As we enter Genesis 6, we see that there is a rapid increase in sin. We don’t know what the actual population of the world would have been at this point in time.
Human beings began to increase in number, and daughters were born to them, Genesis 6:1. If you read through Genesis 4-5, you’ll clearly see that the ‘sons of God,’ Genesis 6:2, weren’t ‘fallen angels’ as some like to suggest.
When the New Testament speaks of angels leaving their proper place, 2 Peter 2:4 / Jude 6, it refers to their fall with Satan, not to cohabitation with women. Nowhere in the Bible are ‘bad’ angels called ‘sons of God’.
We must remember that angels are without sexual orientation, which implies that they aren’t male or female. Angels do not have physical bodies, although there are times when they appear in human form, Genesis 18:22 / Genesis 19:1, but nowhere in Scripture are we told that they were capable of procreation to have human children, Matthew 22:30 / Luke 20:36.
Demons and angels do not have the power to create, so they could not have re-created or reproduced with human beings. Note in Genesis 6:9, we are told that God was bringing judgment on ‘man’ not angels or fallen angels.
The daughters of men are the daughters of the children of Cain, whose family is listed in Genesis 4:16-24. Seth’s family is then listed in Genesis 4:25-5:32. So, you have two families represented up to this point.
Cain’s line is recounted in Genesis 4, and this line displays a huge growth in wickedness, capped by Lamech, who was the first polygamist, Genesis 4:19, and who rejoiced in the murderous, vengeful use of the sword, Genesis 4:23-24.
The line of Seth is traced in Genesis 5 and displays righteousness. This line includes Enoch, who ‘walked with God’, Genesis 4:24, and Noah, who was ‘a righteous and blameless’ man, Genesis 6:9. There are ‘the sons of God’ represented in the family of Seth, and there are ‘the daughters of men’ who are the female offspring of the children of Cain and his family.
It’s true that angels are called ‘sons of God’ in Job 1:6 / Job 2:1 / Job 38:7, but as we mentioned above, ‘bad’ angels are never called ‘sons of God. Righteous people are also called ‘sons of God’ in Hosea 1:10. Even in the New Testament, we find that Christians are called ‘sons of God’ through faith in Christ, Galatians 3:26.
The term ‘sons of God’ simply refers to those who were obedient to God, but those who joined themselves to, that is, married, those who weren’t faithful to God, that is, ‘the daughters of men’. Seth’s godly descendants married the descendants from Cain, and so marrying those who’d rejected God led to greater wickedness.
The ‘sons of God’ were those who loved God, and the ‘daughters of men’ were those who didn’t love God. So, we simply have people who served God and people who served themselves. We see two lines, one obeying God and the other wilfully disobeying Him.
Because of intermarriage, Genesis 6:1-2, the people who belonged to the line of Seth came down to the level of those who didn’t love God. In other words, the godly became ungodly.
It’s clear that God was upset because the people left Him, and despite having one hundred and twenty years to repent, Genesis 6:3, they didn’t, and so, God announces His judgment and man is to be judged, Genesis 6:3 / Genesis 6:5-7 / Romans 1:24 / Romans 1:26 / Romans 1:28.
The Nephilim existed before and after ‘the sons of God’ married ‘the daughters of men,’ Genesis 6:4. They were a vicious and dominant people who dominated civilisations by populating the earth through the ‘daughters of men,’ and so they brought wickedness upon the earth.
Notice some translations use the words ‘giants’ and ‘mighty men.’ In Numbers 13:33, we find a description of them; they were a group of big, strong people. Here in Genesis 6:4, this can be read one of two ways. They were either physically large or they were giants among men in the sense of leaders. The Nephilim were powerful and influential men, but not necessarily good.
Notice they were ‘heroes of old and men of renown’, Genesis 6:4. The Hebrew word ‘gibbor’ is translated as ‘heroes’ in the NIV, but this is misleading because most other translations use the words ‘mighty men.’
