From the outset, God has utilized angels in human form and with human voices to communicate with humanity, as seen in various angelic appearances throughout Scripture. Notably, the appearances of the angel of the Lord, who held a special redemptive relationship with God’s people, demonstrate a divine method of self-revelation that ultimately culminated in the coming of the Savior, Jesus Christ.
This divine method of self-revelation through angelic appearances highlights God’s desire to engage with humanity in a tangible and personal manner. By taking on human form and speaking in human language, angels have facilitated communication between God and humanity, bridging the divine-human gap.
The angel of the Lord, in particular, holds a unique position in this context. With a special redemptive relationship with God’s people, this angelic being has been instrumental in orchestrating key events in human history, from the call of Abraham to the deliverance of Israel from Egypt.
The progression from angelic appearances to the incarnation of Jesus Christ underscores God’s continuous quest to connect with humanity. While angels have played a vital role in revealing God’s character and plans, the ultimate revelation of God’s nature and love came through Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh.
And so, the biblical narrative demonstrates God’s creative and personal approach to communication with humanity. From angelic appearances to the incarnation of Jesus Christ, God has consistently sought to reveal Himself and His plans to humanity, inviting us to respond in faith and trust.
Moreover, it is prudent to avoid speculation and instead concentrate on the explicit biblical account, as certain topics are off-limits. Nonetheless, as previously mentioned in this series, angels continue to operate just as they did before.
Various religious traditions offer diverse perspectives on angels. In Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, angels are commonly seen as messengers of God, distinct from humans but serving roles like worshiping God, delivering messages, and protecting individuals. In Hinduism and Buddhism, angels are considered celestial beings moving through spiritual planes and may be linked to ancestor spirits or divine aids. New Age spirituality conceptualizes angels as advanced spirits guiding people on their spiritual paths.
Each tradition presents unique nuances about the nature, roles, and hierarchy of angels. To maintain focus on biblical viewpoints, including Jewish scriptures outside the traditional Bible canon, we will explore angels from this perspective.
In the Bible, the term “angel” is not exclusively reserved for divine beings. There are instances where humans are referred to as “angels” due to their role as messengers or representatives of God. Malachi 2:7 is a prime example, where priests are called “the messenger (mal’ak) of the LORD of hosts.” Here, the Hebrew word “mal’ak” translates to “messenger” or “angel,” signifying their intermediary role between God and humanity.
Similarly, in Revelation 2-3, the leaders of the seven churches are addressed as “angels” of their respective churches. While some interpret this as referring to guardian angels overseeing the churches, it is more widely understood to mean human messengers or leaders, emphasizing their responsibility to convey God’s message to their congregations.
These examples illustrate the use of “angel” as a functional term, highlighting the individual’s role as a messenger or representative, rather than implying their ontological nature as divine beings. This nuance is essential in understanding the biblical concept of agency and representation, where humans can serve as vessels for God’s message, embodying the meaning of the word “mal’ak” or “angel.”
Furthermore, the Greek word used in James 2:25 for “messenger” is “angelos” (ἄγγελος), which is the equivalent of the Hebrew word “mal’ak” (מַלְאָך). Both words convey the meaning of “messenger” or “agent” and are used to describe both human and divine messengers.
In James 2:25, the word “angelos” refers to the spies sent to Jericho by Joshua (Joshua 2:1-21), who were received by Rahab and helped by her. In this context, “angelos” is used to denote human messengers, illustrating the shared usage of the term in both Hebrew and Greek to describe messengers or agents, regardless of their divine or human nature.
In this context, the sons of God referred to before the great flood could be seen as human angels, rather than divine beings.
Genesis 6:2-4 presents a intriguing scenario, where the “sons of God” are often interpreted as human messengers or agents of God, who married the “daughters of men,” referring to the women of the sinful human population. This understanding raises questions about the resulting offspring, described as giants (Nephilim). It seems unlikely that the union of holy men and sinful women would produce giants, unless the term “giants” is symbolic of extensive sinfulness.
However, this interpretation poses a theological challenge, as it would imply that God would be intimidated by evil and refer to it as “giants” in contrast to righteousness. This seems inconsistent with the biblical narrative.
Therefore, we need to reexamine the meaning of “sons of God” in this context. Some possible explanations include:
- Divine beings (angels) who rebelled against God and took human form to cohabit with women (a view held by some ancient Jewish traditions)
- Descendants of Seth (a righteous lineage) who intermarried with the ungodly descendants of Cain
- Kings or rulers who claimed divine authority and took multiple wives
The correct understanding of “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2-4 remains a topic of ongoing debate and exploration among biblical scholars and theologians.
The notion that Seth’s descendants constituted a righteous lineage is a human invention, not a biblical concept. If Seth’s lineage were truly righteous, Enoch’s exceptional faithfulness, described as “walking with God” (Genesis 5:24), would not have stood out. Moreover, Noah would not have been the sole recipient of God’s grace (Genesis 6:8).
In reality, the biblical account suggests that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2-4 refers to fallen divine angels, rather than human messengers of God. These divine beings cohabited with human women, resulting in the Nephilim, a race of giants. The scriptures do not indicate that the descendants of Seth and Cain remained separate and did not intermarry.
Over time, the biblical context implies that the genetic lineage of Seth and Cain became intertwined.
