 |  |
statement of the Saviour: "In the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in
marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven" (Matt. 22: 30). Here it is clear that
angels who do keep their first estate and do not forsake their own habitation cannot be
conceived of as entering into the marriage relationship. The teaching of II Pet. 3: and
Jude however is that certain angels left this position, and consequently the changed
condition and environment opens the way for any number of unsuspected possibilities.
We have already referred to the evidence that would lead us to believe that the angels
were not entirely disembodied, but like the resurrection bodies of the saints, their bodies
would be `spiritual'.
There is, however, no need to load the passage with unnecessary difficulties, for just
as Satan possessed himself of the body of a serpent in Gen. 3:, and just as demons can
and did possess themselves of the bodies of men, so, the angels that left their own
habitation, could have taken possession of the bodies of those men who had so far
profaned the Name of the Lord as to have been abandoned or `given up' (Rom. 1: 24, 28)
with dreadful consequences.
It appears from Gen. 6: 3 that Adam himself had become involved in the general
degeneration, and God said:
"My Spirit shall not always strive with man" that is in testifying against him, but
judgment must ensue (Davidson).
The note in the Companion Bible at this point needs revision.
"For that he also is flesh."
As it stands it looks as though the words `is flesh' could be taken as part of the verb
to err, Hebrew shagag, but every student knows that the word `flesh' is basar. What is
intended by the note in the Companion Bible is that the words `for that also' could be a
part of the verb shagag `to err' and would indicate that by complicity with the erring of
mankind Adam had become like the rest. Adam, however, was not cut off without
opportunity for repentance. The longsuffering of the Lord gave him another 120 years of
life.
The presence in the earth after the flood of Nephilim, Rephaim, Giants, Canaanites,
Anakims and the like is not to be interpreted as though the Deluge failed in its purpose,
but is to be read in the light of the words of Gen. 6: 4 "In those days; and also after
that". Another irruption of the sons of God took place, concentrated more particularly on
the land of promise, with the intention of occupying it with the false seed of their evil
progeny, so that by the time Abraham reached the land of promise it could be written `the
Canaanite was then in the land' (Gen. 12: 6), with an intended emphasis on the word
`then'.
It is not our custom to seek confirmation of our teaching from pagan sources, but
Gen. 6: 4 speaks of the offspring of the unholy union as `mighty men which were of old,
men of renown', and as we have so few names given in Gen. 4: and 5:, this reference by