors to say what is possible or not. Nevertheless there is nothing in the Scriptures to indicate that people before Anak were giants. Anak may have been the first large person - that's why he is mentioned. He then passed some abnormality or genetic trait down to his descendants.

The Meaning of Nephilim
Let's talk about the Hebrew word "Nephilim" (found only in Genesis 6:4 & Numbers 13:32). We aren't sure what root it comes from. It doesn't mean "giants." It's not even close to Hebrew words used to speak of tall or large people.

Some say it is related to the Hebrew word nepel "untimely birth" or "miscarriage," so the sense would be "monstrosities."
Others say it is related to the Hebrew word pul "to be wonderful, strong, mighty," so the sense would be "mighty men" or "heroes" as it says at the end of Genesis 6:4: "They were the mighty men of old, men of renown."
Others believe it is related to napal "to fall," so the idea would be "ones who fall upon others, tyrants, violent rulers." This was the view of Martin Luther. They are called Nephilim because they fell upon the people and oppressed them (cf. Genesis 6:11-13).
Others also believe the word is relate to napal "to fall" (just like #3). But they believe it means "fallen ones." In this view, they believe that Nephilim is just another word for fallen angels.
The truth is we aren't sure what exactly the word Nephilim means or what its root origin is linguistically. This is why the Revised Standard, the New International, and the American Standard translations don't attempt to translate the word at all. They simply transliterate the Hebrew letters: "Nephilim."

But let's plug the possible root meanings into the phrase "... the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim" and see what we come up with:

Option #1: "a genetic group of giants (that is, the "descendants of Anak") come from the monstrosities." - This idea fits better with your view that angels and human women gave birth to some genetically weird human beings. So according to this view Numbers 13:32-33 would say: "And they spread among the Israelites a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, 'The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. We saw monstrosities there (the descendants of Anak come from monstrosities). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.'" But if this meaning of Nephilim is correct, what monstrosities are we talking about? Monstrosities in Genesis 6? We already showed this is not possible, since any descendants of angels and humans did not survive the flood.
Option #2: "a genetic group of giants (the "descendants of Anak") come from wonderful, mighty men." - This idea just says that Anak and his offspring come from strong stock. It doesn't necessarily mean that they come from the heroes in Genesis 6 - just that they came from great men. So according to this view Numbers 13:31-33 would say: "And they spread among the Israelites a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, 'The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. We saw mighty men there (the descendants of Anak come from mighty men). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.'"
Option #3: "a genetic group of giants (the "descendants of Anak") come from violent rulers." - Like the previous option there is nothing that says these violent rulers are related to the ones in Genesis 6. All Numbers would be saying is that these large men come from a line of mean, violent people. So according to this view Numbers 13:31-33 would say: "And they spread among the Israelites a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, 'The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. We saw vicious rulers there (the descendants of Anak come from vicious rulers). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.'"
Option #4: "a genetic group of giants come from the fallen ones." - This would mean that the descendants of Anak came from fallen angels. When did this happen? It couldn't be referring to the Genesis 6 passage, because that happened before the flood and there weren't any giants hidden away on the ark. So now we have to suppose a second event after the flood (never mentioned in Scripture) when angels take human beings as wives and bear giant children?!! This option just seems too preposterous!
The point I'm trying to make is that there is confusion about the meaning of the word Nephilim and this confusion is what has led to imaginative stories about fallen angels and monstrosities - stories which even many Christians believe. But when you take the options and plug them into the Numbers 13 passage, you find either reasonable statements which say nothing about giants and fallen angels (#2 and #3) or you find statements which make no sense and create more problems than they solve (#1 and #4).

A Final Look at Genesis 6
The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown. (NIV)

When you look at Genesis 6:4 without the King James translation (or another translation that uses the term giants), you realize that apart from the mistranslation there is nothing about giants in the passage. Introducing giants into the passage also doesn't fit the context of what comes in the chapters before or the verses after. Nephilim means giants?! Then what do the giants do? What happens to them? If they are giants why does it say: "They are the heroes of old, men of renown" (Genesis 6:4). They are called "men." Nothing about monsters eating humans to satisfy a voracious appetite (like in the book of Enoch) - only that they are famous, mighty human beings.

