It is not unusual for people to suppose that they know what the Bible says when in fact all they know is legends and myths that have grown up around the Bible. Unfortunately, people make decisions about the veracity of the Bible on the basis of their misconceptions. It is important to understand that not everything believed to be taught in the Bible is in fact taught by the Bible. In this issue, we will deal with three myths that people have about the Bible.

Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose.

    The erroneous supposition is that "the sons of God" to whom the text refers where angels, and particularly, the same angels which Jude mentioned in his epistle (verse 6). While it is true that the "sons of God" in Job 1:6 were angels, the meaning of the phrase in Genesis 6:2 will be best understood in light of the immediate context.

    First of all, notice that the purpose of relating the fact that "sons of God" married "daughters of men" was to explain how society became so thoroughly evil that God determined to destroy the world. Verses 1 and 2 are immediately followed by this statement: "Then the LORD said, 'My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.'" The next few verses provide further description of the depths to which mankind had fallen, and God's intent to destroy the world by a flood at the end of the 120 years.

    It may be asked why the marriage of "sons of God" to "daughters of men" would result in society becoming utterly evil. The preceding context will provide the answer. Chapter 5 describes the descendants of Seth, and prior to this, the descendants of Cain are described in Genesis 4:16-24. It is significant that a trend toward godliness is seen among Seth's descendants, and quite the opposite tendency is seen among Cain's descendants.

    Cain himself was a murderer. Among his posterity, much attention is given to Lamech. Contrary to God's intent, Lamech took two wives, and is the first recorded as having done so. Furthermore, Lamech is described as having been an exceedingly arrogant man, proclaiming, "I have killed a man for wounding me; and a boy for striking me; If Cain is avenged sevenfold, Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold" (Genesis 4:23-24).

    On the other hand, as the inspired text directs our attention away from Cain's descendants to Seth's descendants, we are told, "Then men began to call upon the name of the LORD" (Genesis 4:26). Among Seth's progeny was Enoch, who "walked with God" (Genesis 5:22). We are told that because he walked with God, Enoch "was not, for God took him" (5:24). The New Testament explains: "By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and he was not found because God translated him: for he hath had witness borne to him that before his translation he had been well-pleasing unto God" (Hebrews 11:5).

    As we come to the conclusion of Genesis 5, we would not suppose that every last descendant of Cain was rotten to the core, and every last descendant of Seth was as faithful as Enoch. However, we are left with the impression that there was a marked distinction in the character of the two families; that in general, Cain's descendants were a vain people, while "calling upon the name of the LORD" characterized Seth's descendants.

    How was it that from such circumstances, with the exception of Noah, godliness disappeared altogether, and evil prevailed among all men? The answer is that the "sons of God", that is, godly men, descendants of Seth, saw that the "daughters of men", that is, worldly women, descendants of Cain, were beautiful, and married them. By means of these unions, even those men who had been godly were influenced to become evil, and "then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thought of his heart was only evil continually" (Genesis 6:5).

    It is expected that godly men would have been called "sons of God". But why "daughters of men" should suggest worldly women may seem less clear. The Hebrew word translated "men" (ADAM) is sometimes used to denote in particular those men who are of low character, e.g. in Psalm 62:9.

    Let it first be observed that although it was Ham who took irreverent pleasure in his father's drunken stupor and shameful nakedness, the curse was not upon Ham, but upon one of his sons, Canaan. Perhaps Canaan had manifested a disrespectful spirit similar to his father's. But for whatever reason, Ham's other sons were not included in the curse. Now, it cannot be said that the Negro race descended from Canaan, and therefore, the supposed connection between the curse, and the dark skin of the Negro does not exist.

    As previously suggested, this curse is not merely an aside in the Biblical narrative, but is fundamental to the subsequent history of Old Testament peoples. "Canaan" is recognized by anyone who has even minimal knowledge of the Old Testament as the name of the land which God gave to Israel, and the Canaanites were the people whom God drove out before Israel. Who were these people, and why did God see fit to destroy them in order to make room for Israel? Was it merely bad luck that accounted for the Canaanites being the ones whom Israel would displace? Not at all, and the curse upon Canaan is recorded for the very purpose of explaining the subsequent fate of the Canaanites.

    Genesis 9:18 is the first occurrence of the name "Canaan" in the Old Testament: "And Ham was the father of Canaan." Ham had four sons (Genesis 10:6) but only Canaan is mentioned here, in anticipation of the narrative of the curse:

Cursed be Canaan;
A servant of servants
He shall be to his brothers.
Blessed be the LORD,
The God of Shem;
And let Canaan be his servant.
May God enlarge Japheth,
And let him dwell in the tents of Shem;
And let Canaan be his servant.
(Genesis 9:25-27)

From this point on, the name "Canaan" becomes very prominent in the books of Moses.

    Following the curse upon Canaan, and the corresponding blessings upon Shem and Japheth, is a brief statement which brings us to the end of Noah's life, and then the text immediately begins to explain what peoples came from which of Noah's sons, and what lands they inhabited. Genesis 10:15-19 is a description of those peoples who descended from Noah's grandson, Canaan. Among these were the Hittites (the Heth who was a son of Canaan in Genesis 10:15 is shown to be the father of the Hittites by comparing Genesis 23:10 with 23:20; and Genesis 26:34 with 27:46), the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, and the Hivites. Originally, the term "Canaanite" included all of these (Genesis 10:18). Significantly, the borders of the territory in which the Canaanites dwelled are also described (Genesis 10:19).

