Genesis 6- 10
Genesis 6:1-4 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. 3 And the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." 4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
During Noah's day there was a population explosion.
Keep in mind, that people were living to be 900 years old!
We think it could have been that the "canopy", the water "firmament" around the earth shielded the earth from harmful radiation, and that's why lifespans were so great.
6:1-4. Many have suggested that the sons of God were the godly line of Seth and the daughters of men were the Cainites. But this does not do justice to the terminology or the context. Others view the “sons of God” as angels (as in Job 1:6), who cohabited with women on earth. This, however, conflicts with Matthew 22:30.
The incident is one of hubris, the proud overstepping of bounds. Here it applies to “the sons of God,” a lusty, powerful lot striving for fame and fertility. They were probably powerful rulers who were controlled (indwelt) by fallen angels. It may be that fallen angels left their habitation and inhabited bodies of human despots and warriors, the mighty ones of the earth.
It is known from Ezekiel 28:11-19 and Daniel 10:13 that great kings of the earth have “princes” ruling behind them—their power is demonic. It is no surprise that in Ugaritic literature (as well as other nations’ literature), kings are described as divine, half-divine, or demigods. Pagans revered these great leaders. Many mythological traditions describe them as being the offspring of the gods themselves. In fact bnÕlm (“sons of the gods”) in Ugaritic is used of members of the pantheon as well as great kings of the earth. In the Ugaritic legend of the Dawn, the chief god of the pantheon, El, seduced two human women. This union of a god with human women produced Sðh\r (“Dawn”) and Sðlm (“Dusk”) who seem to have become goddesses representing Venus. Thus for the pagans, gods had their origin in copulation between gods and humans. Any superhuman individual in a myth or any mythological or actual giant would suggest a divine origin to the pagans.
Genesis 6:1-4, then, describes how corrupt the world got when this violation was rampant. It is also a polemic against the pagan belief that giants (Nephilim; cf. Num. 13:32-33) and men of renown (Gen. 6:4) were of divine origin, and that immortality was achieved by immorality. The Canaanite cult (and most cults in the ancient Near East) included fertility rites involving sympathetic magic, based on the assumption that people are supernaturally affected through an object which represents them. Israel was warned to resist this because it was completely corrupt and erroneous.
The passage, then, refutes pagan beliefs by declaring the truth. The sons of God were not divine; they were demon-controlled. Their marrying as many women as they wished (possibly this is the origin of harems) was to satisfy their baser instincts. They were just another low order of creatures, though powerful and demon-influenced. Children of these marriages, despite pagan ideas, were not god-kings. Though heroes and “men of renown,” they were flesh; and they died, in due course, like all members of the human race. When God judges the world—as He was about to—no giant, no deity, no human has any power against Him. God simply allots one’s days and brings his end.
Jude 6 6 And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; (NKJV)
2 Peter 2:4
4 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; (NKJV)
there were Giants AFTER the flood, Numbers 13 - five brothers.
Genesis 6:5-7 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them." 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
Even though swift judgment would fall because God’s Spirit would not always shield (duÆn; “shield” is better than niv‘s “contend with,” Gen. 6:3) mankind, the judgment would be delayed 120 years (v. 3). During this time Noah was “a preacher of righteousness” (2 Peter 2:5).
Noach, found grace in the eyes of the Lord, He was different, he stood out from the rest of his generation, notice the next verse,
Genesis 6:9-13 This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth. 13 And God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
He walked with God later the scriptures will tell us that he walked before God, God was on his mind, in his thoughts on his heart.
The word Corrupt in the Hebrew carries the idea of something becoming utter ruin , especially morality, it speaks of gross immorality.
Does this not sound like today’s earth there is a flood coming, but a flood of fire.
God always has His remnant, Praise GOD Noah was pre-flood in His theology.
Genesis 6:14-22 Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch. 15 "And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16 "You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. 17 "And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. 18 "But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the ark -- you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you. 19 "And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. 20 "Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive. 21 "And you shall take for yourself of all food that is eaten, and you shall gather it to yourself; and it shall be food for you and for them."
22 Thus Noah did; according to all that God commanded him, so he did.
what was Noah doing these years as he built, he preached and reached.
2 Peter 2:5 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; (NKJV)
120 years he built, some have seen this as God giving every opportunity to come to repent. Just as today, he is building a boat, it never rained on the earth,
ROOMS literally nests ,
even today we are don’t exactly sure what gopher wood is .
There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
This is one of those classic "problem" passages.
There are three main, decent, possible interpretations:
1) The godly line of Seth marrying ungodly women of the line of Cain.
The idea is that the godly men were called "sons of God".
This interpretation mainly comes about because people have a problem with the next possibility.
"Line of Seth?"
The early church viewed the B'nai Elohim as angels up through the late fourth century: Justin, Athenagoras, Cyprian, Eusebius, et al. (also Josephus, Philo, Judeaus, and the Apochrypha regard this view).
Celsus and Julian the Apostate exploited the older common belief to attack Christianity. Cyril of Alexandria, in his reply, repudiated the orthodox position. Julius Africanus (a contemporary of Origen) introduced the theory that the "sons of God" simply referred to the genealogical line of Seth, which was committed to preserving the true worship of God.
Seemingly more appealing, the "Sethite theory" prevailed into the Medieval Church, and many still hold this view.
This view, however, has several serious problems. There is no indication that the Sethites were distinguished for piety; they were not exempted from the charge of general wickedness which brought on the flood. In fact, Seth's son Enosh was the one who introduced apostasy to that world. This is masked by a mistranslation of Genesis 4:25, which should read:
"...then men began to profane the name of the Lord."
Furthermore, when the faithful marry the unfaithful, they do not give birth to unnatural offspring! And the "daughters of men" were not differentiated with regard to the Flood. All were lost.
The strange events recorded in Genesis 6 were understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, as well as the Septuagint translators, as referring to fallen angels procreating weird hybrid offspring with human women-known as the "Nephilim." So it was also understood by the early church fathers. These bizarre events are also echoed in the legends and myths of every ancient culture upon the earth: the ancient Greeks, the Egyptians, the Hindus, the South Sea Islanders, the American Indians, and virtually all the others.
However, many students of the Bible have been taught that this passage in Genesis 6 actually refers to a failure to keep the "faithful" lines of Seth separate from the "worldly" line of Cain. The idea has been advanced that after Cain killed Abel, the line of Seth remained separate and faithful, but the line of Cain turned ungodly and rebellious. The "Sons of God" are deemed to refer to leadership in the line of Seth; the "daughters of men" is deemed restricted to the line of Cain. The resulting marriages ostensibly blurred an inferred separation between them. (Why the resulting offspring are called the "Nephilim" remains without any clear explanation.)