This is important because a ‘hero’ is good, but a ‘mighty man’ can be good or evil. These ‘mighty men’ were so evil that the result of their wicked culture led to the degeneration of mankind. Mankind’s strength wouldn’t save them, and so the people put their faith in the Nephilim, giants, mighty men, instead of God, Matthew 23:12.
The word ‘Nephilim,’ often translated as ‘giants,’ means people who were physically bigger than typical men or who were of outstanding skill. The giants existed before, and after the sons of God married the daughters of men, Genesis 6:4.
In other words, before the flood, there was a population of physically large men or very skilled men. After the flood, we see the same word, ‘Nephilim’, being used, and again it is translated as ‘giants.
Notice in Numbers 13:33, it refers to their physical stature. Anak was an exceptionally large man, as were his descendants, the ‘Anakites’ NIV or as the ‘Anakims’, as the KJV translates the word, Deuteronomy 1:28.
We must note that they weren’t the only large people living after the flood. The ‘Emites’, NIV or the ‘Emims’ as the KJV translates the word, are also described as being tall, as tall as giants, as tall as the ‘Anakim’, NIV, or the ‘Anakites’ as the KJV translates the word, Deuteronomy 2:10-11.
The point is, when we read the word ‘Nephilim’ in our Bibles, we’re not to think of a race of people but rather a characteristic of some people. They were tall, they were strong, they were mighty men, Genesis 6:4.
It’s here in these verses that we see the progression of sin, and it seems the more people there were, the more sin was around, Genesis 6:5 / Genesis 6:3. God regretted or felt grieved, Isaiah 63:10 / Ephesians 4:30, and His heart was deeply troubled, Genesis 6:6 / Romans 1:18-32. Because He loved His creation and because the animals were under the rule of man, Genesis 1:26-28, they too shared in man’s punishment, Genesis 6:7.
Mathews, in his commentary, says the following.
‘God is no robot. We know him as a personal, living God, not a static principle, who, while having transcendent purposes to be sure, also engages intimately with his creation. Our God is incomparably affected by, even pained by, the sinner’s rebellion. Acknowledging the passibility (emotions) of God does not diminish the immutability of his promissory purposes. Rather, his feelings and actions toward men, such as judgment or forgiveness, are always inherently consistent with his essential person and just and gracious resolve, James 1:17.’
It’s always sad when people go the opposite direction God wants them to go, and so, God changes His relationship with man in terms of being a loving, caring protector of man to now becoming the God who rebukes men and brings judgment on them.
The good news in all of this is that God not only sees the sinfulness of man, but he also sees the righteousness of man. He sees those who are faithful to Him, even when no one else is faithful, in this case, but it was also Noah, Genesis 6:8, who was a preacher of righteousness, 2 Peter 2:5.
He was telling people to start to walk with God, but they chose to ignore him, 1 Peter 3:20. This sinful generation had a chance to be right with God through Noah, Genesis 6:8.
Noah was right with God because he lived by faith in accordance with the standard of God’s law, Genesis 6:9 / Hebrews 11:7. This is the first time the important words ‘righteous’ and ‘blameless’ appear in the Bible, Genesis 6:9.
He was blameless, not necessarily in terms of being sinless but in terms of doing everything God wanted Him to do by living right by God, Genesis 6:9 / Philippians 3:6. Noah, just like Enoch, Genesis 5:24, enjoyed a close fellowship with God because of his obedience to the will of God. He had three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth,’ Genesis 6:10 / Genesis 5:32.
What a contrast there is between Noah, who was faithful and those who weren’t. It’s here that we see this contrast. This generation of people became corrupt and full of violence; they were well on their way to self-destruction, Genesis 6:5.
God saw the mess mankind was in, just like others saw that things weren’t right, Genesis 30:1 / Genesis 30:9 / Genesis 50:15, and so, God knew that something had to be done to save humanity for future generations.