    Abram (Abraham), a descendant of Shem, is introduced to us in chapter 11, and verse 31 indicates that the goal of Abraham's journey was the land of Canaan which was described in Genesis 9. After Abraham arrived in Canaan (Genesis 12:5), where dwelt the Canaanite (Genesis 12:6), that is the descendants of Canaan, the Lord said to this descendant of Shem, "To your descendants I will give this land" (Genesis 12:7). In Genesis 15, the promised land is defined as that "from the river of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates" (verse 18). This would include all the territory described in Genesis 10:19. The peoples who possessed this land in Abraham's time are mentioned, including the Hittites (15:20), Jebusites (15:21), Amorites (15:16), and Girgashites (15:21). By Abraham's time the term "Canaanite" had evidently acquired a narrow sense in which it referred to a particular group of Canaan's descendants, and these also are mentioned (15:21). Later, (e.g. in Exodus 3:8, Deuteronomy 7:1) mention is made of the Hivites as inhabitants of the land which Abraham's seed would possess.

    The Israelites were descended from Abraham, and thus also from Shem, and to them God promised to give the land of Canaan (Exodus 6:2-8). Although the Israelites were commanded to utterly destroy the Canaanite peoples which lived in the land (Deuteronomy 7:1-2, 20:16-18), they fell short of accomplishing this. However, in Joshua 9:22-27 (note "Hivites" in verse 7), 16:10, 17:12-13, and 1 Kings 9:20-21, we find that any Canaanites in the land who were not destroyed did become slaves to Israel. And thus it was that Canaan became the servant of Shem.

    But the curse upon Canaan was not only that he would serve Shem. Noah said, "May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant." How it is that Canaan would become Japheth's servant is less clear than how he became Shem's servant. The descendants of Japheth settled in parts of Europe and Asia. In his commentary on Genesis, C.F. Keil noted, "The Phoenicians, along with the Carthaginians and the Egyptians, who all belonged to the family of Canaan, were subjected by the Japhetic Persians, Macedonians, and Romans." While this is true, the inspired text seems to make a connection between Japheth's dwelling "in the tents of Shem" and Canaan's submission to him, as if through Israel, the European and Asian peoples would have dominion over Canaan's descendants.

    Perhaps the meaning of Canaan's subjugation to Japheth as well as Canaan is realized spiritually. If the Canaanites represent those outside of God's kingdom, then the Shemites and Japhethites represent God's people, Jews and Gentiles respectively. Then Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem would represent the Gentiles participation in the inheritance along with faithful Jews (Romans 15:27), and the dominion of Shem and Japheth over Canaan would be fulfulled in that God's kingdom would prevail over the kingdoms of men (Dan. 7:27, Rev 11:15).

    What is clear is that the curse had nothing to do with the dark skin of some of Ham's descendants, but rather with the subjugation of Canaan's descendants, and especially their subjugation to the Israelites who were descendants of Shem.

    The passage under consideration is found in the midst of several prophecies against various nations. "The oracle concerning Babylon" begins in Isaiah 13:1. Prophecies against Assyria and Philistia are found in Isaiah 14:24-32. "the oracle concerning Moab" begins at Isaiah 15:1, and chapters 17, 18, and 19 are the oracles concerning Syria, Ethiopia, and Egypt respectively.

    In particular, it is in the oracle concerning Babylon that we find "Lucifer" mentioned. A Day of the Lord in which judgment will be rendered against Babylon is foretold (Isaiah 13:6ff). Specifically, God promised to bring the Medes against Babylon (Isaiah 13:17), "And Babylon, the beauty of kingdoms, the glory of the Chaldeans' pride, will be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah." When Babylon did fall, the Jews, who had been captives, were allowed to go back to their land, and so began the process of restoration which culminated in the spiritual restoration under the reign of the King, Jesus. All of this is only briefly alluded to in Isaiah 14:1-2 before the prophet describes the taunt that would be taken up against Babylon when that great empire fell: "And it will be in the day when the LORD gives you rest from your pain and turmoil and harsh service in which you have been enslaved, that you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon" (Isaiah 14:3-4). Notice that what follows is a taunt against the king of Babylon, not Satan!

    In the following verses, the king of Babylon is described as a once powerful oppressor who has now been brought down, just as he himself had brought down so many other kings. The joy of his previous victims is described. Kings he had defeated are pictured as welcoming him into Sheol (the realm of the dead), gloating over the fact that he, who was once so much more powerful than they, is now no better than they:

Sheol from beneath is excited over you to meet you when you come; It arouses for you the spirits of the dead, all the leaders of the earth; It raises all the kings of the nations from their thrones. They will all respond and say to you, "Even you have been made weak as we, you have become like us" (Isaiah 14:9-10).

    Whether verse 12 represents a further taunt by these kings, or by the Lord, it is again directed to the king of Babylon:

How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn? You have been cut down to the earth, you who have weakened the nations.

    People become confused when they forget the context, and take too literally the phrases, "fallen from heaven" (verse 12), "ascend to heaven" (verse 13), and "ascend above the heights of the clouds" (verse 14). These phrases represent the power over the earth that the king of Babylon achieved, and especially, how he himself viewed his power. Similar language is used of the arrogance of a human ruler in Daniel 8:10-11.

    Then what of Satan's fall? Luke 10:18 and Revelation 12:7-9 describe Satan's fall. But in these passages, his fall is his defeat on account of Jesus' resurrection from the dead, by which Jesus brought to nought Satan, who had the power of death (Hebrews 2:14). There is no account of Satan falling from heaven before the beginning of the world anywhere in scripture.

[NoVa Bible Study HOME Page] [Topical Index][Preach the Word]