Since Jesus prophesied, "As the days of Noah were, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be,"2 it becomes essential to understand what these days included.
Origin of the Sethite View
It was in the 5th century a.d. that the "angel" interpretation of Genesis 6 was increasingly viewed as an embarrassment when attacked by critics. (Furthermore, the worship of angels had begun within the church. Also, celibacy had also become an institution of the church. The "angel" view of Genesis 6 was feared as impacting these views.)
Celsus and Julian the Apostate used the traditional "angel" belief to attack Christianity. Julius Africanus resorted to the Sethite interpretation as a more comfortable ground. Cyril of Alexandria also repudiated the orthodox "angel" position with the "line of Seth" interpretation. Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages. It is still widely taught today among many churches who find the literal "angel" view a bit disturbing. There are many outstanding Bible teachers who still defend this view.
Problems with the Sethite View
Beyond obscuring a full understanding of the events in the early chapters of Genesis, this view also clouds any opportunity to apprehend the prophetic implications of the Scriptural allusions to the "Days of Noah."3 Some of the many problems with the "Sethite View" include the following:
1. The Text Itself
Substantial liberties must be taken with the literal text to propose the "Sethite" view. (In data analysis, it is often said that "if you torture the data severely enough it will confess to anything.")
The term translated "the Sons of God" is, in the Hebrew, B'nai HaElohim, "Sons of Elohim," which is a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels,4 and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament. It was so understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, by the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ, and by the early church fathers. Attempts to apply this term to "godly leadership" is without Scriptural foundation.5
The "Sons of Seth and daughters of Cain" interpretation strains and obscures the intended grammatical antithesis between the Sons of God and the daughters of Adam. Attempting to impute any other view to the text flies in the face of the earlier centuries of understanding of the Hebrew text among both rabbinical and early church scholarship. The lexicographical antithesis clearly intends to establish a contrast between the "angels" and the women of the Earth.
If the text was intended to contrast the "sons of Seth and the daughters of Cain," why didn't it say so? Seth was not God, and Cain was not Adam. (Why not the "sons of Cain" and the "daughters of Seth?" There is no basis for restricting the text to either subset of Adam's descendants. Further, there exists no mention of daughters of Elohim.)
And how does the "Sethite" interpretation contribute to the ostensible cause for the Flood, which is the primary thrust of the text? The entire view is contrived on a series of assumptions without Scriptural support.
The Biblical term "Sons of Elohim" (that is, of the Creator Himself), is confined to the direct creation by the divine hand and not to those born to those of their own order.6 In Luke's genealogy of Jesus, only Adam is called a "son of God."7 The entire Biblical drama deals with the tragedy that humankind is a fallen race, with Adam's initial immortality forfeited. Christ uniquely gives them that receive Him the power to become the sons of God.8 Being born again of the Spirit of God, as an entirely new creation,9 at their resurrection they alone will be clothed with a building of God10 and in every respect equal to the angels.11 The very term oiketerion, alluding to the heavenly body with which the believer longs to be clothed, is the precise term used for the heavenly bodies from which the fallen angels had disrobed.12
The attempt to apply the term "Sons of Elohim" in a broader sense has no textual basis and obscures the precision of its denotative usage. This proves to be an assumption which is antagonistic to the uniform Biblical usage of the term.
2. The Daughters of Cain
The "Daughters of Adam" also does not denote a restriction to the descendants of Cain, but rather the whole human race is clearly intended. These daughters were the daughters born to the men with which this very sentence opens:
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
It is clear from the text that these daughters were not limited a particular family or subset, but were, indeed, from (all) the Benoth Adam, "the daughters of Adam." There is no apparent exclusion of the daughters of Seth. Or were they so without charms in contrast with the daughters of Cain? All of Adam's female descendants seem to have been involved. (And what about the "sons of Adam?" Where do they, using this contrived dichotomy, fit in?)
Furthermore, the line of Cain was not necessarily known for its ungodliness. From a study of the naming of Cain's children, many of which included the name of God,13 it is not clear that they were all necessarily unfaithful.
3. The Inferred Lines of Separation
The concept of separate "lines" itself is suspect and contrary to Scripture.14 National and racial distinctions were plainly the result of the subsequent intervention of God in Genesis 11, five chapters later. There is no intimation that the lines of Seth and Cain kept themselves separate nor were even instructed to. The injunction to remain separate was given much later.15 Genesis 6:12 confirms that all flesh had corrupted His way upon the earth.
4. The Inferred Godliness of Seth
There is no evidence, stated or implied, that the line of Seth was godly. Only one person was translated from the judgment to come (Enoch) and only eight were given the protection of the ark. No one beyond Noah's immediate family was accounted worthy to be saved. In fact, the text implies that these were distinct from all others. (There is no evidence that the wives of Noah's sons were from the line of Seth.) Even so, Gaebelein observes, "The designation 'Sons of God' is never applied in the Old Testament to believers," whose sonship is "distinctly a New Testament revelation."16
The "Sons of Elohim" saw the daughters of men that they were fair and took them wives of all that they chose. It appears that the women had little say in the matter. The domineering implication hardly suggests a godly approach to the union. Even the mention that they saw that they were attractive seems out of place if only normal biology was involved. (And were the daughters of Seth so unattractive?)
It should also be pointed out that the son of Seth himself was Enosh, and there is textual evidence that, rather than a reputation for piety, he seems to have initiated the profaning of the name of God.17
If the lines of Seth were so faithful, why did they perish in the flood?
5. The Unnatural Offspring
The most fatal flaw in the specious "Sethite" view is the emergence of the Nephilim as a result of the unions. (Bending the translation to "giants" does not resolve the difficulties.) It is the offspring of these peculiar unions in Genesis 6:4 which seems to be cited as a primary cause for the Flood.
Procreation by parents of differing religious views do not produce unnatural offspring. Believers marrying unbelievers may produce "monsters," but hardly superhuman, or unnatural, children! It was this unnatural procreation and the resulting abnormal creatures that were designated as a principal reason for the judgment of the Flood.
