I got an email today.
It said:
"Dear David,
I watched your video on the giants of Genesis 6,
and for a long time I agreed with you.
But this note in my study Bible seems to prove
the common teaching.
Thanks!"
And this is the page he showed me:
At Genesis 6:2 it says "The identity of these 'sons of God'
has been a matter of much discussion,
but the obvious meaning is that they were angelic beings."
Then he says,
"This was the uniform interpretation of the ancient Jews,
who translated the phrase as 'angels of God' in their
Septuagint translation of the Old Testament."
Next he says,
"The apocryphal books of Enoch elaborate this interpretation..."
So I have four questions: 1.
Is the obvious meaning that they were "angelic beings"?
2.
Was this the uniform interpretation of the ancient Jews?
3.
Did they translate "sons of God" as "angels of God" in the Septuagint?
And 4.
What about the apocryphal books
and this part of the story of Genesis 6?
I am so excited to take these apart, right in plain sight,
right in front of you.
Are you ready?
Hi, I'm David Daniels from Chick Publications.
The books that deal with this are often small print or hard to read,
so I blew them up so that I can show them to you.
Let's take the Septuagint question first.
What's in the Septuagint?
If you have watched my Septuagint series,
you know there is no evidence for a BC Septuagint,
and the earliest it might have been put together
at least partly is shortly before
Philo the Alexandrian Jew died in 50 AD.
But from 120-200 AD there were three men
who made the Old Testament Greek translations.
And because Origen from about 230-250 AD
made the Hexapla, we can see what they said,
as well as Origen's own notes.
Take a look!
This is Genesis 6:2 in Origen's Hexapla.
This is a blow-up of Genesis 6:2.
Note first that in Latin it says the sons of God are
"Seth-ites," and the daughters of man
are "Cain-ites."
Origen didn't write that, because it's in Latin,
but note that it's not a new teaching, either.
Look at Aquila, 120-130.
Aquila says "sons" --"huioi."
Look at Symmachus, 175-200.
He says "sons" too --"huioi."
Look at Theodotion.
Again, 175-200.
He says "sons" --"huioi," like the rest.
Then there is a Latin note.
It says, "another example," "alia exemplum"
[is] "hoi angeloi," "the angels."
But those words are Latin, not Greek, so they were not written
by Origen.
Let's look at the footnote for this in my copy of Origen's Hexapla.
Okay?
Right down here, it says that "Angels of God" is in the margin
of the Syrian Hexapla, 600s AD.
And it's in "certain copies," according to Cyril of Alexandria
in the 400s AD.
And Procopius wrote that apostates wrote these words.
He was around 400s-500s AD.
So the Septuagint doesn't say "angels of God."
And look: even the Hebrew, according to Origen
(let me bring it back up), even the Hebrew says
"b'nei ha Elohim," "sons of God."
But wait!
Alexandrinus says "angels of God"!
Look at this footnote to the 2006 Septuaginta, blown up.
Right down here.
The main text says "huioi tou theou," "sons of God,"
and the footnote says the Majority of manuscripts say
"sons," "huioi," as well.
But then it says "angeloi," Capital A, raised r.
That means Alexandrinus says "angeloi," angels!
So is that the case?
Not exactly.
You see, that raised r means "Rescriptor."
Here's the definition right out of the Septuaginta itself.
Okay?
"Rescriptor, that is, one who, in his correction,
has so completely set aside the original text
that it is no longer recognizable."
Want to see it for yourself?
Here is Genesis 5:2- 6:4 in Alexandrinus.
So a Rescriptor, literally, is a person who erases
everything that's there, so you can't recognize it,
and then writes on top of it.
And that's where you got the "angeloi."
Watch.
This is the full page.
This is Genesis 5:2 to 6:4a In Alexandrinus.
Now let me show you the part that matters, Genesis 6:1-2.
It took a while, but I actually transcribed this.
It's kind of hard to read.
Do you see that?
Right here is the text.
But I'll make it easier to read, right here.
So it says,
"And it came to pass when the men" (there's that where it
condenses the two together, with a little line, "anthropoi," men)
"when men began to become many" (multiply) "upon the earth and
daughters were born" (that's all connected) "to them."
