Who were the heroes of old (Genesis 6:4)?

As to ver. 4, the construction is not without difficulty. It appears to distinguish between the Nephilim or giants in those days, as afterwards also, and the Gibborim, mighty ones or heroes, who were the fruit of the union of the sons of God with men's daughters. In fact, notwithstanding the dark confusion of the old heathen remains, traces of this distinction are not wanting; though nothing can be more marked than the superiority of scripture in the very little it says on this painful subject over the traditional lore respecting the Giants and the Titans, which the later poets jumbled inextricably. Num. 13:33 of itself easily accounts for the clause here parenthetically marked. It may run, without parenthesis, "And also after that the sons of God …: these [are] the mighty ones which were of old, men of the name," thus distinguishing the giants and these heroes. One shrinks from boldness in speaking of such a phrase; but the latter part distinguishes a class which was not found afterwards: "These [are] the heroes, who [were of old, men of renown." These, as being of quite a different source and character, had a fame peculiar to themselves for might. The reputation they acquired of old was not founded on mere stature, like that of the Nephilim.

And Jehovah said, "My Spirit shall not strive within man for ever, for that he also [is] flesh, and his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. The Nephilim (giants) were on the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare to them. These [are] the heroes, mighty men who [were] of old, men of renown (the name)" (vers. 3, 4).

nephilim. The signification of this word is uncertain: some trace it to a root 'to fall,' but then it is not clear whether it signifies 'fallen ones,' or 'those who fall upon.' They were men of great stature, which made the Israelites consider themselves as grasshoppers in comparison. They are not said (as has been supposed) to be the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men: those born of them are described as "mighty men (gibborim) which were of old, men of renown." The nephilim are merely said to be "in the earth in those days," and they were also seen by the spies about a thousand years afterwards: this is all that is revealed respecting them. The various ancient versions confirm the translation of 'giants.' Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:33.

As we open Genesis 6 we are carried on to the later centuries of the antediluvian age, when the population had considerably increased and human wickedness began to rise to a climax. Many have understood the term, "sons of God," to refer to men of Seth's line — the line of faith — who fell away and married daughters of Cain's line, but we agree with those who accept the term as meaning beings of an angelic order, as it clearly does in such scriptures as Job 1:6 and Job 2:1 and Job 38:7. How such connection can have been established, resulting in progeny superhuman in size and strength, we do not know, but we believe that Jude 6 and 7 confirm what we are saying. Sodom and Gomorrha went after "strange flesh," committing such enormous evil as is forbidden in Exodus 22:19, and these sons of God did the same thing in principle, by going after the daughters of men. Thereby they apostatized, leaving their first estate, and lest they should repeat the offence they are held in everlasting chains under darkness until eternal perdition falls upon them. They will be finally judged at the great day of the great white throne.

In Genesis however, we are only told about the terrible effect of this in the world of men. The monstrous men produced were monsters of iniquity, filling the earth with violence and corruption. Yet man in his fallen condition is such that these monsters instead of being considered men of infamy were treated as men of renown. They were the originals doubtless from whom sprang those tales of "gods" and "goddesses" and "Titans," etc., which have come down to us in the writings of antiquity. They are popularly dismissed as fables, but it looks as if they have a larger basis of fact than many care to admit.

We need not stop to enquire the exact meaning of the phrase "sons of God." The solution of this question is hardly relevant to the subject before us. It suffices to note that scripture distinctly indicates that the breaking down of the wall of separation between those who were OF GOD and those who were of MEN was the immediate cause of the terrible evils which called down the Divine displeasure.

If there be one plea which more frequently than another is urged to justify the Christian's association with the world, or those linked up with the world, it is that by so doing he will help to elevate and purify those he takes into association with himself. We have not to travel further into the Bible than Genesis 6 to see the utter fallacy of the argument. The product of this unholy union were the giants, "men of renown" truly, for they were probably the originals from which many a story of the "demi-gods" sprang — treasured up in heathen mythology, — but at the same time paragons of iniquity. An eloquent parable this for all who have ears to hear. The sons of God did not elevate the daughters of men, and their progeny partook of the baser strain.

In the narrative now before us, we see that the union of the sons of God with the daughters of men led to the most disastrous consequences. True, the fruit of that union seemed exceedingly fair, in man's judgement, as we read, "the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown;" yet, God's judgement was quite different. He sees not as man sees. His thoughts are not as ours. "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." Such was man's condition before God — "evil only" — "evil continually." So much for the mingling of the holy with the profane. Thus it must ever be. If the holy seed will not maintain its purity, all must be forfeited as regards testimony on the earth. Satan's first effort was to frustrate God's purpose by putting the holy seed to death, and when that failed; he sought to gain his end by corrupting it.

I have sometimes thought that in this verse (4) two classes of persons are referred to - the giants, and men of renown. They were men of renown (I apprehend the article in the Hebrew is emphatic), the builders of Babel aimed at it; it is possible that the mythologists mixed up this story with it. I apprehend certainly it is "the" giants were in the earth in those days, and also after that the sons of Elohim came into the daughters of Adam, and they bore to them, the same were mighty men which were of old, men of name - of the well-known name, an'shey hashshem, the men of name.

Glorious things are spoken of the City of God; but the moment we speak of the City of God, we think necessarily of the citizens. If this is the city, what about the citizens? what about the men, then? The Psalmist contrasts it with all the cities that have been upon the earth — with all the places of power, with all the records of great men which have been left in every part of the world. He says: "I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon to those who know me." Rahab — "pride," I suppose it means; but Egypt is what we call it; one of their great nations of antiquity, as we know, and which has left her monuments in the solid rock. She has built here eternally, in a way — built sepulchres for eternity; and with a grim irony, one would think, has written the name of her mighty men upon those sepulchres!

They are called giants or nephilim, giants I suppose earthborn; all this history is their being men of renown. Ovid says, besides the violence against men they would have aimed at heavenly rule, but were judged. Yet the giants and Titans are said to have been in contention; the oppression of the heaven-assailing rebels, who would have introduced all this, may be here alluded to.

I can understand two distinct classes here, but they seem to have subsisted together, though the first may have, in the first instance, preceded the second. They may have been Cain's progeny; another offspring of the unholy mixture of the sons of God and daughters of men. Certainly the two are brought out as bringing about the Flood, they both characterised the epoch which brought about the Flood - "those days."

The principle is the mixture of those who are of God with evil; but I am not aware that B'ney ha-Elohim (sons of God), is ever used for men. Job 38:7, they are surely not men, but angelic; so Job 1: 6. B'ney El khay (sons of the Living God) in Hosea 1:10 (in the Hebrew 2:1), is surely different. Judges are called "Elohim," but not B'ney ha-Elohim (sons of God). But there is no question of that here; so that the usage is certainly for beings angelic, not human, in nature; see Jude. I cannot for a moment doubt the force of this B'ney ha-Elohim (sons of God), and b'noth ha-Adam (daughters of man); and Jude quite confirms it. It seems to me also that akharey ken is not "afterwards" but "after that"; i.e., the consequence of this alliance; they were Titans and such like. All these traditions had a source. It may be questioned if the nephilim (giants) and gib-bo-rim (mighty ones) are identical.

51 But then, afterwards, only the general state of the race of Ha-Adam (Man) is spoken of. The sons of Anak are called nephilim; elsewhere giants are "Rephaim"; the connection with the traditions of giants, Titans, etc., seems evident.