The very absence of any such adulteration of the human genealogy in Noah's case is also documented in Genesis 6:9: Noah's family tree was distinctively unblemished. The term used, tamiym, is used for physical blemishes.18
Why were the offspring uniquely designated "mighty" and "men of reknown?" This description characterizing the children is not accounted for if the fathers were merely men, even if godly.
A further difficulty seems to be that the offspring were only men; no "women of reknown" are mentioned. (Was there a chromosome deficiency among the Sethites? Were there only "Y" chromosomes available in this line?)19
6. New Testament Confirmations
"In the mouths of two or three witnesses every word shall be established."20 In Biblical matters, it is essential to always compare Scripture with Scripture. The New Testament confirmations in Jude and 2 Peter are impossible to ignore.21
For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell [Tartarus], and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 2 Peter 2:4-5
Peter's comments even establishes the time of the fall of these angels to the days of the Flood of Noah.
Even Peter's vocabulary is provocative. Peter uses the term Tartarus, here translated "hell." This is the only place that this Greek term appears in the Bible. Tartarus is a Greek term for "dark abode of woe"; "the pit of darkness in the unseen world." As used in Homer's Iliad, it is "...as far beneath hades as the earth is below heaven`."22 In Greek mythology, some of the demigods, Chronos and the rebel Titans, were said to have rebelled against their father, Uranus, and after a prolonged contest they were defeated by Zeus and were condemned into Tartarus.
The Epistle of Jude23 also alludes to the strange episodes when these "alien" creatures intruded themselves into the human reproductive process:
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 6,7
The allusions to "going after strange flesh," keeping "not their first estate," having "left their own habitation," and "giving themselves over to fornication," seem to clearly fit the alien intrusions of Genesis 6. (The term for habitation, oivkhth,rion, refers to their heavenly bodies from which they had disrobed.24)
These allusions from the New Testament would seem to be fatal to the "Sethite" alternative in interpreting Genesis 6. If the intercourse between the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" were merely marriage between Sethites and Cainites, it seems impossible to explain these passages, and the reason why some fallen angels are imprisoned and others are free to roam the heavenlies.
7. Post-Flood Implications
The strange offspring also continued after the flood: "There were Nephilim in the earth in those days, and also after that..."25 The "Sethite" view fails to meaningfully address the prevailing conditions "also after that." It offers no insight into the presence of the subsequent "giants" in the land of Canaan.
One of the disturbing aspects of the Old Testament record was God's instructions, upon entering the land of Canaan, to wipe out every man, woman, and child of certain tribes inhabiting the land. This is difficult to justify without the insight of a "gene pool problem" from the remaining Nephilim, Rephaim, et al., which seems to illuminate the difficulty.
8. Prophetic Implications
Another reason that an understanding of Genesis 6 is so essential is that it also is a prerequisite to understanding (and anticipating) Satan's devices26 and, in particular, the specific delusions to come upon the whole earth as a major feature of end-time prophecy.27 We will take up these topics in Part 2, "The Return Of The Nephilim.")
If one takes an integrated view of the Scripture, then everything in it should "tie together." It is the author's view that the "Angel View," however disturbing, is the clear, direct presentation of the Biblical text, corroborated by multiple New Testament references and was so understood by both early Jewish and Christian scholarship; the "Sethite View" is a contrivance of convenience from a network of unjustified assumptions antagonistic to the remainder of the Biblical record.
It should also be pointed out that most conservative Bible scholars accept the "angel" view.28 Among those supporting the "angel" view are: G. H. Pember, M. R. DeHaan, C. H. McIntosh, F. Delitzsch, A. C. Gaebelein, A. W. Pink, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Henry Morris, Merril F. Unger, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Hal Lindsey, and Chuck Smith, being among the best known.
For those who take the Bible seriously, the arguments supporting the "Angel View" appear compelling. For those who indulge in a willingness to take liberties with the straightforward presentation of the text, no defense can prove final. (And greater dangers than the implications attending these issues await them!)
For further exploration of this critical topic, see the following:
- George Hawkins Pember, Earth's Earliest Ages, first published by Hodder and Stoughton in 1875, and presently available by Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids MI, 1975.
- John Fleming, The Fallen Angels and the Heroes of Mythology, Hodges, Foster, and Figgis, Dublin, 1879.
- Henry Morris, The Genesis Record, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids MI, 1976.
- Merrill F. Unger, Biblical Demonology, Scripture Press, Chicago IL, 1952.
Clarence Larkin, Spirit World, Rev. Clarence Larkin Estate, Philadelphia PA, 1921.
2) Fallen angels marrying human wives.
a) Besides here and in verse 4, the phrase "sons of God" is only found three other times in the Old Testament, all in the book of Job (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7), and all referring to angelic beings.
b) Note that these marriages produced strange, unusual offspring, "giants" (verse 4), not something normally found if these were just regular guys.
c) The reason people have problems with this being angels is because of a statement of Jesus, recorded in three of the gospels.
Mt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. (AV) (also Mark 12:25; Luke 20:35)
The reasoning is that if angels in heaven don't marry, then neither can these guys in Genesis 6.
But just because the don't, doesn't mean they can't!
And it would seem that these are fallen angels, demons who don't particularly like to obey God.
d) These might be the mysterious angels mentioned in some cryptic passages:
(Jude 1:6 KJV) 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. (see also 2Pet 2:4)
Genesis 6 indicates that the "sons of God" (B'nai Elohim) took wives of the "daughters of men," which gave birth to the "Nephilim." What on earth was going on?
The B'nai Elohim is a term that refers to angels. It occurs four times in the Old Testament 2 and is rendered "Angels of God" in the ancient Septuagin translation.3 The intrusion of certain angels into the human family resulted in unnatural offspring termed Nephilim, which derives from the Hebrew naphal (to fall), or the Fallen Ones. (The Greek Septuagint renders this term gigantes, which actually means "earth-born." This is often misunderstood to mean "giants"--which they also happen to have been, incidentally.)
THE ANGLES THAT SINNED ??
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. (NASB)
To get a clearer concept of what this verse is saying as a whole, individual parts need to be discussed first.