Judgement Day was coming. I guess we could say, it was going to be the end of their world, Genesis 3:17-19 / Genesis 4:12 / Romans 8:20-21. Because God says that He will ‘put an end to all people’, which surely implies that the flood to come was going to be universal, not just local. Notice the use of the word ‘earth.’ If it were only to be a local flood, then God would have simply told Noah to move to another part of the earth.
The wood to be used would be cypress wood, Genesis 6:14, or acacia wood, as some translations have it. There were rooms within it, and the pitch would act as a sealant, Genesis 6:14. This would be perfect for sealing the ark, as it would help it float.
With eighteen inches being the assumed length of a cubit, the ark would have been four hundred and fifty feet long, seventy-five feet wide, and forty-five feet high, Genesis 6:15.
For ventilation and light, there was a window around eighteen inches in size that may have encompassed the top edge of the ark, Genesis 6:16. A door was on the side of the ark, Genesis 6:16, though no information is given concerning the relationship of the door to the three levels of the ark.
Again, we ask the question, if the flood wasn’t a universal flood, why would God ask Noah to build such a big ark? The word ‘ark’ means chest or box, so it wasn’t a boat as such, like we see in so many pictures today. It had an opening and three decks; the deck space would be 95,700 square feet.
The total space would be 1,396,000 cubic feet, and the weight it could carry would be 13,960 tons. This is the smallest size, the smallest measurement. The very size of the ark proves that it was too big just for a local flood.
Constable, in his commentary, says the following.
‘Later, Moses received detailed instructions that he was to follow in building the tabernacle. Both men followed their respective instructions and received praise, Genesis 6:22 / Exodus 39:42-43 / Leviticus 8:36 / Numbers 27:22 / Deuteronomy 34:9. Both men inaugurated a new epoch. In this respect, Moses was another Noah.’
This wasn’t a local flood because when we read these words carefully, we can only come to the conclusion that the flood was going to be catastrophic throughout the earth. Every man, woman, child and animal, Genesis 6:17, except Noah, his family, and the animals God calls to board the ark, Genesis 6:17, will be wiped off the face of the earth.
This is the first time the word ‘covenant’, Genesis 6:18, is used in the Scriptures. Here, it’s in relation to Noah and his family not being destroyed in the flood, provided he obeyed God in terms of building the ark, Genesis 9:9-17 / Genesis 6:22 / Romans 10:17.
Aalders, in his commentary, says the following.
‘Noah need not be afraid; he would survive this judgment. And as Noah’s part of the covenant, he was required to believe and obey God’s word, build the ark according to God’s instructions, and then enter it with his family. In that way only would he be saved.’
Why did God ask Noah to bring into the ark two of every kind of animal, male and female? Genesis 6:19-21. Simply for the purpose of starting the repopulation of the animal kingdom after the flood. Notice that the animals will come to Noah, Genesis 5:20 / Genesis 2:19.
Noah also had the responsibility for providing the food for the animals, Genesis 6:21. Noah did just as God asked. This was faith in action, Genesis 6:22 / Hebrews 11:7 / 1 Peter 3:19.
We get the impression from 2 Peter 2:5 that, whilst Noah was building the ark, he took the opportunity to preach to those in his generation. I can imagine him preaching about what was to come, but imagine what his hearers must have thought!
Here is Noah in the middle of the desert land preaching about a flood, speaking about the rain which no one had ever seen up to this point in time. I would imagine that people must have thought he had lost the plot, Matthew 24:37-39.
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘The historical truth of the event before us is thus categorically affirmed by the words of both Christ and his apostles. The universal, world-wide extent of it is a necessary deduction from the fact of Christ the Lord having made it a type of the universal and final judgment of humanity, and from the further fact of the apostle Peter’s having made the salvation of Noah and his family ‘through water’ a type of the salvation of the church through Christian baptism, 1 Peter 3:21.’
Some Christians claim that from Genesis 6:22 to Genesis 7:1, it took one hundred and twenty years to complete the ark, which means the people had one hundred and twenty years to repent and turn to God, 2 Peter 3:5-6. However, the Bible doesn’t tell us how long it took Noah to build the ark.