June 1, 2025 • 13 mins
Some Bible readers turn to 1 Enoch to explain Genesis 6:1–4, but is that wise? In this episode, we examine why the Book of Enoch—a Second Temple Period work of religious fiction—should not guide your understanding of inspired Scripture. Learn how pagan myths influenced Jewish literature, why Genesis doesn’t support angelic-human unions, and how to stay anchored in the biblical text.
Read: https://ready4eternity.com/sex-women-sons-of-god-and-1-enoch/
https://x.com/Ready4Eternity https://www.facebook.com/ready4eternity
The presence of any advertisements in connection with this content is determined solely by the hosting platform. I have no control over whether ads appear or not. I appreciate your understanding.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Welcome to the Ready for Eternity
podcast, a podcast and blog dedicated to
inquisitive Bible students exploring
biblical truths that might not be fully
explored in typical
sermons or Bible studies.
(00:20):
My name is Eddie Lawrence.
In episode 61, we noted that some people
view the sons of God in Genesis 6 as
angels because of 1st Enoch, but is 1st
Enoch a reliable guide
to understanding Genesis?
(00:44):
Passages from the Second Temple period
book of 1st Enoch offer an interpretation
of Genesis 6 verses 1-4. It claims that
the sons of God in this passage were
rebellious spiritual beings who married
human women and that these marriages
produced a race of giants called the
(01:06):
Nephilim. What do we know about 1st Enoch
and can we trust it for shedding light on
the scriptures? First of all, the book of
1st Enoch is not inspired and people have
never considered it to be part of the
canon of the Hebrew scripture.
Works such as 1st Enoch are religious
fiction loosely comparable to Dante's
(01:28):
Inferno or Paradise Lost. Although it's
based on real events recording in the
Bible and it may contain certain truths,
it's still a work of fiction, it lacks
inspiration, and it holds no authority.
1st Enoch was a fictional interpretation
of the events recorded in Genesis 6. Not
(01:51):
only is it mere fiction, but Jews wrote
it under the influence of pagan stories
they encountered during
their exile in Babylon.
Surprisingly, some Bible students are
allowing this work of fiction to
influence their interpretation of the
inspired scriptures.
1st Enoch was written in the 2nd or 3rd
(02:13):
century BC. That's about 1200 years after
Moses wrote Genesis. While it's nearly
certain that Moses' original readers of
Genesis 6 understood who the sons of God
and the Nephilim were, it's not at all
certain that the Jews of the 2nd century
BC did. Moreover, the Jews encountered
(02:34):
Mesopotamian pagan mythology during their
exile in Babylon, which influenced the
Book of Enoch and other literature from
the same period. By way of illustration,
consider the myth of the Opkalu. Many
ancient cultures had a flood story, and
the Mesopotamians had one as well.
(02:55):
Mesopotamian literature describes divine
beings of great knowledge called the
Opkalu, who lived before the flood.
The Mesopotamian myth says the Opkalus
descended to earth, mated with human
women, and had semi-divine offspring.
Sound familiar?
(03:17):
The Jewish writers were well aware of
these pagan stories, and there can be
little doubt that the myth of the Opkalu
colored their thinking about Genesis 6.
As a matter of fact, some Jewish texts
found among the Dead Sea Scrolls give
names to the offspring of the sons of
God. The Book of Giants calls one of
(03:40):
these offspring Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh was
the main character from the Mesopotamian
epic of Gilgamesh. Clearly, Mesopotamian
mythology found its way into Jewish
literary tradition during the
intertestamental period.
Even though these pagan-laced literary
(04:01):
traditions existed in Judaism, we
shouldn't assume all Jews believed the
Enoch interpretation.
Likewise, today we mustn't allow this
pagan influence to alter our
perception of the scriptures.
The proper context for interpreting the
Bible is the context in which the author
(04:22):
and original readers lived. Uninspired
literature, written 1200 years after
Genesis, can't provide the original
context, and it can't be used to arrive
at a correct understanding of biblical
passages. We cannot derive sound biblical
(04:42):
theology from uninspired, non-canonical,
second-temple-period literature.
Filtering Genesis 6 through a genre of
intertestamental religious fiction is not
being true to Moses' original intent.
It's true that second-temple-period
literature is valuable for understanding
(05:02):
Jewish ideas from that period, but we
must not let uninspired writings overly
influence our understanding of the Bible.
What does Genesis 6 1-4 actually say, or
just as important? What does it not say?
The proponents of divine human marriages
(05:23):
read a good deal into the text that it
does not actually say.
When man began to multiply on the face of
the land and daughters were born to them,
the sons of God saw that the daughters of
man were attractive, and they took as
their wives any they chose.
Then the Lord said, "My spirit shall not
(05:45):
abide in man forever, for he is flesh.