First is the name Nephilim. In some translations the word Nephilim has been translated by the word "giant." People reading it picture huge human beings. But the word does not mean "giants"; rather, it means "fallen ones." The word does not refer to giants in the sense of huge beings, but to a race of fallen ones. The reason it was translated as "giant" is because in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament made around 250 B.C., the Jewish scholars translated verse 4 by the Greek word gigentes which means "Titan." Our English word "giant" comes from this Greek word gigentes. But what were the Titans in Greek mythology? They were part man and part god, because they were products of gods and men. When the Jewish scholars in 250 B.C. translated the word Nephilim to Greek, they used the Greek word for Titans because they recognized this to be a union not of two types of human beings, but of angels and humans which produced a being that was neither angelic nor human. So at least the Jewish scholars Of 250 B.C., who lived much closer to the time when Moses originally wrote this passage, clearly understood this to be an intermarriage between angels and human women. As a result of this union, a new race of beings called the Nephilim, a race of fallen ones, came into being. They were gigentes, they were superhuman, but not in size. They had human characteristics but were, at the same time, superhuman. They had extra capacities, both mentally and physically, though they may not have been any larger than normal human beings. It is from the events of Genesis 6:1-4 that the source of Greek and Roman mythologies were derived. These mythologies record how gods from Mount Olympus intermarried with human beings on earth and produced children who had superhuman characteristics, who were greater than men but less than the gods. The book of Genesis gives the true history of what really happened, while Greek and Roman mythologies give the corrupted account. In Greek and Roman mythologies the human perspective is given, and what happened is elevated to something special and glorified, but God called it sin.
The second word to note in this verse is giborim, which is translated as "the mighty men... the men of renown." Again, because this was a product of fallen angels and human women, they were unique. They were the giborim. Notice that there is no mention of mighty women, which would be strange if this were a product of a normal union. After all, a normal union produces both males and females. If this were a natural union, then the product should have been mighty men and mighty women. But there are only mighty men because this is a new race of beings that is neither human nor angelic. The only way to explain the origin of the giborim is that they were the product of this union, the point of verse 4.
Only by the angelic explanation of chapter 6 do other areas of biblical teaching make sense. It provides the only adequate explanation for certain statements in II Peter and Jude which will be studied next. It is a peculiar sin, it is connected to the flood, and it is different from the original fall of the angels; otherwise, all fallen angels would be permanently confined.
II Peter 2:4-5
2:4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; ... (NASB)
Verse 4 gives the location of the permanently confined demons. The temporarily confined demons are found in the Abyss, but the permanently confined demons are elsewhere. The Greek word translated in this passage as "hell" is tartarus. Tartarus is a section of Sheol or Hades where the permanently confined demons are located. Both the Abyss and Tartarus are sections of Sheol or Hades. The Abyss is for demons that are temporarily confined, but Tartarus is for demons who are permanently confined. Tartarus is referred to as "pits of darkness" and these angels are reserved there unto the "judgment." This will be the Great White Throne Judgment, the final judgment. This means that at no time will these angels ever be released. When the time comes, they will go directly from Tartarus to stand before the Great White Throne Judgment and then be cast into the Lake of Fire. There will never be a time when they will be free to roam - they are permanently confined.
Verse 5 reveals the timing of their confinement: it was in conjunction with the Flood. This agrees well with the events of Genesis 6:1-4 which are also connected with the Flood. The purpose of the Flood was to destroy this product of fallen angels and human women. So by comparing the II Peter passage with the Genesis passage, there is good evidence to show that Genesis is not speaking about Sethites intermarrying with Cainites, but fallen angels intermarrying with human women. This is a valid conclusion just from a study of the Old Testament passages themselves. However, the New Testament also supports this particular interpretation.
6 And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day. 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. (NASB)
Verse 6 emphasized the fall of a select group of angels and described their fall in four statements. First, "they kept not their own principality." The word "principality" is frequently used of the angelic realm and is one of the various ranks within the angelic realm. It means that they did not remain in their position and place of rank within the Satanic cosmos. Second, they "left their proper habitation." They left the demonic angelic sphere of operation and entered into the human sphere by taking on the form of young men and intermarrying with human women. Third, they are now "kept in everlasting bonds under darkness." Here Jude mentioned the same thing as Peter, that these angels are now permanently confined. Peter also revealed the place of their confinement: Tartarus. Fourth, they are to be kept there until "the judgment of that great day," Again, Jude reaffirms Peter's statement that they are being kept in bondage until the judgment of that great day. This is the Great White Throne judgment. Once again, it is reaffirmed that these demons will never be free to roam around but are permanently confined in Tartarus. When the time comes, they will be taken out of Tartarus to stand before the Great White Throne Judgment, and then be cast into the Lake of Fire.
Verse 7 deals with the nature of their sin. The key phrase is "in like manner." In like manner, as Sodom and Gomorrah, they went after "strange flesh." The sin that these angels committed is similar to the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, the sexual sin of going after strange flesh. "Strange flesh" means sexual union that is unnatural; it goes contrary to nature. In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, the strange flesh was homosexuality; in the case of these angels, the strange flesh was female flesh. Instead of remaining in their usual state of residence, they invaded a new state of residence, one of alien flesh, to commit gross sexual immorality. Sodom and Gomorrah and these angels have one thing in common: they are guilty of sexual sins. In the case of Sodom and Gomorrah it was homosexuality; in the case of these angels, it was intermarrying into the human sphere.
By comparing the Genesis passage with the passages in II Peter and Jude, it is clear that these are angels who intermarried with human women, and not simply Sethites who intermarried with Cainites. ((From Messianic Christology Appendix I, Ariel Ministries, 1998, PO Box 3713, Tustin, CA 92781)
The Angels that Sinned
There is a great deal revealed in the Bible about angels. They can appear in human form,10 they spoke as men, took men by the hand, even ate men's food,11 are capable of direct physical combat,12 some are the principal forces behind the world powers.13 They don't marry (in Heaven),14 but apparently are (or were) capable of much mischief.15
The strange events of Genesis Chapter 6 are also referred to in the New Testament. Peter refers to events preceding the flood of Noah:
"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment..." 2 Peter 2:4
(Peter uses the term tartarus, here translated as hell. This was a Greek term for "the dark abode of woe, the pit of darkness in the unseen world." Homer's Iliad portrays tartarus "as far below hades as the earth is below Heaven...")
Also, in Jude, it mentions them:
"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 6,7.
Scripture warns against meddling with the spirit world. The punishment which overtook the angels that sinned was to emphasize the serious nature of apostasy: beings of a higher order than ours have been hurled down into a dark place of confinement where they have remained for thousands of years.
God has not changed His attitude toward them; time has not mitigated the seriousness of their sin. False teachers are prewritten into condemnation.
ANGLES SEXLESS ??
