In an earlier study in Genesis 3, I claimed: “The power of suggestion is the father of lies. If a person begins a story by, first, suggesting something about the story, then it is easier for that one to use the story to paint the wrong image for the listener/reader, whose mind he has now corrupted to believe what is not really so.” Whenever the traditions of men are held in higher esteem than the word of God, it is because someone began to hold up a doctrine, a falsehood, about what the word of God does not claim.
I met many folks, some in the church I used to attend (I moved), who believed there was a rebellion in heaven among the angels, and that these angels/demons had taken women as their wives and produced the giants/Nephilim of Genesis 6. The Bible never mentions such a rebellion, in fact, there is a question as to whether angels have freewill, which, if true, would suggest they cannot sin. Nevertheless, no matter what one believes about the tradition that angels/demons took women, had sexual intercourse with them and produced the giants/Nephilim, the tradition, itself, is provably false, if one holds to the fact that scripture must not be forced to contradict itself (John 10:35).
Nevertheless, in in cases where one proves a believed tradition is false, by using the word of God to do so, even then, these folks won’t believe the word of God and will hold to their beloved tradition. Such is the power of the translators of Genesis 6. By translating bath into the ridiculous daughters in Genesis 6:1, instead of villages or towns as they have done elsewhere in Joshua, Judges and Nehemiah, scholars have laid the groundwork to claim the sons of god in Genesis 6:2 are rebellious angels/demons, and they had sexual intercourse with the daughters of men and produced the giants/Nephilim of Genesis 6:4. A lying tradition, once believed, holds power over the word of God, and is a mighty stronghold in the minds of men, even the minds of believers (cp. 2Corinthians 10:3-5).
So, in Genesis 6:4 we are introduced to the idea that giants roamed the earth in the days prior to the great Flood. We’re told that the sons of god, vis-à-vis the princes, sons, of the patriarchs (gods – see Psalm 82) came into the towns or villages of men, and by taking the daughters of the chiefs of those towns/villages for their wives, they were able to unite the same with other villages/towns, forming a mighty warring machine. The progeny of these unions produced “mighty men… men of renown” (Genesis 6:4), filling the earth with violence (Genesis 6:11).
Notice who the Lord blamed for this wickedness. It was the wickedness of men, not angels/demons, that was great in the earth. It was “every imagination of the thoughts” of the hearts of men, not angels/demons, that was evil continually (Genesis 6:5)! Where’s the evidence for an angelic rebellion in heaven in these scriptures? Man, especially the leaders/gods of men, have always sought to shift the blame for their evil deeds upon someone else (cp. Genesis 3:12). Through the years events change, the names of men change, but the one common fact always remains true, vis-à-vis, as a rule, men, especially the leaders of men (gods—Psalm 82), don’t take responsibility for the evil they do. They inevitably try to blame others for their crimes. Therefore, one needs to question authority (Psalm 118:9; 146:3). I don’t seek to demean scholarship. On the contrary, I value the thoughts of the men who wrote the commentaries that I possess. However, I don’t read their works with the idea that they must be correct, because they are great scholars. Great scholars are often wrong, not always, but often enough to lead men to err in key doctrines, creating false traditions, which many ignorant believers assume are true.
Many translators, at this point, try to claim that the Lord regretted that he had made man (Genesis 6:6), but this isn’t true. Does God ever say he did wrong? Does he ever say he made a mistake? Why would anyone try to say the Lord erred in creating mankind? He was grieved with the behavior of men. He was grieved over their violence, and it pained him in his heart to see it, much like a parent does, when his child commits terrible wrongs. However, does this mean that the parent believes in his heart that it was wrong to have given birth to his child who grieves him?
The Septuagint does a better job in giving the sense here, saying “And the Lord had sorrow because he had made man on the earth, and grief was in his heart” (Genesis 6:6). Therefore, he decided he would judge mankind and destroy both man and beast and even the birds of the air, because of the great sorrow the Lord had in his heart over the wickedness of men that filled the whole earth (Genesis 6:7; cp. verse-11). Nevertheless, God had not created a proverbial rock he couldn’t lift, vis-à-vis he didn’t create man and, afterward, he realized, he had erred in creating him. The Lord was committed to saving mankind (Genesis 1:1; 3:15), and he found a man, Noah, in whom he, the Lord, could extend his grace and save mankind alive (Genesis 6:8).
Smoodock's Blog 