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 man, and
they bore children to them. These were
the mighty men who were of old, the men
(06:06):
of renown. Genesis 6 1-4.
First of all, notice that the text does
not identify the sons of God as angels,
nor any other kind of spiritual beings.
As we noted in episode 61, the context
determines who the sons of God are, and
(06:28):
the context here suggests that they are
human. In addition, there is no
indication in this passage that anything
sinful was taking place. It doesn't say
that the sons of God sinned, nor does it
say that the daughters of men engaged in
nefarious activities.
(06:49):
Since the phrases "sons of God" and
"daughters of men" refer to godly and
ungodly people respectively, the worst we
can say is that people exercised poor
judgment in selecting spouses.
Likewise, the passage here in Genesis
does not accuse the Nephilim of any
particular sin. Yet, an important part of
(07:11):
the fictional account of first enix
centers on the giants, also known as the
Nephilim. The assumption is that the
Nephilim were the hybrid offspring
produced by the union of angels mating
with human women. There is one huge
problem with this notion.
This is not what Genesis 6 says.
(07:33):
The text says that the Nephilim were on
the earth in those days.
What was happening in those days? It was
the time when the sons of God came into
the daughters of men and bore children to
them. Notice the text does not say the
Nephilim were the children who were born
to the sons of God and daughters of men.
(07:56):
It says they lived at the
same time. That's all it says.
The Nephilim existed on the earth at this
time, and the text does not say they were
the offspring of these unions.
The related idea from first enoch that
God sent the flood to clean up the mess
instigated by these rebellious angels and
(08:19):
to eliminate the Nephilim falls flat.
Genesis 6 states that there were Nephilim
after the flood also.
This idea of divine human mating says
that the Nephilim were around after the
flood because these fallen angels
continued to have relations with Noah's
(08:39):
female offspring. Wouldn't this imply
that God wiped out almost all life on
earth for nothing if these angels were
just going to keep on having sex with
human women? Was God so inept that he
couldn't defeat the rebellion of these
angels, especially since they allegedly
continued procreating once the earth was
(09:01):
repopulated with human women?
This exposes an internal
inconsistency in the theory.
First Enoch says God had the rebellious
angels captured and chained in darkness
to await their judgment. If the angels
were locked up and could no longer mate
with human women, how did they appear
(09:22):
again to seduce women after the flood?
The reality set forth in the text is
simply that the Nephilim lived at the
same time when the sons of God were
marrying the daughters of men. The Bible
doesn't say where the Nephilim came from
nor exactly what they were.
The fact that Nephilim appeared after the
(09:44):
flood, see Numbers 13, 33, shows that the
word is not ethnic. It most likely simply
refers to giants, though scholars still
dispute the exact
meaning of the word Nephilim.
Everyone after the flood, including
giants, you can think of Goliath, was a
(10:05):
descendant of Noah, not
some sort of hybrid offspring.
Is it even possible
for angels to procreate?
There is no evidence whatsoever in the
Bible suggesting that
angels can reproduce.
There is no example, statement, or
necessary inference. When God ordered
(10:25):
creation, He designed both plants and
animals to reproduce
after their own kind.
It's common knowledge that plants and
animals of different kinds cannot
reproduce. Likewise, there is no evidence
that angels would be able to reproduce
with different kinds, that is humans. In
(10:46):
fact, the evidence is fairly conclusive
that angels can't reproduce at all.
In the resurrection, they neither marry
nor are given in marriage,
but are like angels in heaven.
Matthew 22, 30
Jesus plainly says angels do not marry.
(11:07):
Those who believe in divine human mating
point out that it is the angels in heaven
who do not marry, and therefore Jesus
said nothing about the mating habits of
angels who left
heaven. Well, fair enough.
I think that's a real stretch.
But still, the burden of proof falls on
(11:27):
them to show that angels can procreate,
because the Bible
never teaches this idea.
The Bible simply doesn't support the idea
that humans and angels married and
produced a race of hybrid giants. At
first glance, it may appear that Genesis
6, verses 1-4 suggest this, but when we
(11:48):
read the passage very carefully, it's
easy to see that it
doesn't actually say any of this.
The proponents of the theory of divine
beings mating with humans have allowed a
genre of religious fiction written in the
3rd or 2nd century BC to
dominate their view of scripture.
(12:09):
This is something we cannot allow
ourselves to do if we are to draw valid
conclusions from God's Word. In an
upcoming episode, we'll examine one more
aspect of this topic. We'll examine Jude
and Peter's interaction with 1st Enoch.