What Jesus said is that human beings "in the resurrection" and "in heaven" do not 11 marry, nor are [they] given in marriage." The angels that Jesus was speaking of are 11angels in heaven." The comparison is not with angels in general, but with angels "in heaven." The emphasis is that in heaven, good angels neither marry nor are given in marriage. Matthew 22:30 makes the same point about human beings. Humans in heaven do not marry, nor are they given in marriage. What about humans here on earth? Humans on earth certainly do marry and are given in marriage. This is a contrast between what happens in heaven as compared to what happens here on earth. Genesis 6, however, is speaking of angels on earth. So in heaven, angels do not marry, nor are they given in marriage, and humans in heaven will not marry nor be given in marriage. But Genesis 6 discusses things happening on earth. Angels are never declared to be sexless. In fact, the male gender is always used. Matthew 22:30 teaches that angels do not procreate after their kind, meaning that angels do not give birth to other angels. But angels are always described in the masculine gender, not in the feminine, nor in the neuter. They are always masculine gender in both the Old and New Testaments. Whenever angels became visible, they always appeared as young men. Anytime an angel appeared to a person he always appeared as a young man and never a woman (Genesis 18:1 - 19:22; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:4-7; Acts 1:1o-11). Matthew 22:30 cannot be used as an argument against the angelic interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4, because it is dealing with a situation on earth, not in heaven; nor does Matthew 22:30 teach that angels are sexless.
THE ARK !!
Noah is called out of the coming disaster that is upon the earth, the word is Come, this should sound familiar:
three types here:
Enoch = he walked with God and God took Him - the rapture saints
Noah = those who will be preserved through the tribulations
those who perished
Genesis 7:1 Then the LORD said to Noah, "Come into the ark, you and all your household, because I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation.
God Called them into the ark, does this remind you of something, in rev. put our finger on the rapture.
1 After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven. And the first voice which I heard was like a trumpet speaking with me, saying, "Come up here, and I will show you things which must take place after this." (NKJV)
Genesis 7:2-6 "You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female; 3 "also seven each of birds of the air, male and female, to keep the species alive on the face of all the earth. 4 "For after seven more days I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made." 5 And Noah did according to all that the LORD commanded him. 6 Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters were on the earth.
note this was before the levitical law.
6:19-7:5. Into this ark Noah was to take all kinds of animals to preserve life on earth. A distinction was made very early between clean and unclean animals. To preserve life Noah had to take on board two of every kind of animal, but for food and for sacrificing he had to bring seven pairs of each kind of clean animal (7:2, marg.). The distinction between clean and unclean animals became a major point in the Levitical order (Lev. 11:2-23).
Genesis 7:7-16 So Noah, with his sons, his wife, and his sons' wives, went into the ark because of the waters of the flood. 8 Of clean animals, of animals that are unclean, of birds, and of everything that creeps on the earth, 9 two by two they went into the ark to Noah, male and female, as God had commanded Noah. 10 And it came to pass after seven days that the waters of the flood were on the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. 12 And the rain was on the earth forty days and forty nights.
13 On the very same day Noah and Noah's sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark -- 14 they and every beast after its kind, all cattle after their kind, every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, every bird of every sort. 15 And they went into the ark to Noah, two by two, of all flesh in which is the breath of life. 16 So those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as God had commanded him; and the LORD shut him in.
Noticed who shut the door God did, this was both a divine act of mercy for Noah, and a divine act of Judgment on mankind, God showed mercy to Noah but by saving him and not requiring him to shot the door. As for judgment . if God does not hate and judge sin, then he is not a holy God , there are no moral absolutes and we do not live in a moral universe.
Genesis 7:17-24 Now the flood was on the earth forty days. The waters increased and lifted up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. 18 The waters prevailed and greatly increased on the earth, and the ark moved about on the surface of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. 20 The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered. 21 And all flesh died that moved on the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man. 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, all that was on the dry land, died. 23 So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive. 24 And the waters prevailed on the earth one hundred and fifty days.
2 Peter 3:5-7 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. (NKJV)
7:6-20. After all preparations had been completed, the Flood came. On the one hand there was a torrential rain for 40 days and nights (vv. 11-12). On the other hand there were corresponding gigantic upheavals and shiftings of the earth’s crust which caused the oceans’ floors to rise and break up their reservoirs of subterranean waters (v. 11; cf. Unger, Archaeology, p. 61). As a result, the whole earth was flooded in the disaster (v. 19). No doubt the surface of the earth, the manner of life, and the longevity of life were changed by this catastrophe.
7:21-24. Everything living . . . on the earth (outside the ark) was destroyed. Only marine life survived. Sin had infected every aspect of life, and nothing short of a new beginning would suffice. Thus it will also be at the end of this Age (Matt. 24
from the time they went into the ark, to the time that they were allowed to leave it was 377 days.
The Canopy Theory
hey JR and Theresa, here some information on the Canopy theory. This is what I believe the best way to explain why the Longevity of life changed after the food. Here are some basic conclusions as well as what others have said
"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. and God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were UNDER the firmament (ocean) from the waters which were ABOVE the firmament: (water vapor canopy)" Genesis 1:6,7
The firmament separated the water canopy above the earth from the ocean below on the earth.
A great pre-flood water canopy would imply several things, much of which is scientifically verifiable:
1. Greenhouse Effect world-wide. The water canopy would have captured long-wave radiation (heat) to heat the earth. Similarly, the dense clouds of Venus give it an even temperature. We have pole to pole evidence that the pre-flood world was subtropical. Under the ice caps we find palm leaves, fruit trees, vast subtropical forests, tropical marine creatures, and coal beds, all explained by a pre-flood water canopy.
2. Radiation, Size, Longevity. The pre-flood water canopy and great ozone canopy would have greatly shielded the earth from short-wave (high frequency) gamma, x-rays, UV radiation. (This would have invalidated C-14 production and hence dating before the flood). These harmful rays cause mutations, and aging. If these rays were largely kept out, we would expect greater health, life span and possibly size of pre-flood creatures. Some pre-flood insects had 2 foot wing spans. Some birds had 30 foot wing spans. Some dinosaurs weighed 50 tons, some humans had feet 20 inches long.
3. Volcanism. Flood water coming from underground, most likely would have been accompanied by volcanic eruptions. The volcanic ash shooting up into the water canopy would have provided the dust necessary to condense the water vapor canopy into rain drops, thus causing the 40 days of rain. Genesis 7:11 gives this as the order of events:
"the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened".
