“And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

“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” (Genesis 6:1-2, 4).

Introduction

Genesis 6:1-2, 4, above, is our text for this study. This survey is foundationally derived from my article, Genesis 6 Commentary and Genetics | FaithWriters, with a much deeper look into my initial theory on what may have actually occurred during this pivotal and much-debated time in history.

What Genesis 6:1-4 Is Not

One thought on this controversial passage is that the “sons of God” are the sons of the “godly” line of Seth and that the “daughters of men” are the daughters of the “ungodly” line of Cain. This interpretation is obviously wrong for the following reasons:

The “sons of God” (Hebrew – “bene Elohim“) are clearly angels when compared to the “law of first mention” in what is considered to be the oldest book of the Bible, Job. If the intention of the verse was to convey this interpretation, the Holy Spirit would have inspired Moses to write: “… when the sons of Seth came into the daughters of Cain.”

Additionally, “the daughters of men” is all-inclusive and would include the daughters of Seth. Also, how could natural human procreation – made a mandate from God to all humanity – produce the Nephilim/giants/men of renown?

Finally, Seth’s descendants were far from godly as all were destroyed in the deluge of the global flood except Noah and his family.

What Genesis 6:1-4 Is

The correct interpretation is that the “sons of God” were fallen angels.

As noted above, we find that the “sons of God” (Hebrew – “bene Elohim“) in Genesis 6:4 are angels when compared with the book of Job.

“Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them” (Job 1:6).

“Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD” (Job 2:1).

“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-7). (emphasis mine)

In all three instances, the sons of God refer to angels.

The only humans to ever be called sons of God were Adam and Messiah Yeshua. Both were new creations, sinless and perfect. (Eve might be considered in this category, but she was created biologically from Adam himself.) All other human beings have been created biologically in sin and are not unique creations.

Angels fall into this category as well, as they were also unique creations and, as such, were referred to as “sons of God.”

Note: Christians today who are born again are called sons of God only because they are new creations in Christ.

The correct interpretation, therefore, is that the “sons of God” were fallen angels.

These sons of God “came into the daughters of men, and they bare children to them,” which resulted in the Nephilim/giants/men of renown. What exactly happened here?

Angelic Biology and Sexual Intercourse

The other popular interpretation that seems to align with what Genesis 6:4 is conveying is that of sexual relations between the fallen sons of God and human women that produced the Nephilim/giants/men of renown.

It has been conjectured – and I agree – that a major issue that Satan and the fallen angels had regarding mankind was that men and women were created in the image of God, and the angels were not.

When it comes to procreation, there is nothing in Scripture that even hints that the angels have the ability to reproduce among themselves, and every mention of angels in the Holy Bible refers to them in masculine terms.

Jesus, in answering a question from the Sadducees regarding the resurrection (in which they did not believe), “Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 22:29). (emphasis mine)

In the above passage, Jesus said we will not marry in, or clearly after, the resurrection – and would obviously not procreate – like the “angels of God in heaven.”

Angelic and Human Reproduction?

But what about when angels take on human form, as they so often do in Scripture? Would they be provided with reproductive organs that would render the possibility that they could reproduce with human women? Why would this even be possible? Why would God allow angelic beings, who evidently cannot even reproduce between themselves, the ability to have reproductive genitals to procreate with human women when taking human form?

If God created different animal “kinds” (Genesis 1:21, 24-25) on the earth that cannot procreate amongst themselves, then why would we ever entertain the idea that spiritual angels who take on human form could ever reproduce with human women?

The Apostle Paul hit on this same theme:

“All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds” (1 Corinthians 15:39).

Paul contrasts the different “kinds” with the “flesh” of men, beasts, fishes, and birds, which cannot cross the created kind barrier through reproduction – and it is even more limited than that. If the earthly kinds cannot pass the reproduction barriers, then certainly neither can angels and humans.

Sexual intercourse between angels – fallen or not and taking on human form – and women producing hybrid offspring, biologically, would have to be virtually impossible.

God is a God of order, not confusion, and this incredibly unrealistic scenario would be the epitome of confusion. The whole concept, to me, seems more than absurd.

Angels and Human Biology

When it comes to angels taking on human form, I would like to pose a few questions.

Do angels, when taking on human form, receive the physiological anatomy that humans do? Would we expect them to acquire a brain, nervous system, lungs, respiratory system, heart, veins, arteries, circulatory system, stomach, liver, kidneys, digestive system, and such?

When the Lord and the two angels who came to Abraham before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah dined with him, and the two angels later with Lot (Genesis 18:8, 19:3), are we to really expect that the angels experienced the consumption of that food as humans do? Was that food digested in a stomach and intestines, with the waste eventually exiting the body through an anus? Shouldn’t the thought of angels – holy or fallen – having bowel movements cause consternation for us?