(12:31):
Thanks for listening to the podcast. We
hope this episode has deepened your
understanding of scripture. If you found
this content valuable, please share it
with your friends. For more biblical
studies, visit our website at
ReadyForEternity.com. That's the word
"ready," the number four, and the word
"eternity." ReadyForEternity.com. Be sure
(12:54):
and leave a comment on the Ready for
Eternity Facebook page or reach out on
Twitter. That's all for now. Keep
studying your Bible, growing closer to
God, and getting ready for eternity.
See you next time.
Welcome to the Ready for Eternity
podcast, a podcast and blog dedicated to
inquisitive Bible students exploring
biblical truths that might not be fully
explored in typical
sermons or Bible studies.
(00:20):
My name is Eddie Lawrence.
In episode 61, we noted that some people
view the sons of God in Genesis 6 as
angels because of 1st Enoch, but is 1st
Enoch a reliable guide
to understanding Genesis?
(00:44):
Passages from the Second Temple period
book of 1st Enoch offer an interpretation
of Genesis 6 verses 1-4. It claims that
the sons of God in this passage were
rebellious spiritual beings who married
human women and that these marriages
produced a race of giants called the
(01:06):
Nephilim. What do we know about 1st Enoch
and can we trust it for shedding light on
the scriptures? First of all, the book of
1st Enoch is not inspired and people have
never considered it to be part of the
canon of the Hebrew scripture.
Works such as 1st Enoch are religious
fiction loosely comparable to Dante's
(01:28):
Inferno or Paradise Lost. Although it's
based on real events recording in the
Bible and it may contain certain truths,
it's still a work of fiction, it lacks
inspiration, and it holds no authority.
1st Enoch was a fictional interpretation
of the events recorded in Genesis 6. Not
(01:51):
only is it mere fiction, but Jews wrote
it under the influence of pagan stories
they encountered during
their exile in Babylon.
Surprisingly, some Bible students are
allowing this work of fiction to
influence their interpretation of the
inspired scriptures.
1st Enoch was written in the 2nd or 3rd
(02:13):
century BC. That's about 1200 years after
Moses wrote Genesis. While it's nearly
certain that Moses' original readers of
Genesis 6 understood who the sons of God
and the Nephilim were, it's not at all
certain that the Jews of the 2nd century
BC did. Moreover, the Jews encountered
(02:34):
Mesopotamian pagan mythology during their
exile in Babylon, which influenced the
Book of Enoch and other literature from
the same period. By way of illustration,
consider the myth of the Opkalu. Many
ancient cultures had a flood story, and
the Mesopotamians had one as well.
(02:55):
Mesopotamian literature describes divine
beings of great knowledge called the
Opkalu, who lived before the flood.
The Mesopotamian myth says the Opkalus
descended to earth, mated with human
women, and had semi-divine offspring.
Sound familiar?
(03:17):
The Jewish writers were well aware of
these pagan stories, and there can be
little doubt that the myth of the Opkalu
colored their thinking about Genesis 6.
As a matter of fact, some Jewish texts
found among the Dead Sea Scrolls give
names to the offspring of the sons of
God. The Book of Giants calls one of
(03:40):
these offspring Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh was
the main character from the Mesopotamian
epic of Gilgamesh. Clearly, Mesopotamian
mythology found its way into Jewish
literary tradition during the
intertestamental period.
Even though these pagan-laced literary
(04:01):
traditions existed in Judaism, we
shouldn't assume all Jews believed the
Enoch interpretation.
Likewise, today we mustn't allow this
pagan influence to alter our
perception of the scriptures.
The proper context for interpreting the
Bible is the context in which the author
(04:22):
and original readers lived. Uninspired
literature, written 1200 years after
Genesis, can't provide the original
context, and it can't be used to arrive
at a correct understanding of biblical
passages. We cannot derive sound biblical
(04:42):
theology from uninspired, non-canonical,
second-temple-period literature.
Filtering Genesis 6 through a genre of
intertestamental religious fiction is not
being true to Moses' original intent.
It's true that second-temple-period
literature is valuable for understanding
(05:02):
Jewish ideas from that period, but we
must not let uninspired writings overly
influence our understanding of the Bible.
What does Genesis 6 1-4 actually say, or
just as important? What does it not say?
The proponents of divine human marriages
(05:23):
read a good deal into the text that it
does not actually say.
When man began to multiply on the face of
the land and daughters were born to them,
the sons of God saw that the daughters of
man were attractive, and they took as
their wives any they chose.
Then the Lord said, "My spirit shall not
(05:45):
abide in man forever, for he is flesh.
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 man, and
they bore children to them. These were
the mighty men who were of old, the men
(06:06):
of renown. Genesis 6 1-4.
First of all, notice that the text does
not identify the sons of God as angels,
nor any other kind of spiritual beings.