Vast volcanic action would produce huge lava flows. This would explain the origin of today's Indian Deccan Plateau containing volcanic rock two miles deep, as well as the American Columbian plateau covering 200,000 square miles and averaging 3000 feet deep.
The "waters above the firmament" thus probably constituted a vast blanket of water vapor above the troposphere and possibly above the stratosphere as well, in the high-temperature region now known as the ionosphere, and extending far into space. They could not have been the clouds of water droplets which now float in the atmosphere, because the Scripture says they were "above the firmament." Furthermore, there was "no rain upon the earth" in those days (Genesis 2:5), nor any "bow in the cloud" (Genesis 9:13), both of which must have been present if these upper waters represented merely the regime of clouds which functions in the present hydrologic economy. (Henry Morris- Geneses Flood )
the declining life-span after the Flood seems to fit in perfectly with our concept of the dissipation of the earth's protective blanket during the Flood... this canopy... provided a warm, pleasant, presumably heathful environment throughout the world. Perhaps the most important effect of the canopy was the shielding action provided against the intense radiations impinging upon the earth from space. Short wave-length radiation, as well as bombardment of elementary particles of all kinds, is known to have damaging effects - both somatic and genetic effects - on organisms and this is generally true for all types of radiations...
'...a single dose of radiation which does not kill an animal within the period of acute radiation sickness may tend to shorten life....'
[Autin M. Brues: "Somatic Effects of Radiation," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 14, January 1958, pp. 13-14]
...If such effects can be observed in a short lifetime as a result of artificial radiations, it is certainly possible that much greater effects on longevity would have been produced over the millenniums by the natural background radiation... ...Even more significant than these somatic effects, however, are the genetic effects of radiation, which injure not only the individual receiving the first exposure but also his descendants as well...
'And the nature of these mutations is practically always - perhaps unqualifiedly always, so far as the laboratory evidence goes - harmful!'
[James F. Crow: "Genetic Effects of Radiation," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 14, January 1958, pp. 19-20]
...As a matter of fact, only the rare gross mutations tend to die out naturally... The great majority of them are only slightly harmful and continue to survive. Their descendants also survive, perhaps with additional mutations, and the net result is bound to be an over-all deterioration of the species. This undoubtedly is why the fossil record reveals living creatures before the Flood, of all kinds, to be larger and better equipped than their modern descendants!...
...it surely is quite reasonable in view of what is known about the somatic and genetic effects of radiations to infer that, over the centuries since the Flood, the accumulation of these effects in man in particular has resulted in gradual deterioration and decreasing life-span.
.. I hope this helps.
Genesis 8:1-5 Then God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the animals that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters subsided. 2 The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. 3 And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. 4 Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
the typical teaching of the ark reaches beyond the truth of atonement to resurrection itself. We quote the truth of atonement to resurrection itself. We quote here from the writings of the late Mr. William Lincoln: “ there seems no reason to doubt that the day the ark rested on the mountain of Ararat is identical with the day on which the Lord rose form the dead. It rested “On the 17 day of the 17 month” but by the commandment of the lord, given at the time of the institution of the feast for Passover, the seventh month was changed into the first month. Then three days after the Passover, which was on the 14th day of the month, the lord , having passed quite through the waters of Judgment , stood in the resurrection in the midst of his disciples, saying peace be unto you, they well as himself have reached the haven of everlasting rest. 
17 day of the 17 month ..
the 17 month was changed to the 1st month in the following passage:
1 Now the LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying, 2 "This month shall be your beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you. 3 "Speak to all the congregation of Israel, saying: 'On the tenth day of this month every man shall take for himself a lamb, according to the house of his father, a lamb for a household. 4 'And if the household is too small for the lamb, let him and his neighbor next to his house take it according to the number of the persons; according to each man's need you shall make your count for the lamb. 5 'Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats. 6 'Now you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month. Then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at twilight. (NKJV)
Leviticus 23:5 5 'On the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight is the Lord’s Passover. (NKJV)
10 day - lamb was selected
14 day Passover
3 days later - resurrection
17 day of the 1st month which was the 17 month
Genesis 8:6-7 So it came to pass, at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. 7 Then he sent out a raven, which kept going to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth.
Raven were birds of prey, the raven would sustain itself by feeding on carrion which would abound if the earth was dry. He would have no problem landing on unclean things.
Genesis 8:8-12 He also sent out from himself a dove, to see if the waters had receded from the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark to him, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took her, and drew her into the ark to himself. 10 And he waited yet another seven days, and again he sent the dove out from the ark. 11 Then the dove came to him in the evening, and behold, a freshly plucked olive leaf was in her mouth; and Noah knew that the waters had receded from the earth. 12 So he waited yet another seven days and sent out the dove, which did not return again to him anymore.
olive tree does not grow very big.
8:4-19. The ark rested in the mountains of Ararat 150 days after the rains began. Assyrian records may identify such a name in Armenia of eastern Turkey, but the precise location remains unknown. After it was clear that the earth was suitable for habitation, the eight people and all the animals left the ark. This was 377 days after they had entered it (cf. 7:11 with 8:13-14). The theme of “rest” seems to be quite strong throughout the story. The ark rested (v. 4); at first the dove could find no place to set its feet (v. 9; lit., “could not find a resting place for its feet”). When the ark came to rest on Ararat, this was more than a physical landing on dry ground. It was a new beginning; the world was clean and at rest.
Genesis 8:13-22 And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and indeed the surface of the ground was dry. 14 And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dried.
15 Then God spoke to Noah, saying, 16 "Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons' wives with you. 17 "Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you: birds and cattle and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, so that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth." 18 So Noah went out, and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives with him. 19 Every animal, every creeping thing, every bird, and whatever creeps on the earth, according to their families, went out of the ark.
20 Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. 21 And the LORD smelled a soothing aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, "I will never again curse the ground for man's sake, although the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done. 22 "While the earth remains, Seed time and harvest, Cold and heat, Winter and summer, And day and night Shall not cease."
The flood did not change the heart of Man, the heart is still evil.
8:20-22. Leaving the ark, Noah made a sacrifice to God, which was a pleasing aroma to Him. The people of God are a worshipping people, as Israel would learn, and that worship was to take the form of giving God some of the best of what was His. The redeemed of the Lord offer Him the praise of their lips (Heb. 13:15), the best of their possessions (Prov. 3:9), and the willingness and humility of their spirits. Noah received God’s grace, walked with God in obedience and righteousness, was preserved from judgment, entered a new age with people’s wickedness temporarily removed, and responded with worship and sacrifice.