When the two angels were in Sodom and the men of the city wanted to have sexual relations with them (Genesis 19:5), are we to really believe that if, somehow, the men of the city were to overpower them that the two angels would even have rectums to violate?

And, please, spare me any notion that it might be different for fallen angels. When it comes to our topic, angels are angels, and humans are humans.

Unfortunately, the very concept of fallen angels having sexual intercourse with women and procreating half angel/half human hybrids seems to have its origin – apart from the text of Genesis 6:1-4 – in The Book of Enoch and other pseudepigraphal books.

The Book of Enoch is one of many pseudepigraphal – falsely attributed works and/or texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded – extra-Biblical writings. This mythically unsubstantiated book has numerous difficulties, including fancifully mystical tales that contradict the revealed Word of God. Whether or not there is any truth found in the book of Enoch is irrelevant, as Satan, along with man, will always mix truth with error.

As a Scripture-only proponent, I highly advise my brothers and sisters in Christ to shun any religious literature that attempts to masquerade itself as being on an equal footing with the Holy Scriptures other than the 66 books of the Holy Bible. Doing so will keep the student on the straight and narrow road without the very real possibility that these extra-Biblical texts will wreak havoc on their Biblical foundation and understanding and could eventually lead to a corruption of the Word of God within their Scriptural interpretations and views.

Please, Saint, avoid all extra-Biblical writings that masquerade as “Scripture.”

Addressing Jude 1:6-7 and a Remote Possibility

“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 1:6-7).

My interpretation of this passage of Scripture is straight-forward:

Just as “the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, [God] hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day,” when they will be thrown into the Lake of Fire, and they “are set forth an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire… even as Sodom and Gomorrah” were judged.

The phrase “giving themselves over to fornication and going after strange flesh” is attributed specifically to Sodom and Gomorrah as their particular sin which resulted in their judgment, just as the sin of “the angels which kept not their first estate [and] left their habitation,” and subsequent rebellion in Genesis 6, resulted in their awaiting judgment “in everlasting chains under darkness.”

But even if one were to interpret Jude 1:6-7 as stating that just as those in Sodom and Gomorrah gave “themselves over to fornication and [went] after strange flesh” as being applicable to “the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation” – and honestly acknowledge that angels and humans are unable to reproduce as different created kinds of God – then the only remote possibility for this to have occurred would be possession; again, if it happened at all.

This would be accomplished by the fallen angels possessing human males to have sexual relations with the women, but the progeny would still be human in nature as the seed of the men would be the fertilization method for the eggs of the women.

Again, I find this remote possibility highly unlikely, but it does deserve to at least be considered. The fallen angels did observe that the daughters of men were “fair” or “beautiful,” but this could have been nothing more than a reasoning within themselves that the children that they would bare to them (more on this below) would be physically attractive.

In addition, Satan undoubtedly informed the fallen angels of what God had told him in the Garden of Eden concerning the seed of the woman and his seed.

“And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed” (Genesis 3:15a).

This surely played a role in their thinking of corrupting the seed of the woman!

Finally, it should be noted that, regarding the Nephilim/giants/men of renown, there is no hint whatsoever that they had any supernatural qualities to them, which one would expect had angels mated with women – the supernatural with the natural. Though they are most probably the basis for much of the legends of the ancient world, any supernatural characteristics of these “gods” were found within the myths themselves and the imaginations of men; they were not based on reality and what we know of them in the Holy Bible. Consider Goliath and his family, as well as the other families of giants that Israel encountered in the promised land.

“… they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown” (Genesis 6:4b). (emphasis mine)

The Hebrew word for “men” is 582 אֱנוֹשׁ “enosh,” which means man, men, mankind, another, bloodthirsty, certain, divers, fellow, in the flower of their age. (emphasis mine)

The Nephilim, or “fallen ones” and/or “giants” are obviously men/mankind, yet were evidently corrupted and therefore ineligible for salvation as the “fallen ones.”

So, again, what may have really happened in Genesis 6?

The Theory of Genetic Manipulation and Genome Editing

My theory is very basic, really, and it involves the genetic manipulation and genome editing to alter the DNA of a fertilized egg or embryo. Whether this would have been accomplished by having the women fertilized naturally by human males (or by human males who were possessed by fallen angels) or by acquiring the spermatozoa of human males to fertilize the eggs in a laboratory-like setting is obviously unknown but seems like a logical and rational possibility considering all the defects in the alternative interpretation of angels mating with women.

Angels do excel in strength and wisdom compared to fallen man. And when one considers what men and women are doing today regarding genetics and the easily available technology of CRISPR – let alone what scientists are accomplishing in labs all over the world – the fallen angels would seemingly have no issue whatsoever with accomplishing this feat.

With this foundation laid, let us explore the original Hebrew and see what, if anything, the text can offer us in regard to our theory.