As we noted in episode 61, the context
determines who the sons of God are, and
(06:28):
the context here suggests that they are
human. In addition, there is no
indication in this passage that anything
sinful was taking place. It doesn't say
that the sons of God sinned, nor does it
say that the daughters of men engaged in
nefarious activities.
(06:49):
Since the phrases "sons of God" and
"daughters of men" refer to godly and
ungodly people respectively, the worst we
can say is that people exercised poor
judgment in selecting spouses.
Likewise, the passage here in Genesis
does not accuse the Nephilim of any
particular sin. Yet, an important part of
(07:11):
the fictional account of first enix
centers on the giants, also known as the
Nephilim. The assumption is that the
Nephilim were the hybrid offspring
produced by the union of angels mating
with human women. There is one huge
problem with this notion.
This is not what Genesis 6 says.
(07:33):
The text says that the Nephilim were on
the earth in those days.
What was happening in those days? It was
the time when the sons of God came into
the daughters of men and bore children to
them. Notice the text does not say the
Nephilim were the children who were born
to the sons of God and daughters of men.
(07:56):
It says they lived at the
same time. That's all it says.
The Nephilim existed on the earth at this
time, and the text does not say they were
the offspring of these unions.
The related idea from first enoch that
God sent the flood to clean up the mess
instigated by these rebellious angels and
(08:19):
to eliminate the Nephilim falls flat.
Genesis 6 states that there were Nephilim
after the flood also.
This idea of divine human mating says
that the Nephilim were around after the
flood because these fallen angels
continued to have relations with Noah's
(08:39):
female offspring. Wouldn't this imply
that God wiped out almost all life on
earth for nothing if these angels were
just going to keep on having sex with
human women? Was God so inept that he
couldn't defeat the rebellion of these
angels, especially since they allegedly
continued procreating once the earth was
(09:01):
repopulated with human women?
This exposes an internal
inconsistency in the theory.
First Enoch says God had the rebellious
angels captured and chained in darkness
to await their judgment. If the angels
were locked up and could no longer mate
with human women, how did they appear
(09:22):
again to seduce women after the flood?
The reality set forth in the text is
simply that the Nephilim lived at the
same time when the sons of God were
marrying the daughters of men. The Bible
doesn't say where the Nephilim came from
nor exactly what they were.
The fact that Nephilim appeared after the
(09:44):
flood, see Numbers 13, 33, shows that the
word is not ethnic. It most likely simply
refers to giants, though scholars still
dispute the exact
meaning of the word Nephilim.
Everyone after the flood, including
giants, you can think of Goliath, was a
(10:05):
descendant of Noah, not
some sort of hybrid offspring.
Is it even possible
for angels to procreate?
There is no evidence whatsoever in the
Bible suggesting that
angels can reproduce.
There is no example, statement, or
necessary inference. When God ordered
(10:25):
creation, He designed both plants and
animals to reproduce
after their own kind.
It's common knowledge that plants and
animals of different kinds cannot
reproduce. Likewise, there is no evidence
that angels would be able to reproduce
with different kinds, that is humans. In
(10:46):
fact, the evidence is fairly conclusive
that angels can't reproduce at all.
In the resurrection, they neither marry
nor are given in marriage,
but are like angels in heaven.
Matthew 22, 30
Jesus plainly says angels do not marry.
(11:07):
Those who believe in divine human mating
point out that it is the angels in heaven
who do not marry, and therefore Jesus
said nothing about the mating habits of
angels who left
heaven. Well, fair enough.
I think that's a real stretch.
But still, the burden of proof falls on
(11:27):
them to show that angels can procreate,
because the Bible
never teaches this idea.
The Bible simply doesn't support the idea
that humans and angels married and
produced a race of hybrid giants. At
first glance, it may appear that Genesis
6, verses 1-4 suggest this, but when we
(11:48):
read the passage very carefully, it's
easy to see that it
doesn't actually say any of this.
The proponents of the theory of divine
beings mating with humans have allowed a
genre of religious fiction written in the
3rd or 2nd century BC to
dominate their view of scripture.
(12:09):
This is something we cannot allow
ourselves to do if we are to draw valid
conclusions from God's Word. In an
upcoming episode, we'll examine one more
aspect of this topic. We'll examine Jude
and Peter's interaction with 1st Enoch.
(12:31):
Thanks for listening to the podcast. We
hope this episode has deepened your
understanding of scripture. If you found
this content valuable, please share it
with your friends. For more biblical
studies, visit our website at
ReadyForEternity.com. That's the word
"ready," the number four, and the word
"eternity." ReadyForEternity.com. Be sure
(12:54):
and leave a comment on the Ready for
Eternity Facebook page or reach out on
Twitter. That's all for now. Keep
studying your Bible, growing closer to
God, and getting ready for eternity.
See you next time.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.