They Took Them Wives

In Genesis 6:2, we read that the fallen angels “took them wives of all which they chose.” Because he has argued that the “sons of God” were the so called “godly descendants of Seth,” Dr. John Gill says that the “daughters of men” were taken “not by force.”[1] He says that “the posterity of Seth, who from the times of Enos, when they began to be called by the name of the Lord, (Gen 4:25) had the title of the sons of God, in distinction from the children of men.” and “it can hardly be thought that… [Seth’s posterity] …would attempt it.” The “it” here is the forcible taking of the “daughters of men.”  Dr. Gill apparently believes that the supposed “godly” descendants of Seth were such holy and righteous men that they would not do such a dastardly thing.

This interpretation totally ignores what we know of the circumstances in which the events of Genesis 6 took place. A careful study of Genesis 4-6 reveals that violence and sin reigned on the Earth as “men began to multiply on the face of the earth.” (Gen 6:1) In fact, man’s sinfulness became so great that, “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.” (Gen 6:5) Additionally, Dr. Gill’s interpretation totally ignores what we know of the way in which marriages took place in the ancient Middle East.

I suspect that Dr. Gill imagines that the “godly sons of Seth” properly courted the “ungodly daughters of Cain” for some length of time before going to their fathers and asking for their daughter’s hands in holy matrimony with invitations going out to friends and relatives asking them to join the happy couple as they began their new life together. However, this idealistic version of marriage and how a man took a wife comes from western and not eastern traditions.

Even in the West, we say, as I just have, that a man has “taken a wife.” By that we mean that he has married her. But in the ancient Middle East this phrase had a very literal meaning. When they would say that a man “took a wife” they quite literal meant that a man had taken a wife. In Genesis 25:1 we read that, “Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah.”

The word “took” in Genesis 25:1 is same word used in 6:2. It is the Hebrew word laqach. This is a root word meaning to “take.” Its exact meaning must be determined by the context.  It can mean to grasp or seize as in 1 Samuel 4:10-11 where we read that “there was a very great slaughter;” at the hands of the Philistines, “And the ark of God was taken [laqach;]…” Here the Ark was snatched from its rightful owners by force. On the other end of the spectrum the “virtuous woman” of Proverbs 31, “considereth a field, and buyeth it.” Here “buyeth” is laqach and obviously means to “acquire by purchase.”

Dr. David Livingston, in a well written article in which he argues that the “sons of god” were “tyrannical ‘divine’ kings” says that “the modern Hebrew meaning [of laqach] is simply ‘to marry.’"[2] But note that he says the “modern” Hebrew meaning is “to marry.” But this is not likely to have been the understanding of the word during the antediluvian[3] period.

We have already addressed the question of who the sons of God where and came to the conclusion that they were the fallen angels described by Jude (1:6) and Peter (2 Peter 2:4-5). Last week we discussed the fact these fallen angels saw that the daughters of men where “functional” (ṭôb). They saw that the daughters of men were useful for their purposes. Those purposes involved the pollution of the human blood line in an attempt to prevent the coming of the “seed” promised by Jehovah in Genesis 1:15. But supposing the “sons of God” were the “godly sons of Seth,” how would they have “taken a wife?”

In the online article, A Compilation of Customs and Traditions Regarding Marriage[4], the author says that, “In tracing the origins of marriage customs, we find that marriage has evolved through three general stages: marriage by force or capture, marriage by purchase or contract, and marriage by mutual love.” Of course, the first stage would have begun after Adam and his wife Eve were ejected from The Garden and their sin nature had begun to reign in their lives and the lives of their descendants. But by the time of Genesis 6, we know that that every imagination of the thoughts of man’s heart “was only evil.” So marriage by force would no doubt have been the norm.

So when we read that the sons of God “took them wives of all which they chose” we can interpret this to mean that the fallen angels forcibly took wives which they saw as fitting their purposes without regard for the feelings of the women or their families. And, if there was such a thing as the godly line of Seth, I rather suspect that the demonic creatures who were seeking to pollute the human bloodline would have sought them out all the more for the possibility that they might be caring “the seed.” 