Genesis 6:1-2

“And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose” (Genesis 6:1-2). (emphasis mine)

Our main objective with this portion of Genesis 6:1-2 is with the definition and meaning of the word “wives” because this might help us better understand the intention of the fallen angels.

The Hebrew for “wives” is 802 אִשָּׁה “ishshah” and is most often translated woman, wife, female. (emphasis mine)

As can be seen, the translation of “women” is just as valid as the translation of “wives,” and, as we always note, the proper word translation will always be dependent upon context.

In our case, since we have ruled out the idea of sexual procreation between fallen angels and women, let’s see how the passage looks with the alternative translation.

“And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them women of all which they chose” (Genesis 6:1-2). (emphasis mine)

Here are just a few of the translations that actually use “women” instead of “wives.”

“the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were beautiful and they took those women to them of all that they chose.” – Aramaic Bible in Plain English

“and the sons of God see that they, the daughters of men, [are] beautiful, and they take women for themselves of all whom they have chosen.” – Literal Standard Version

“and sons of God see the daughters of men that they are fair, and they take to themselves women of all whom they have chosen.” – Young’s Literal Translation

“the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were beautiful and they took those women to them of all that they chose.” – Peshitta Holy Bible Translated

I personally believe that “women,” based upon context and what the fallen angels’ agenda clearly was, is the proper translation.

What about Genesis 6:4?

Text Analysis of Genesis 6:4

“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” (Genesis 6:4).

As we sometimes do, it can be very helpful to the Bible student to investigate the Text Analysis, which shows us the order of the words in the original language (in this case, Hebrew), and we can also scrutinize each individual word’s meanings and definitions to see if we can glean anything interesting from the original text.

Here is how the Text Analysis of Genesis 6:4 reads, along with my suggested punctuation:

The Nephilim were on the earth in days, those and also after that, when came in the sons of God to the daughters of men and they bore [children] to them. Those [were] the mighty men who [were] of old men of renown.

First of note is that the words “children” and “were” are not in the original but have been added for additional helpful clarification in the English.

I had two questions that were of interest to me that I sought answers for. Basically, what are the Hebrew definitions for “came in” and “and they bore,” and how can we possibly interpret them apart from the original concept of sexual relations between angels (which are always referred to in the Scriptures as masculine) and women?

The Hebrew for “came in” is the Hebrew word structure “yā·ḇō·’ ū” with the Hebrew word 935 בּוֹא “bo” and means to come, go in, go, abide, apply, attain, be, befall, besiege, bring forth, in. A primitive root; to go or come (in a wide variety of applications) — abide, apply, attain, X be, befall, + besiege, bring (forth, in, into, to pass), call, carry, X certainly, (cause, let, thing for) to come (against, in, out, upon, to pass), depart, X doubtless again, + eat, + employ, (cause to) enter (in, into, -tering, -trance, -try), be fallen, fetch, + follow, get, give, go (down, in, to war), grant, + have, X indeed, (in-)vade, lead, lift (up), mention, pull in, put, resort, run (down), send, set, X (well) stricken (in age), X surely, take (in), way. (emphasis mine)

Note my underlined emphases within these definitions. My theory is not that of sexual intercourse between angels and women that produces a progeny that is no longer fully human, but rather an incubation-type process that renders genetically modified, altered and/or engineered information into a naturally fertilized human embryo.

With definitions of “go in, apply, attain, besiege, bring forth, bring in, bring into, bring to pass, carry, certainly cause, cause to enter in, cause to enter into, fetch, get, invade, put, and set,” I do believe we have the ability to conjecture that this was a genetic manipulation that led to offspring that wasn’t fully human as God intended and no longer made in the image of God; not the popular notion of a hybrid offspring acquired from angels and humans mating, which, according to Scripture, biology, logic, and reason shouldn’t even be possible.

The Hebrew word structure for “and they bore” is “wə·yā·lə·ḏū” with the Hebrew word 3205 יָלַד “yalad” and means to bear, bring forth, beget, birthday, born, make to bring forth children, young, bring up, calve. A primitive root; to bear young; causatively, to beget; medically, to act as midwife; specifically, to show lineage — bear, beget, birth((-day)), born, (make to) bring forth (children, young), bring up, calve, child, come, be delivered (of a child), time of delivery, gender, hatch, labour, (do the office of a) midwife, declare pedigrees, be the son of, (woman in, woman that) travail(-eth, -ing woman). (emphasis mine)

We should be able to honestly recognize that these definitions could be equally applied to genetic manipulations and genetic editing from naturally conceived progeny and birthed in the natural way, with the women rendering to the sons of God those “children to them.”

Phrases such as “bring forth, make to bring forth children, born, bring up, causatively to beget, make to bring forth children, and declare pedigrees” do have this distinct possibility of genetic alteration for the purposes of thwarting God’s plans for redemption, salvation, and reconciliation by bringing into the world children whose DNA had been corrupted.