After Noah made the sacrifice, God promised never to curse the ground in this way again. The continuity of seasons is evidence of God’s forbearance.
Rabbinic interpretation of these verses deduced seven fundamental law from them
1- the establishment of courts of justice
2- the prohibition of blasphemy
4- of incest
5- of blood shed
6- of robbery
7- of eating flesh cut from a living animal.
The Rabbis called these seven laws the ‘seven commandments given to the descendants of Noah’
Genesis 9:1-3 So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 "And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. 3 "Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs.
9:1-4. God instructed Noah to be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth (vv. 1, 7) just as He had told Adam (1:28). And Noah, like Adam, was to have dominion over animals (9:2; cf. 1:26, 28). Also both were given food to eat (9:3; cf. 1:29; 2:16) with one prohibition (9:5-6; cf. 2:17).
Genesis 9:4- 7 "But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. 5 "Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man's brother I will require the life of man. 6 "Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man. 7 And as for you, be fruitful and multiply; Bring forth abundantly in the earth And multiply in it."
9:5-7. With Noah’s new beginning came a covenant. It was necessary now to have a covenant with obligations for mankind and a promise from God. Because of the Flood’s destruction of life people might begin to think that God holds life cheap and assume that taking life is a small matter. This covenant shows that life is sacred and that man is not to destroy man, who is made in the image of God.
In essence, then, this covenant was established to ensure the stability of nature. It helped guarantee the order of the world. People would also learn that human law was necessary for the stability of life and that wickedness should not go unchecked as it had before. So human government was brought in.
Genesis 9:8- 17 Then God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying: 9 "And as for Me, behold, I establish My covenant with you and with your descendants after you, 10 "and with every living creature that is with you: the birds, the cattle, and every beast of the earth with you, of all that go out of the ark, every beast of the earth. 11 "Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth." 12 And God said: "This is the sign of the covenant which I make between Me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: 13 "I set My rainbow in the cloud, and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between Me and the earth. 14 "It shall be, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the rainbow shall be seen in the cloud; 15 "and I will remember My covenant which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 "The rainbow shall be in the cloud, and I will look on it to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth." 17 And God said to Noah, "This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth."
The terms of the covenant are these: (1) God will not destroy mankind with a flood of waters; (2) man may eat animal flesh, but not blood (see Lev. 17:10ff); (3) there is fear and terror between man and beast; (4) human beings are responsible for human government, seen in the principle of capital punishment (see Rom. 13:1–5). God set apart the rainbow as the token and pledge of the covenant. This does not mean that the rainbow first appeared at that time, but only that God gave it a special meaning when He made this covenant. The rainbow is a product of sunshine and storm, and its colors remind us of the “manifold (many-colored) grace of God” (1 Peter 4:10). The rainbow appears to be a bridge between heaven and earth, reminding us that in Christ, God bridged the chasm that separated man from God. We meet the rainbow again in Ezek. 1:28 and Rev. 4:3.
We must keep in mind that the covenant was with Noah’s “seed” after him, and this includes us today. It is for this reason that most Christian people have supported capital punishment (9:5–6). God had promised to avenge Cain (4:15), but in this covenant with Noah God gave men the responsibility of punishing the murderer.
9:8-17. That this covenant (vv. 9, 11-13, 15-17) is cosmic and universal (every living creature, vv. 10 [twice], 12; all living creatures, vv. 15-16; all life, vv. 11, 15, 17) is seen from the rainbow God gave as a sign (vv. 12-13, 17). When it arches over the horizon after a rainfall it is an all-embracing sign of God’s faithfulness to His work of grace. Signs remind participants in a covenant to keep the stipulations. In the rainbow God, who is omniscient, perpetually reminds Himself (repeated in vv. 15-16) never to flood the whole world again (vv. 11, 15). Since no rain had fallen before the Flood (2:5), no rainbow was needed. Now when clouds clear, light refraction shows this marvelous display. The rainbow arcs like a battle bow hung against the clouds. (The Heb. word for rainbow, qesûet_, is also the word for a battle bow.) Elsewhere in the Old Testament God referred to judgment storms by using terms for bows and arrows.
The bow is now “put away,” hung in place by the clouds, suggesting that the “battle,” the storm, is over. Thus the rainbow speaks of peace. In the ancient Near East, covenant treaties were made after wars as a step toward embarking on peace. Similarly God, after judging sin, made a covenant of peace. Israel certainly would be strengthened to see in the skies again and again God’s pledge that He keeps His promise of grace. But certainly it also reminded the faithful in Israel that God’s judgment was completed for that age. Judgment will come once again in the end times (Zech. 14:1-3; Rev. 19:15) before there can be complete millennial peace and rest (Rev. 20:6). So Genesis 9:8-17 anticipates that in the end Israel will beat her swords into plowshares (Isa. 2:4; Micah 4:3). In the meantime life goes on in a new order; the divine will of forbearance, “common grace,” is at work until that end.
Genesis 9:18-29 Now the sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And Ham was the father of Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated.
20 And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. 21 Then he drank of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father's nakedness.
24 So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. 25 Then he said: "Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants He shall be to his brethren." 26 And he said: "Blessed be the LORD, The God of Shem, And may Canaan be his servant. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, And may he dwell in the tents of Shem; And may Canaan be his servant."
28 And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. 29 So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.
Noah, “the man of the earth” (as the rabbis translated the words a man of the soil), began to plant a vineyard. Though wine is said to cheer the heart (Jud. 9:13; Ps. 104:15) and alleviate the pain of the curse (Prov. 31:6), it is also clear that it has disturbing effects. Here Noah lay drunk and naked in his tent. Intoxication and sexual looseness are hallmarks of pagans, and both are traced back to this event in Noah’s life. Man had not changed at all; with the opportunity to start a “new creation,” Noah acted like a pagan (cf. Gen. 6:5; 8:21).
The basic question concerns what Ham, Noah’s youngest son, did (9:22, 24) and why Noah cursed Ham’s “son” Canaan (vv. 25-27). Many fanciful ideas have been proposed . The rabbis said Ham castrated Noah, thus explaining why Noah had no other sons. Others claim that Ham slept with his mother, thus uncovering his father’s nakedness, and that Canaan was the offspring of that union. Others have said that Ham was involved in a homosexual attack on his father. But the Hebrew expression here means what it says: Ham . . . saw his father’s nakedness (v. 22). He was not involved with Noah sexually, for in that case the Hebrew would be translated “he uncovered (causative form of gaµlaÆh) his father’s nakedness.” Instead Noah had already uncovered himself (wayyit_gal, reflexive form, v. 21), and Ham saw him that way.