And there is a very serious objection to the view that Nephilim are offspring of angels. No matter what translation you look at please note that the Nephilim were already on the earth when the sons of God went in to the daughters of men (v. 4). The Nephilim were not a result of the union, since they were already present before the union of "God's sons" and "mankind's daughters."

Finally, let's evaluate the idea that "sons of God" means angels. This would be the first mention of angels in the Bible. (I'm not counting the cherubim of Genesis 3:24.) It would be an unusual way to introduce angels. Furthermore, the idea of angels marrying humans and producing giant offspring has no connection with the context. It doesn't flow from what went before or what goes after. Where did the angels come from? Genesis 6:4 says they "came in" to the daughters, not they "came down" from heaven. Are angels even able to have sex or procreate? (In Matthew 22:30 Christ Himself seems to say that the angels cannot marry). What happened to the angels after doing this terrible thing? Were they judged for what they did? If this is about angels taking women as mates, it seems very strange that there is nothing said about how God reacts to the angels. Finally, why does God destroy human beings with a worldwide flood for something the angels did?

So what does Genesis 6 mean? That sinful human beings (either the line of Seth or the rulers) did something wrong (involving taking women in marriage) to bring judgment upon the earth. This caused God to set a date 120 years in the future for the destruction of humanity. Mighty men (or vicious rulers) were on the earth in those days when this sin took place.

Who were the "mighty men who were of old, the men of renown" (v. 4)?

If the phrase refers to the giant offspring of angels and women, then it seems strange to call them "men" or "heroes" or "famous."
If the phrase refers to vicious rulers (one possible meaning of Nephilim), then it means these rulers were famous for their mighty deeds and brutality.
If the phrase refers to mighty men (another possible meaning of Nephilim), then it could mean the godly men who didn't intermarry with Cain's offspring, the faithful. These would be men like Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, and Noah's sons who were mighty in God and famous for their righteousness. If this is the case there is a nice symmetry and parallelism between Genesis 6:1-4 and 6:5-8:
Genesis 6:1-4
Genesis 6:5-8

Man's sin When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. (1-2) The Lord saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. (5-6)
God's decree Then the Lord said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years." (3) So the Lord said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth--men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air--for I am grieved that I have made them." (7)
A faithful remnant The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. (4) But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord. (8)

As you can probably tell, I opt for:

The "sons of God" being the line of Seth most of whom now become unfaithful to God through intermarriage with pagan women.

The Nephilim meaning "mighty men" or "heroes."

And "the heroes of old, men of renown" being the same as the Nephilim and referring to the few of Seth's line that remained faithful to God. Men like Noah and his sons who are introduced by name just a few verses later (Genesis 6:8-10).

Summary

The reasons I don't go with the angel interpretation are:

There are two other very good interpretations of the passage that fit the context: the line of Seth intermarrying with the line of Cain or vicious rulers who abuse their power by taking whatever women they want.
The idea of angels marrying humans and producing giant offspring has no connection with the context of sinful human beings and the judgment of a worldwide flood.
The Nephilim were not a result of the union, since they were already present before the union of the "sons of God" and "daughters of mankind."
The inter-testamental books of Enoch and Jubilees are neither from the same time period as Genesis nor considered authoritative. They simply represent an erroneous view of the passage that was held by some Jews during the period between the Old and New Testaments.
And the reasons I don't believe that Nephilim are giants:

The word Nephilim does not mean giants. We may not know its actual meaning, but it has no connection to any Hebrew word for giants.
The Nephilim are specifically called men, not genetic monstrosities: "mighty men who were of old, the men of renown" (KJV).
The only connection between tall people and the Nephilim of Genesis 6 is one verse (Numbers 13:32) and there are many reasonable explanations for what this one verse means that don't involve viewing the people in Genesis 6 as giants or the offspring of angels & women.
The idea of giant monstrosities doesn't fit the context of wicked human beings who deserve God's judgment. Rather it leads us to pity humanity as victims of angels and monsters, rather than violent, corrupt human beings who God justly condemns to death. (See Genesis 6:15-13 where the emphasis is on mankind's wickedness, mankind's evil thoughts, mankind's corruption, and mankind's violence).
If you hold to the position that angels married humans and produced giants, you must explain three things:
How this idea fits the context.
How the Nephilim could already be on the earth when the angels had sex with the women.
How the Anakites could be genetically related to a giant race that was destroyed by the flood.