When we think about how God would have conveyed the actions of the fallen angels to genetically manipulate, modify, and/or engineer the DNA and all that was involved in the process – by using the Hebrew language – I submit that these would be the words to be used. There seems to be no better way of communicating these actions on the part of the fallen angels than using the language and word structures that we see in the text.

For centuries these verses have caused confusion and been much debated, as some, for obvious reasons, had concluded that there must have been sexual intercourse between fallen angels and human women that produced offspring, no matter how much this demented concept did not make sense to them. We should all be able to recognize how those in the past came to this conclusion, as confusing as it was to them.

But now – when we consider the human body’s biology with that of spiritual angels who take the form of human beings and take note of what is happening with genetics today – we should honestly acknowledge that genetics could very well be the key to what these Scriptures are communicating to the reader.

What the fallen angels succeeded in doing in the pre-flood world, mankind is doing today. This information came from somewhere, and it certainly would not be a stretch to believe that fallen angels have been the ultimate entities giving to man this knowledge and technology, whether through deceptive communication with the cosmic “alien” and “Ascended Masters” delusions or Eastern meditation techniques that result in contact with “spirit-guides.” In all of this, fallen angels are the powers behind these deceptions.

Regardless of how this is being achieved, we can be certain that unseen dark and evil spirits are behind these genetic endeavors to achieve the elite’s ambitions of transhumanism, longevity, and ultimately, in their deluded minds, eternal life!

A Synopsis of Our Theory

Here is a brief synopsis of our theory as presented within this study.

* There is zero biological or Scriptural evidence that angels and humans are capable of mating and procreating.

* The fallen angels devised a plan, left their first estate, came to earth, and took to themselves any of the beautiful women they desired to implement their scheme.

* If there were any “sexual relations” between angels and women – highly unlikely, but remotely possible – the only way for this to have been accomplished, if at all, was that fallen angels would have possessed human men, which would have resulted in the fertilization of the eggs of the women with the seed of men. Biologically and Scripturally, there could not have been a mixing of the DNA of angels (whatever that would be) and humans to produce demi-gods of half angel/half human hybrids.

* The fallen angels genetically corrupted the DNA by altering, modifying, editing, and/or engineering the embryos. We postulate that the fallen angels were genetically altering, modifying, editing, and/or engineering either with the embryo in the mother’s womb or through a fertilized egg outside the mother’s womb and re-implanting the genetically edited embryo back into the womb in an in vitro fertilization (IVF) process. Fallen angels, with their superior intelligence, would certainly possess the knowledge needed for such an endeavor.

* The women carried to term and birthed the genetically altered, modified, edited, and/or engineered Nephilim and gave the children to the fallen angels to raise in their fallen image. By utilizing the most beautiful women and, necessarily, the spermatozoa from elite candidates of men, the fallen angels helped to produce the most attractive and physically formidable, genetically altered Nephilim possible.

* Though no language at the time of Moses, up to the recent past, could ever convey what the fallen angels were accomplishing in their genetic undertakings, the Hebrew used in Genesis 6:1-4 – because of the wide array of definitions within the words themselves – affords the very real plausibility of being applicable to our supposition. These would be the words one should expect to see in such a futuristic narrative written in the ancient past.

Post-Flood Reemergence of the Giants

Quite interesting to note is that the giants reemerged after the flood. There are two possibilities in this situation.

[1] There was another rebellion by fallen angels that went into the daughters of men to corrupt the genome again.

[2] One of the eight members on board the ark was already a carrier of the corrupted gene(s).

Regarding the latter, many believe that if there was a carrier of the corrupted gene(s), it was probably Ham’s wife, as the descendants of Ham populated ancient Canaan, where the giants were reported before and after Israel conquered the land.

Final Thoughts on the Fallen Angels and the Nephilim

The genetic corruption of the DNA of the Nephilim by the fallen angels resulted in four important outcomes:

1. The fallen angels showed their disdain for God and His intended creative and redemptive purposes.
2. The fallen angels attempted to thwart the coming seed of the woman – the Messiah.
3. The fallen angels attempted to so corrupt the DNA of men and women through the Nephilim that they would be ineligible for salvation as they would no longer be created in the image of God.
4. The fallen angels acquired – to the best of their ability – a progeny to raise in their own fallen image.

When it comes to the spirit/soul complex that inhabited the genetically altered bodies of the Nephilim – and how this trickled down into subsequent populations and played out in regard to salvation – we have no choice but to leave this issue in the more than capable hands of our righteous Creator.

The Mark of The Beast Connection

Some have offered the possibility that there may be another eruption of fallen angels trying to corrupt the gene pool of humanity once again. For me, I really don’t think so because man has already attained the technology and knowledge needed to corrupt mankind on his own – no doubt with fallen angels working behind the scenes!

“That which has been is what will be, That which is done is what will be done, And there is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9).

