The present study will attempt to answer the questions that arise from an investigation of this subject. Are the “sons of God” distinguished individuals, “good and virtuous” men, descendants of the line of Seth, “spiritual beings” (angels), or something else?
Are the “daughters of men” descendants of the line of Cain, mortal and sinful women in general, or something else?
And are the “giants” mythological beings, demigod heroes of antiquity, or renowned men?
All of these questions will be examined in what follows on the basis of the tradition preserved in Genesis 6:1–4, within the framework of primeval history, and through a detailed analysis of the text—especially the Hebrew text—as well as an investigation of the philological problems presented by the passage.
TEXT
PHILOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
The sixth chapter of the Book of Genesis begins with a narrative that is unusual by the theological standards of the Old Testament. It is one of the most enigmatic passages of the Pentateuch, recounting the union of certain “sons of God” with certain “daughters of men,” as well as the existence of certain “giants.” This text (vv. 1–4), in the form in which it has been transmitted to us, both in the Masoretic Hebrew text and in the Septuagint (LXX), appears disconnected in its individual parts, fragmentary as a whole, and not entirely clear in all its details. It may not be unintelligible, yet it leaves many questions unanswered—questions to which, despite the efforts made over the centuries, no generally accepted solutions have been given.
Turning now to an analysis of the text, we make the following observations:
The Septuagint renders the original text faithfully, without altering its meaning, and differs from the Masoretic text only in matters of expression.
Among the individual differences between the two texts, the Septuagintal variants, and the proposed readings, we note the most significant:
Verse 1
“And it came to pass”: This is a faithful rendering of the Hebrew wayehi and is used very frequently in the Old Testament (Genesis 26:8; 27:1; 43:21; 44:24). It is employed at the beginning of a discourse and serves to connect a new narrative with what precedes it. In Modern Greek it may be omitted without altering the meaning of the verse.
“Upon the earth”: Other manuscripts read “in the earth” instead of the fuller Masoretic expression “upon the face of the earth” (‘al-pene ha’adamah).
Instead of “were born” there is also the reading “were begotten” (yulledu),¹ which is accepted by Philo, Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, and among modern Greek commentators on the passage by Professors Kolitsiaras and Vasileiadis, as well as Fr. Joel Yiannakopoulos and Fr. Ieremias Fountas.
After “to them” or “for themselves,” some minuscule manuscripts add the phrase “beautiful and fair.”²
Verse 2
The verbal form wayyir’u (“and they saw”) is rendered by the Septuagint as the participle “having seen.”
Instead of “sons of God,” there are also the readings “sons of the gods” (Aquila)—a literal translation of bene ha’elohim—and “sons of the rulers” (Symmachus).
Instead of “sons of God,” there is also the reading “angels of God,”³ adopted by Philo (De Gigantibus), Justin (Apology II, 5), Ambrose, Josephus, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Cyril of Alexandria, and Augustine.
The reading “sons of God” is attested by the Codex Coislinianus, ancient versions such as the Armenian, Bohairic, Paris Bibl. Nat. Copt. I (quoted for Genesis only), Ethiopic, Dillmann's Codex C, the Syro-Hexaplar version (Lagarde's edition, Bibliothecae Syriacae), works of Origen preserved in Greek, Eusebius, Athanasius the Great (Padua edition, 1777), Chrysostom, works of Theodore of Mopsuestia preserved in Latin, Cyril of Alexandria in the text of Julian as quoted by Cyril, Theodoret of Cyrus, and the anonymous Chronicle preserved in two critical recensions, at Lucca and Turin, published by Lagarde in his Septuagint studies.
After “they took,” Saint John Chrysostom, in one of his citations, adds the word “them.”
The expression “for themselves” also varies among manuscripts, appearing as “for themselves [feminine]” (Oxford, Bodleianus, Canon. Gr. 35), “them” (Escurial, Y. II.5), “for themselves from among them” (Theodoret of Cyrus 1/3), and “from among them” (Theodoret of Cyrus 1/3).
Verse 3
“God” is absent from the Masoretic text.
Instead of “My Spirit shall certainly not remain among these men forever,” the original Hebrew has also been rendered as “My Spirit shall not judge men forever” (Symmachus). However, the Hebrew yadon (din = judge, govern, humble, abase) gives an uncertain meaning to the passage, and for this reason translators of the Masoretic text generally prefer the rendering of the Septuagint.
In Cyril of Alexandria there is also the reading “and his days shall be...”, while in the minuscule manuscript Rome, Vat. Regin. Gr. 10, the words “all of them” are added.
Verse 4
Instead of “giants” (v. 4a), there are also the readings “those who fall upon others” (Aquila) and “the violent ones” (Symmachus). In place of “giants” (v. 4b), Aquila has “the mighty ones” and “the incurable ones,” while Symmachus again reads “the violent ones.”
In the minuscule manuscript Escurial Y. II.5, the phrase “those from of old” is added to the word “giants” (v. 4a).
The word Nephilim (giants) occurs only in the plural and is derived either from naphal I (“to fall”) or from naphal II (“to be marvelous, splendid, outstanding, extraordinary”).⁴ Aquila, by rendering it as “those who fall upon others,” derives it from naphal I.
The obscure expression “after that”, which elsewhere appears as “it happened” or “they came into being,” is reflected in the various renderings of the demonstrative: “those things” (Bohairic Version; Chrysostom), “those men” (Oxford, Bodleianus, Univ. Coll. 52), and “of those.”
The verb “went in unto” also appears as “went” and “entered” (Theodoret of Cyrus).
The “sons” are rendered as “angels” in the Oxford minuscule manuscript (Bodl., Canon. Gr. 35) and by Philo.
Instead of the Septuagint's “they begot,” there is also the reading “they were born” (Oxford, Bodl., Canon. Gr. 35).
And instead of “for themselves,” there is the reading “to them” (autois) in the Codex Cottonianus, the Ethiopic Version, the Syro-Hexaplar version, Philo, and Cyril of Alexandria.
