GIANTS AND SONS OF GOD [PART 2]
There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5. Not only is it unscriptural but unhistorical to teach that giants came from the union of ordinary men and women. The great question has been: WHERE DID THE GIANTS GET THEIR START? Genesis 6:4 makes it clear – from the union of the sons of God and daughters of men. If the sons of God were ordinary men in the same sense that the daughters of men were ordinary women, THEN we must conclude 4 things:
1] That godly women have the power to produce such monsters if married to godly men, OR,
2] That godly men have the power to produce giants when married to ungodly women.
3] That a mixture of godliness and wickedness produces giants.
4] That extreme wickedness on the part of either parent will produce giant offspring. All 4 conclusions are wrong however, as proved every day by the marriages of unconverted persons with the converted and the producing of offspring through the union of a wicked parent and a godly one. Thus, the theory that giants came from the marriage of Seth’s sons with Cain’s daughters is disproved.
6. The sons of God could not have been the sons of Seth or other godly men for the following 7 reasons:
 There were no men godly enough to be saved during the Antediluvian Age except ABEL [Gen. 4:4; Heb. 11:4], ENOCH [5:21-24; Heb. 11:5], and NOAH [6:8; 7:1; Heb. 11:7], as far as Scripture records are concerned. Shall we conclude that these 3 men were the sons of God who married the daughter of Cain and produced races of giants in the earth IN THOSE DAYS before the flood [6:4]? We have no record of any such marriage or offspring of Abel before he was murdered. Regarding Enoch, are we to believe that Methuselah and his other children were the giants? Are we to believe that Noah’s 3 sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth were giants? If so, where is our authority for this? Had this been true, there would have been nothing on earth after the flood but giants born of Noah’s giant sons, for by his children the whole earth was then replenished [10:1-32]. That would cause another unsolved mystery – how giants became ordinary sized men again.
 The time of the marriages of the sons of God disproves the theory that they were the sons of Seth. Marriages of Seth’s sons could not have taken place during the first 325 years, for he had only one son of marriageable age up to that time [5;1-8] and he [ENOS] was not godly. See note f, Gen. 4:26. To say there were no such marriages before Enos would contradict Gen. 6:1-2 which shows that sons of God married daughters of men when such daughters were not born in the first 325 years? If so, then where did Cain, Seth and others get their wives? Furthermore, such marriages between godly sons and ungodly daughters could not have been during the last 600 years before the flood, because Noah was the only son of God by righteousness during this time [Gen. 6:8-9; 7:1; 2 Pet. 2:4-5]. His sons were preserved in the ark because of being pure Adamite stock and not because of personal righteousness. The foregoing facts then, would limit these marriages to the 731 yeaars between the first 325 years and the last 600 of the Antediluvian Age; whereas, sonsof God actually married daughters of men throughout the entire 1,656 years of that age. Genesis 6:1-2 makes it clear that this happened “when men began to multiply on the face of the earth.”
 Genesis 6:4 teaches that there were giants on the earth IN THOSE DAYS [before the flood] and also AFTER THAT [after those days which were before the flood] as a result of the sons of God marrying the daughters of men. If, as is taught, the sons of God were the sons of Seth, we can account for the AFTER THAT [after the flood], for the line of Seth was continued through Noah. But, with the daughters of Cain [supposed to be the daughters of men], the story is different. Cain’s line perished in the flood, both men and women, which means there were no daughters of Cain after the flood, for sons of God to marry.
 The Bible gives us no reason to believe that the statement “the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair” should be limited to Cain’s daughters. Other families had daughters too, thousands of families which made up the many branches of the race both BEFORE and AFTER the flood. These were DAUGHTERS OF MEN, too. In the 1,656 years before the flood [which is the period in which Seth and Cain lived], there must have been from 150,000,000 to 500,000,000 people. It is unbelievable that so many as half of these were godly and half ungodly; and we know that they were not limited to two lines – the line of Seth and the line of Cain. Regarding Seth’s daughter we have reason to believe that they were as FAIR as the daughters of Cain – beautiful enough to attract men as husbands for themselves. The line of Seth alone survived the flood, so we know this is true. Genesis 6:1-2 therefore, cannot be said to refer only to the daughters of Cain; and the term DAUGHTERS OF MEN cannot be limited to mean only the daughters of Cain.
 The very expression, SONS OF GOD and DAUGHTERS OF MEN, indicate two different kinds – one the product of man. Seth was not God, so why call the sons of God the sons of Seth?
 It is a matter of record that Seth’s children were as ungodly as Cain’s. The first-born even started idolatry, as proved in note f, Gen. 4:26.
 With the exception of Noah and his family ALL FLESH had CORRUPTED HIS WAY upon the earth, before the flood [Gen. 6:12], which means the entire race [besides Noah’s family] had become a mixture of fallen angels and men, or giants. Only Noah and his family had preserved their pedigree pure from Adam; and this is really why they were saved in the Ark. They were the only ones capable of giving the race a new, clean start after the flood. It is said of Noah that he was a just man and PERFECT in his generation [Gen. 6:9]. The word for ‘perfect’ in the Hebrew is ‘tamim’, which means ‘without blemish’. It is the technical word for bodily perfection, and not moral perfection. Hence it is used of the sacrificial animals of the O.T. which had to be of pure stock and WITHOUT BLEMISH [Ex. 12:5; 29:1; Lev. 1:3; 3:1-6; 4:3, 23-32; 5:15-18; 6:6; 9:2-3; Ezek. 43:22-25; 45:18-23]; WITHOUT SPOT [Numb. 19:2; 28:3-11; 29:17, 26]; and UNDEFILED [Ps. 119:1]. The use of this word in connection with Noah means that he and his sons were the only pure Adamites left, and for such purity they [regardless of the sons’ position in personal holiness] were all preserved in the ark.
– Dake Annotated Reference Bible: page 62-63.