Fast forward approximately 4,500 years from Genesis 6, and indeed there is “nothing new under the sun.” Instead of fallen angels personally corrupting humanity’s gene pool, it seems mankind is to be the conduit for this nefarious scheme today; that of corrupting the genome in an effort to achieve physical prowess, perceived supernatural powers, and immortal life.

The ramifications of rejecting The Mark of The Beast will be starvation and death, though some will survive the Tribulation.

“And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name” (Revelation 13:15-17).

And the ramification of taking The Mark of The Beast is to “be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb… the smoke of their torment [will] ascend up for ever and ever: and they [will] have no rest day nor night.”

“And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name” (Revelation 14:9-11).

Thanks be to God almighty that the Lord Jesus Christ has saved us, and after the rapture of the church, we shall always be with our Lord!

This is why it’s so vitally important, while we still have time, that each and every one of us is Answering the Call of The Great Commission, and giving an answer to every man and woman who so desperately needs Jesus and asks us, “Why Am I Here and What Is It All About?”

Love, grace, mercy, and shalom in Messiah Yeshua, and Maranatha!

➢ Email: mab10666@yahoo.com

➢ If you have not given your life to Jesus Christ and are seeking answers about God, Jesus Christ, the gospel, and salvation, please email me at mab10666@yahoo.com for information.

➢ I am still taking questions for the Questions from the Body of Christ series. If you or someone you know has a question pertaining to the Word of God – theology, difficult passages, eschatology, etc. – I would really like to hear from you.

➢ A listing of past articles may be found at my Article Listings on Rapture Ready or my Home Page on FaithWriters.

The origin of the Hebrew language is shrouded in mystery. Jewish tradition as well as various Christian scholars throughout the ages believed that Hebrew was the original language of man.

“When God created Adam, he spoke to him” (Genesis 2:16), indicating that God gave Adam a language and this language came from God himself. When we look at all the names of Adam’s descendants, we find that all the names from Adam to Noah and his children are Hebrew names, meaning that their name has meaning in Hebrew.

For instance, Methuselah (Genesis 5:21) is Hebrew for “his death brings” (The flood occurred the year that he died). It is not until we come to Noah’s grandchildren that we find names that are of a language other than Hebrew. For instance, the name Nimrod (Genesis 11:18), who was from Babylon/Sumer/Shinar and possibly the Tower of Babel, is a non-Hebrew name. According to the Biblical record of names, Adam and his descendants spoke Hebrew.” ^{1}

Whatever the language that Noah and his sons spoke, that was the one language that was spoken after the flood up until the time of the Tower of Babel. “And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech” (Genesis 11:1). At Babel, God confused the language of the whole world and scattered them over the face of the whole earth (Genesis 11:9).

The family of the sons of Noah (Shem, Japeth, and Ham) is given in Genesis 10, “and by these the nations divided in the earth after the flood” (Genesis 10:32). These 70 descendants of Noah’s sons eventually became nations, so Genesis 10 is referred to as the Table of Nations. It is theorized by some scholars that God created 69 different languages at this time, with the existing language of Hebrew remaining with Shem’s descendants, namely Eber and his son Peleg. Genesis 10:25 says in the days of Peleg, the earth was divided. Many theologians believe this verse is referring to the Tower of Babel incident.

THE ANCIENT HEBREW LANGUAGE

Written records documenting languages belonging to the Semitic family reach back to the middle of the 3rd millennium BC. Hebrew is a member of a family of ancient languages known as the Northwest Semitic group. All of the languages in this group were similar, and several of them developed related styles of script in the first millennium BC. However, none of these scripts are thought to have gone back as far as the time of the Exodus.

“Scholars believe that Hebrew is one of the oldest of these scripts. However, the fact that Old Hebrew is thought to have first emerged around 900 BC contributes to the thinking that the accounts in the first books of the Bible, like the exodus from Egypt, were passed down as oral traditions that became exaggerated and mixed with fiction before being written down centuries later. However, there is new evidence that indicates that Moses could have authored the Torah as an eyewitness account. A strong pattern of evidence is even pointing to the reality that the world’s oldest alphabet was a form of Hebrew invented by the people of Israel while they were in Egypt.

Some of the world’s oldest alphabetic inscriptions were found more than a century ago on the walls of ancient mines in the Sinai Peninsula that were dug by Egyptian slaves. Further investigation showed that the writing was a Semitic script, and it was given the name proto-Sinaitic (proto meaning “first”). In time, about two dozen of these inscriptions using a Semitic alphabet were discovered – all recording short messages. The oldest was dated to Egypt’s Middle Kingdom period.