To the ancients, however, even seeing one’s father naked was a breach of family ethic. The sanctity of the family was destroyed and the strength of the father was made a mockery. Ham apparently stumbled on this accidentally, but went out and exultingly told his two brothers, as if he had triumphed over his father.
So what seems to be a trivial incident turned out to be a major event. Noah’s oracle (vv. 25-27) showed that the natures of his three sons would be perpetuated in their descendants.
In all but one of the verses in Leviticus 18:6-19, Moses used the causative form of the verb gaµlaÆh to refer to the Canaanites’ (Ham’s descendants) “uncovering” another’s nakedness (rendered in the niv, “have sexual relations”). This euphemism reports the actual licentious and repulsively immoral behavior of the descendants of Ham (cf. Lev. 18:3). Ham’s disposition toward moral abandon thus bore fruit in the immoral acts of his descendants, the Canaanites.
9:24-29. Because of this incident Noah prophesied about his sons’ descendants. He began with the direct words, Cursed be Canaan! However, Noah was not punishing Ham’s son for something Ham did. Instead, Noah’s words referred to the nation of Canaanites that would come from Ham through Canaan. Ham’s act of hubris could not be left without repercussions. A humiliation in like measure was needed, according to the principle of retributive justice. Ham had made an irreparable breach in his father’s family; thus a curse would be put on his son’s family. It has been suggested that Ham may have attempted to seize leadership over his brothers for the sake of his own line. This would be similar to other ancient traditions about a son replacing his father. But if he did his attempt failed, and his line through Canaan was placed not in leadership over other clansmen, but under them (v. 25).
Vs 24- it is ironic that after hearing God, building the ark, collecting the animals, weathering the flood, and seeing the total destruction of all of humanity except his won immediate family, Noah’s first recorded words are “ Cursed is Canaan”
it may not be any of these, it may be as simple as one rabbis puts it:
Some Jewish and not-Jewish teachers omit this story in Children’s bible classes. Yet it is of beep significance in a child’s moral training. An intelligent child cannot help now and then detecting a fault or something to laugh at in his parents. But instead of mockery or callous exposure, it is for him to throw the mantle of filial love over the fault and turn away his face.. Am I the one to Judge my parents, a child should ask himself. Few Jewish children have parents who are drunkards, but there is a great many whose fathers and mother do not speak the language of the land fluently as they do. Instead of laughing at them, Jewish children should be taught to feel. “ have my parents had the opportunities in life that they have given me. “ 
Genesis 10:1-14 Now this is the genealogy of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And sons were born to them after the flood.
2 The sons of Japheth were Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer were Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastland peoples of the Gentiles were separated into their lands, everyone according to his language, according to their families, into their nations.
6 The sons of Ham were Cush, Mizraim, Put, and Canaan. 7 The sons of Cush were Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabtechah; and the sons of Raamah were Sheba and Dedan. 8 Cush begot Nimrod; he began to be a mighty one on the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; therefore it is said, "Like Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD." 10 And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. 11 From that land he went to Assyria and built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah, 12 and Resen between Nineveh and Calah (that is the principal city). 13 Mizraim begot Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, 14 Pathrusim, and Casluhim (from whom came the Philistines and Caphtorim).
Nimrod was a grandson of Ham through Cush, and his name means “rebel.” He was a mighty tyrant in the sight of God, the first dictator. The word “hunter” does not refer to the hunting of animals, but rather to the hunting of men. He was the founder of the Babylonian empire and the organizer of the enterprise that led to the construction of the tower of Babel. History informs us that Nimrod and his wife devised a new religion built around “the mother and child.” For details, read Alexander Hislop’s book The Two Babylons (London: S.W. Partridge, 1956). “Babylon” in the Bible symbolizes rebellion against God and confusion in religion. We see Babylon opposing the people of God throughout the Bible, culminating in the “Great Babylon” of Rev. 17–18. 
The subject of Antichrist is not exhausted by any means by the above brief discussion. There are a number of types of Antichrist in Scripture. For example A.W. Pink discusses Nimrod as a type of Antichrist in his book Antichrist (Kregel Publications 1988). Nimrod founded Babylon and Ninevah in what is today the nation of Iraq. Nimrod was responsible for introducing the powerful system of religious error which later diffused throughout the world and still greatly affects our modern cultures. The Assyrians of this fertile crescent area are noted throughout history for their violent hatred of Israel. Saddam Hussein (who likens himself to a new Nebuchadnezzar) is also rebuilding ancient Babylon, the city, in our time. In Revelation Chapters 17 and 18 Babylon is not merely a city, but an entire global religious and an economic world view (weltaungshaung) based on the Babylonian Mystery religion of Nimrod. My belief is that "Mystery Babylon the Great" is both a literal city and also a symbol of all false (apostate) religion and false commerce and trade existing at the end of the age.
Genesis 10:15-32 Canaan begot Sidon his firstborn, and Heth; 16 the Jebusite, the Amorite, and the Girgashite; 17 the Hivite, the Arkite, and the Sinite; 18 the Arvadite, the Zemarite, and the Hamathite. Afterward the families of the Canaanites were dispersed. 19 And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; then as you go toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. 20 These were the sons of Ham, according to their families, according to their languages, in their lands and in their nations.
21 And children were born also to Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder. 22 The sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram. 23 The sons of Aram were Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash. 24 Arphaxad begot Salah, and Salah begot Eber. 25 To Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother's name was Joktan. 26 Joktan begot Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 27 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 28 Obal, Abimael, Sheba, 29 Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab. All these were the sons of Joktan. 30 And their dwelling place was from Mesha as you go toward Sephar, the mountain of the east. 31 These were the sons of Shem, according to their families, according to their languages, in their lands, according to their nations.
32 These were the families of the sons of Noah, according to their generations, in their nations; and from these the nations were divided on the earth after the flood.
Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.) 1983, 1985.
Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.) 1983, 1985.
Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.) 1983, 1985.
 A.W. Pink “Gleanings in Genesis”
Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.) 1983, 1985.
Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.) 1983, 1985.
 The Pentateuch J.H. Hertz pg. 34
Warren W. Wiersbe, Wiersbe’s Expository Outlines on the Old Testament, (Moody Press: The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, New Testament) Chicago.
 Lambert Dolphin, Article on the anti-christ