It says, right here,
"the angels of God, seeing that the daughters of men were good
(or fair, or beautiful), they took to themselves wives
from all whom they chose."
Now, did you see this gray area with the line through it?
That's in the text, right here.
See that?
Do you see how broken up the words are?
And when I write them out, do you see how long the words are,
compared to the other lines?
Someone erased the original words on the line,
then rewrote it with "angeloi," "angels,"
and squeezed all the letters in to fit.
So what would have fit the line?
"Huioi," sons.
So not even Alexandrinus actually has "angels of God"
in Genesis 6:2!
It was most likely what almost every other text
everywhere in Greek, and Hebrew, says: "sons of God."
So, "sons" looks like the "uniform interpretation,"
not "angels."
So what about Enoch?
The Eth Cepher has both Enoch and Jasher.
So let's look and see what they say caused the flood.
Let me open up to Enoch 7:1-2 and 10-11.
"It happened after the sons of men had multiplied
in those days, that daughters were born to them,
elegant and beautiful.
And when the Watchers, the sons of heaven,
beheld them, they became enamored of them,
saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves
women from the progeny of men, and let us beget children."
Then it lists all these angelic Watcher chiefs by name,
and the leaders stood on Mount Hermon.
And then it says, down here,
"Then they took women" (I'm skipping some stuff)
... teaching them sorcery ... Verse 11,
And the women conceiving brought forth giants,
and they bore to them three races first, the great giants.
The giants brought forth the Nephiliym,
and the Nephiliym brought forth the Elioud.
And they existed, increasing in power
according to their greatness."
So finally we see where the story comes from!
But what about the same timeline in Jasher?
Jasher 4:17-19, right here.
Just parts.
It says,
"And every man made unto himself an elohiym (god, an idol, basically),
and they robbed and plundered ... and the earth was filled with violence.
Verse 18,
And their judges and rulers went to the daughters of men
and took their women by force from their men
according to their choice ... and taught the mixture
of one animal species with another ... and Elohiym saw
the whole earth and it was corrupt ... and Yahuah said,
I will blot out man that I created from the face of the earth ...
for I repent that I made them."
Wait a minute.
These are both included in this bible-cepher thing,
this bible-y type book thing.
But they contradict right here.
Were they angels, or human judges?
They can't be both.
Both go into great detail, and both contradict each other!
I don't trust Enoch or Jasher.
I think someone got the bright idea to expand upon Genesis,
and just let his imagination run wild.
And the best way to disguise it was to give it the name
of someone great, like Enoch, or a book that is
mentioned twice in passing but no one has one, like Jasher.
So what does that leave?
1.
It was not the uniform interpretation
of ancient Jews that the sons of God were angels.
2.
The Septuagint did NOT translate "sons of God"
as "angels of God."
The only place that seems to have, Alexandrinus,
was deliberately erased and rewritten.
It was NOT original.
So 3, the obvious meaning was not that they were
"angelic beings."
They were "sons of God," not described as angelic beings.
And 4.
Enoch does say "angels" and makes up a detailed fantasy,
complete with conversations, and science
being taught by the angels, along with sorcery, etc.
But Jasher, supposedly just as ancient,
merely says the people were corrupt, made idols,
and their judges grabbed men's daughters
and married them.
No mention of Nephilim or angels.
Not even apocryphal or pseudepigraphal books agree
about the reason for the Flood.
So I'm just gonna stick with what I know.
I know God promised to preserve His words.
And I know that God kept His promise,
and preserved them each generation to the present.
I know I can trust my King James Bible,
which came straight from that line, from Hebrew and Greek,
and ultimately to English, by the same God
who kept His promise to preserve His words.
I'll stick to what I said in the vlog, "Nephilim & Sons of God:
Who Are They?"
You can look it up.
Because I don't need outside, uninspired revelation,
to look for simple patterns in God's words.
All I need is trust in God and to prayerfully
read the text carefully.
That way I don't have to say something
that God never said.
I can stick close to His words, and not let some pagan
or uninspired writer act like God wouldn't tell me
the whole story, so I have to listen to him, instead.
The King James is my authority.
What is yours?
God bless you, and have a wonderful day.