Where did this technology come from, and when exactly were these etchings made? There is no evidence of local populations near the mines in ancient times, so all the activity there is attributed to seasonal mining parties that came from Egypt. One clue pertaining to the development of this early script is that it borrowed symbols for the letters from Egyptian hieroglyphics. There are also many hieroglyphic inscriptions from the Egyptian excavation parties around the Sinai mines. However, new strictly phonetic meanings were given to the symbols in the alphabetic inscriptions.

There would have been no motive for Egyptians to create this Semitic script. So, it appears that the genius of a Semitic alphabet was invented by a Semitic person living in Egypt during the Middle Kingdom, who was familiar with Egyptian hieroglyphs – a writing system that was so complicated, only the elite in society could use it. The pattern is beginning to form.

A series of past Thinker Updates covered Douglas Petrovich’s thesis that Hebrew was the world’s oldest alphabet. He proposed several new letter identifications for these inscriptions that allowed him to read them as Hebrew messages. Egyptologist David Rohl has made different identifications for the words by using ideas from some of the previous scholars involved in this debate for the letter identifications and then using Rabbi Michael Shelomo Bar-Ron to read them as Hebrew. Each thinks the Israelites were responsible for the writing.” Excerpted from: Was Hebrew the First Alphabet in the World and Used by Moses? (patternsofevidence.com)

THE HEBREW TRANSLATED MASORETIC TEXT

“The Masoretic Text is the authoritative Hebrew and Aramaic text of the 24 books of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) in Rabbinic Judaism. Most Jews and Protestant Christians consider the Masoretic Text the authoritative Hebrew Bible. The Jews call it the Tanakh, and Protestants (and Roman Catholics) call it the Old Testament. While it was written sometime between the seventh and tenth centuries AD, it was based on the meticulously preserved oral tradition and the best available manuscripts of the original Hebrew text.

About a millennium before the Masoretic Text was finished, rabbis began notating the original Hebrew with punctuation and additional letters to help readers correctly interpret the text. These notations were informed by the oral tradition. Initially, they only added consonants and minimal punctuation, but the system evolved over the centuries to address specific confusions.

The Masoretic Text was an answer to a problem that had been building in the Jewish community for centuries: biblical Hebrew was ambiguous, and most Jews didn’t know how to read it anymore. With no vowels, punctuation, or stress marks, the original Hebrew left a lot of room for interpretive errors. And as biblical Hebrew fell out of usage, the Scriptures became virtually inaccessible to the public. The Masoretes first came onto the scene in the sixth century, and they produced a more advanced system of punctuation and accents, building on previous scholarship to more precisely define how to read the text.

Scholars aren’t sure when exactly the Jewish canon was established, but it likely occurred sometime between the second century BC and the third century AD. The Torah (the first five books of the Bible) had always been considered authoritative and had been carefully copied and preserved. But the rest of the canon took longer to define, and so other books splintered off into multiple editions.

The Masoretic Text is traditionally divided into three groups of books: Torah (Teaching), Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings). This is why the Hebrew Bible is also known by the acronym Tanakh: Ta (Torah), Na (Nevi’im), Kh (Ketuvim). The books of Masoretic Text look pretty different from most Christian Bibles. While there are 39 books in most Old Testaments, the Tanakh only has 24. Nobody added 15 extra books to the Bible, though. The texts are just divided differently. The Jewish Masoretes combined numerous books and reduced the total number to 24. 1 and 2 Kings are combined into one book, and so are 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Chronicles. Nehemiah and Ezra are a single book as well. All twelve of the Minor Prophets are bundled into one book.

The Torah is the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Nevi’im is divided into three sections: the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings), the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel), and the 12 Minor Prophets (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi). Ketuvim is also divided into three sections: the three Poetic Books (Psalms, Proverbs, Job), the five Scrolls (Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther), and other books: Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah, Chronicles).

Unlike the Septuagint (Greek translation) and the Vulgate (Latin translation), there are no apocryphal (non-canonical) or deuterocanonical (second canon) books included in the Masoretic Text.” Excerpted from: What Is the Masoretic Text? The Beginner’s Guide – OverviewBible

THE HEBREW TRANSLATED SEPTUAGINT TEXT

According to legend, seventy-two men (six from each of the twelve tribes of Israel) were commissioned to go from Jerusalem to Alexandria, Egypt, to translate the Hebrew and Aramaic Scriptures into the Greek language. This occurred in approximately 250 BC. There are historical records indicating that Ptolemy II (the son and successor of Ptolemy I, one of four generals who took control of Alexander the Great’s empire) requested that the high priest send seventy-two men to Alexandria to work on a Greek translation of the Pentateuch (Torah). Their work was entitled the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX), from the Latin word for seventy.

Most of the entirety of the Septuagint, however, seems to be the accumulated work of various individuals and groups at different times. The LXX became the official Scriptures for Greek-speaking Jews scattered around the Western Mediterranean. In fact, the New Testament authors who were writing to Greek-speaking communities typically quoted from the LXX, and its prevalent usage continued throughout the early church era. It is still the official Old Testament of the Greek Orthodox Church.