A word is used in Genesis 6:4 verse which causes us to immediately conjure the wrong understanding of what is taking place. That word is “wives.” The word “wives” bring with it all sorts of baggage. Wives must have husbands and husbands and wives must have gotten married. And they must have been married in a civil ceremony. And that ceremony must have been conducted in the little white church building in the center of town. And so on.

However, the word translated “wives” is better understood just as Young’s Literal Translation (YLT) of the Bible translates it. Young’s says that the sons of God took “to themselves women of all whom they have chosen.” Note that Young’s has “women” and not “wives.” This would be the literal translation of the Hebrew word 'ishshah. This is the femine form of the word ish which simply means “male.” So 'ishshah simply means female. And so it is translated in Genesis 7:2, where we read that Noah was told by God before The Flood, “Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male (ish) and his female ('ishshah).” In this verse 'ishshah obviously refers to female animals.

So, while the translators had do decide what word to use to help us understand what is taking place in a particular portion of Scripture, here we can see that they may have not done us any favors. What they actually “took” were “women.” And they took them not so that they might live happily ever after but rather because they served a purpose. That purpose was the pollution of the human bloodline which would carry “the seed” which will crush Satan’s head!

While I disagree with A. E. Knoch’s ultimate conclusions, in his article on Genesis 6, I do agree with him when he says that, “Genesis definitely states that God created distinct species. And so it is today. While there is vast variety within species, no new species have arisen, and it is impossible to breed one that will propagate itself, even from closely allied species. It is therefore utterly contrary to God's arrangements to have mankind mix with creatures that are not human. Humanity springs from Adam. The very word in Hebrew is adam.”[5] I suspect that Satan understood this as much as Mr. Knoch. He knew that if he could create genetic half-breeds that humanity would be destroyed and the promised Seed with it.

Whether by force or by agreement, we know that “when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them.” (Gen 6:4) These “children” are said to have been “giants” who became “mighty men” and “men of renown.”

“Mighty men” means that they were men of great strength and bravery. They were “men of renown” because they were famous. They were well known. Their fame was spread abroad so everyone knew of them. It is clear that they are the reason that “God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth.” These men, if they can truly be called men, were even more wicked then Cain “who was of that wicked one.” (1 John 3:12)

It should be noted that the word translate “men” in the phrase “the daughters of men” is not the same word translated “men” in the phrase “mighty men.” And neither of these is the same Hebrew word translated “men” in the phrase “men of renown.”

• In “the daughters of men” the word “men” is the Hebrew word “ha-adam.” Whenever the defiant article “ha” appears before the word “adam” it is meant to refer to the human race. The descendants of Adam.  Adam was that man directly created by God. So we know that these daughters were direct descendants of the man Adam.

• The phrase “mighty men” is the translation of the Hebrew word “gibbor.” The plural form is “gibborim.” This simply means “powerful.” It is from the root word geber which means “strong.” We see this meaning in Deuteronomy 10:17 where God says that He is “a great God, a mighty (gibbor), and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward.” And again, when God calls Gideon to lead Israel He calls him a “mighty man (gibbor) of valour.” But this is not because of any attribute of Gideon but rather because “The LORD is with thee.”(Judges 6:12)

• In the phrase “men of renown,” the Hebrew word ish is translated “men.” Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Dictionary tells us that ish means, “man, male (in contrast to woman, female).” The Complete Word Study Dictionary: Old Testament by Warren Baker, Eugene Carpenter says, “The word does not indicate humankind but the male gender in particular…the word is also used of animals (Gen 7:2) referring to a male and his mate.”[6]

So what does this mean? It means that the “giants” where “strong males” but not necessarily men in the sense that they were descendants of Adam as were the daughters which had been taken by the angelic invaders.

This brings us to the “giants” of Genesis 6. At this point, we know a little about who they were. They were the results of the union between human when and fallen angels. They are a genetic half-breed; neither human nor angelic. As a mutation, they do not caring the human blood line and thus can not carry The Seed. Next week we will begin looking in detail at these mysterious creatures.