The history of the translation of the Hebrew Torah into the Greek language, known as the Septuagint text, is very interesting, as well as the New Testament. In 331 BC, the Persian empire fell at Alexander’s feet. Instead of making the peoples of the conquered kingdoms slaves and treating them cruelly, he required them only to embrace the Greek culture and language. For the most part, he made friends of them. This was a fulfillment of God’s providential use of him. Unwittingly, Alexander was being used to accomplish God’s purpose by making Line Greek the lingua franca of the known world. Even Rome would not be able to change the universal language. When the remains of the Greek empire were taken over by the Romans, everyone continued to use Greek as the language of business, trade, and international communication.

So when Jesus the Messiah came and purchased a pardon for the sin of all mankind by his death, the infinitely valuable message about it was entrusted to none other than Alexander’s creation – Koine Greek. The original manuscript of the New Testament was written in this Common Greek and could be rapidly spread among the Gentiles. Why? Because in the providential working of God, Alexander had made it possible for them to understand. For more information, see The Greatness of the New Testament (rev310.net).

Since Greek was the common language of the Roman Empire, the Septuagint was popular among Jews living under Roman rule. Many of the early Christians didn’t know Hebrew, so they naturally embraced this popular Greek translation as well. While the Law and the prophets remained tremendously important to the Jewish people, the Hebrew Bible became inscrutable to non-Hebrew-speaking Jews. It’s no surprise that a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible emerged. The Septuagint isn’t even the only one. It’s just the translation that became most popular, and it’s the only Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that has survived fully intact.

While the Protestant Bible only has 39 books in the Old Testament, the Septuagint contains 51. Catholics and Orthodox Christians refer to these “extra” books as deuterocanonical (meaning “second canon”), and Protestants refer to them as Apocrypha (meaning “secret, or non-canonical”).

The Septuagint is divided into six sections: the Pentateuch, Historical Writings, Wisdom Literature, Minor Prophets, Major Prophets, and Appendix. We will list the books contained in these sections below, with the deuterocanonical/Apocrypha in bold.

Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Historical writings: Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees. Wisdom Literature: Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom (or Wisdom of Solomon), Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus), Psalms of Solomon. Minor Prophets: Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. Major Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, Letter of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel (with additions). Appendix: 4 Maccabees.

While the Septuagint was widely used in the early Christian church, when the Jewish canon was formally established centuries later, it didn’t include many of the writings we find in the Septuagint. Rabbinic Judaism claimed that the canon hadn’t changed as it was passed down orally, and these writings were never included. This sparked a debate within the church: what should they do with the texts the early Christian church accepted, which Jewish tradition rejected?

The church debated including many of these books in the Christian canon throughout the fourth and fifth centuries, labeling them either “ecclesiastical” or “apocryphal,” depending on the degree to which the early church accepted them. After the Reformation, Protestants supported the Judaic canon, labeled all of these books apocryphal, and removed them from the canon. But Catholics and Orthodox Christian traditions still hold to several of these writings from the Septuagint.

SEPTUAGINT VS. MASORETIC TEXT

“The oldest copy we have of the Septuagint is from the fourth century. The oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text we have is from the ninth century. But while the Septuagint gives us an ancient Greek translation of the ancient Hebrew text, the Masoretic Text is the ancient Hebrew. And it came from a tradition of carefully passing down the Hebrew Bible word for word. Thus, the Masoretic Text is believed to authentically represent the original Hebrew Bible. This creates a bit of a problem: the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text don’t always see eye-to-eye.

Early church fathers openly called these differences errors. As Jerome translated the Septuagint into the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible), he faced a dilemma. If he only translated from the Septuagint, he would force the books of Matthew and John to “quote” passages that didn’t exist. They were in the original Hebrew, but not the Septuagint. But if the Septuagint was in error, was it not inspired? What would that mean when Paul quoted from the Septuagint?

For centuries, scholars believed these differences between the manuscripts supported the idea that the translators of the Septuagint were more familiar with Greek than with Hebrew and that the Septuagint was an inferior translation. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls threw a wrinkle in the debate. The Dead Sea Scrolls contained more than 200 biblical books, including a nearly complete manuscript of the Hebrew Bible that was more than 1,000 years older than the oldest copy of the Masoretic Text, and 500 years older than the oldest copy of the Septuagint. Inside the caves, there was also a smattering of Hebrew scrolls that supported the Septuagint’s translation.

While these ancient scrolls largely affirmed the Masoretic Text’s authority and careful preservation of the original Hebrew, the other copies of Old Testament books revealed that there was possibly a multitude of versions of the original Hebrew, some of which the Septuagint may have come from. The existence of other manuscripts doesn’t tell us whether they were accepted as authoritative.

What we do know is this: while the Septuagint was widely used even among Jews, Jewish tradition did not consider it authoritative. And shortly after the early Christian church started using prophecies in the Septuagint to point to Jesus—around the time people started noticing what appeared to be errors in its translation—popular Jewish culture turned away from it, too.

Most Protestant scholars still uphold the authority of the Masoretic Text, but for many, the Dead Sea Scrolls cast new light on whether or not the differences in the Septuagint were true “errors,” or simply translations based on a different manuscript (one that Jewish tradition rejected).” Excerpted from What Is the Septuagint? The Beginner’s Guide – OverviewBible

OUR MODERN OLD TESTAMENT BIBLE

“The fact is that 99% of all Protestants use a translation of the Bible and certainly do not read either Hebrew (Masoretic Text) or Greek (Septuagint). The same is true of Eastern Orthodox Christians. Virtually all of us use translations. As far as I know, our Orthodox Christian friends who read the Bible use more or less the same translations as we do. So, for virtually all Protestant and Orthodox believers, they read neither the Masoretic nor the Septuagint. They use translations by reputable scholars, and all scholars that I know of use both the Masoretic and the Septuagint texts in attempts to arrive at the best English translation.

In the very early church, when there were no separate Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, one thousand years before there even was such a thing as a Protestant, the Christian Church primarily read the Old Testament from the Septuagint, not the Masoretic Text. This was for two reasons. First of all, the church was composed mostly of Greek speakers at that time, so, naturally, they read the Bible in a Greek translation, which was the Septuagint. Very few of the early church read Hebrew, so, naturally, they used a translation, and the Septuagint was the only Greek translation available in the early church. The disciples could not read the Masoretic Text even if they wanted to (with the exception of Paul, the disciple to the Gentiles).

Another reason the early church did not use the Masoretic Hebrew Bible is that it literally did not even exist at that time. The Hebrew Masoretic Text was produced in the eighth and ninth centuries by Jews in an attempt to create a standard Hebrew text. There was literally no Masoretic Text available in the early Christian Church when the Eastern Church was using primarily the Septuagint! We can assume that the primitive church had access to Hebrew Old Testaments, but we cannot be sure exactly what the texts at that time were like.

As for the relative advantages and disadvantages, the Masoretic Text has some textual issues because it was produced from Hebrew texts from the 8th and 9th centuries. The Septuagint Text has a different problem, which is that it is not in the original language. But the advantage of the Septuagint for accuracy is that it is a translation made about 250 years BC, so it reflects relatively better Hebrew text. Good scholars who translate the Old Testament into English take into account both the Masoretic and the Septuagint texts, as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls. In fact, if you look in the margin of your Bible, they will often note which of the versions is being used, as well as give the translation of the other texts in the margin.

Virtually all in the English-speaking world use neither the Masoretic nor the Septuagint. We read translations. All good translations take both the Masoretic and the Septuagint (as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls) into account in a more or less balanced way. This is true of Protestants, Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox. It is also true of people like myself who are Christians but who identify as neither Protestant, Orthodox, or Catholic, but simply as Christians. There is no modern English translation that relies solely on the Masoretic Text, although really old translations such as the King James did rely quite largely on the Masoretic.

In any case, the differences, due to copying errors and slips of the pen, are quite minor, and, generally, the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint will produce identical translations into English. It is true that there are some advantages to the Septuagint, but the majority of our translations do come from the Hebrew Masoretic Text, even though it is from a thousand years after, simply because it is in Hebrew. The Dead Sea Scrolls are a third source of material for trying to produce the best Hebrew text. The fact is that often the Dead Sea Scrolls are closer to the Septuagint, and often they are closer to the Masoretic Text.

In the end, this is a fascinating topic, and we, as English speakers, are fortunate to have so many sources for producing good translations of the Old Testament into English. But for everyday use of the Bible, the distinctions between the Masoretic, the Septuagint, and the DSS is not a significant issue in how we live out our Christianity.” Excerpted from What is the advantage of the Masoretic Text over the Septuagint Translation? – Evidence for Christianity by John Oakes.

While most of the differences between the Masoretic and Septuagint Texts are minor word or phrase variations and sentence structures, a few are quite significant. It is not in the scope of this article to examine all of these scripture discrepancies. There are plenty of articles online that delve into this subject, or you can just obtain an Old Testament Septuagint “Bible” and compare the contrasting scriptures to your Bible. This is just an introduction to the different manuscripts, copies, and translations that the Old Testament Bible has evolved from.

In part II, we will examine the differences between the Masoretic, Septuagint, and Samaritan Pentateuch in regard to the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 and also the chronology of Exodus 12:40. We will determine which translation is more in line with the Millennial Day Theory, whereas six thousand years is as one day for the Lord.

Randy Nettles

rgeanie55@gmail.com

—

Endnotes:

{1} A Short History of the Hebrew Language | AHRC (ancient-hebrew.org)