Therefore, the biblical evidence supports the understanding that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2-4 refers to fallen angels, rather than human descendants of Seth or messengers of God.
The Nephilim mentioned in Numbers 13:33 are likely a different group from those in Genesis 6:4, as their origin is attributed to a different source. While the Genesis 6:4 Nephilim are described as the offspring of the “sons of God” (believed to be fallen angels) and human women, the Numbers 13:33 Nephilim are described as the descendants of Anak, a human giant, who could not be an offspring of the Nephilim mentioned in Genesis 6:4, because only Noah’s family survived the flood. However, the traits of the pre-flood giants could have been passed down from Noah’s daughters-in-law. So, while there may be a connection between the two groups, they are not from the same direct source.
We encounter another challenge when we consider the biblical teaching that angels, unlike humans, are incapable of procreation and do not possess sexual desire. This raises questions about the notion of fallen angels cohabiting with human women and producing offspring, as described in Genesis 6:2-4. The Bible appears to contrast angels and humans in this regard, emphasizing that angels are spiritual beings without physical bodies or sexual appetites (Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25). This seeming contradiction demands a nuanced understanding of the nature of angels and their potential interactions with humanity.
Before we delve into complex interpretations, let’s consider the straightforward meaning of Matthew 22:30 and Mark 12:25. The Bible states that angels “neither marry nor are given in marriage,” not that they are incapable of marriage or sexual relations altogether. This phrase highlights the angels’ nature as spiritual beings, unaffected by human institutions like marriage. Similarly, while saints are capable of committing adultery, they are called to righteousness and expected to refrain from it. In the same vein, angels, though capable of sexual relations, do not engage in them as they exist beyond human physicality and relational structures. By acknowledging the literal meaning of these passages, we can better understand the biblical perspective on angels and their interactions with humanity.
Please forgive me if my analogy seems unconventional, but it serves to illustrate the point succinctly. Jesus Christ, though fully human and capable of experiencing all human temptations, including idolatry, murder, theft, and sexual desires, chose not to sin. He conquered sin and Satan through His divine nature, demonstrating that He could have succumbed to sin but opted not to. Satan tempted Him, aware of His capacity to sin, but Jesus resisted. Similarly, the “angels in Heaven” – note the specific phrase – though capable of sin, choose not to. They remain sinless, not because they are incapable of sinning, but because they willfully submit to God’s will. Only God, in His divine essence, is unable to sin, for sin is defined as missing God’s mark. Whatever God thinks or does is inherently godly and cannot be considered sin. This distinction highlights the unique nature of God’s character and the choices made by Jesus and the angels in Heaven.
In this understanding, there is no contradiction between Genesis 6:2-4 and Matthew 22:30 or Mark 12:25. The fallen angels, like fallen Adam, possessed the capacity to sin. Let us embrace the straightforward meaning of Scripture, unencumbered by human biases and limitations. Our imaginations and understanding may falter, but the Bible’s clarity shines through when we allow it to speak for itself. By acknowledging the fallen angels’ capacity for sin, we harmonize these seemingly disparate passages, showcasing the cohesion and beauty of God’s Word.
The author of Hebrews mentions that “some” have entertained angels (Hebrews 13:2), implying that Abraham’s encounter (Genesis 18) was not an isolated incident. In fact, Genesis 18:8 explicitly states that the three visitors, who were either angels or the Lord accompanied by angels, did eat and drink. Abraham himself stood by them, watching as they consumed the food he had prepared. This account demonstrates that angels can engage in human-like activities, including eating and drinking, just like humans do.
This episode also suggests that angels may possess appetites similar to those of humans, as they seem to have enjoyed the food and drink offered by Abraham. This challenges the common perception that angels are solely spiritual beings, devoid of physical needs or desires. Instead, Scripture presents angels as capable of interacting with the physical world, sharing in human experiences, and even partaking in sustenance. By recognizing this aspect of angelic nature, we gain a deeper understanding of their role in the biblical narrative and their interactions with humanity.
God’s ways are fundamentally different from humanity’s, and His thoughts and methods are beyond human comprehension (Isaiah 55:8-9). Unlike humans, God doesn’t operate within a predictable system or framework, and He rarely repeats Himself in accomplishing His will (Ephesians 3:10). A striking example of this is seen in Judges 6:21, where the angel of the Lord didn’t physically eat the unleavened bread but instead touched it with His staff, causing fire to consume the offering. Then, the angel vanished, leaving no trace.
Similarly, King David, a man after God’s own heart, demonstrated an understanding of God’s unpredictable nature. When his brave warriors risked their lives to fetch him water from the well of Bethlehem, David refused to drink it, instead pouring it out as an offering to the Lord (2 Samuel 23:15-17). This act showed that even a human leader like David recognized that God’s ways supersede human desires and routines.
Just as David couldn’t be bound by human conventions, God’s ways cannot be limited by human understanding. His thoughts and actions are as vast as the universe, and our finite minds can only scratch the surface of His divine nature. As the apostle Paul wrote, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isaiah 55:8-9).
In conclusion, angels are capable of manifesting in various forms, as determined by God’s sovereign will, to interact with humanity. They can assume physical appearances and engage in human-like activities, including eating and drinking. Moreover, angels possess desires, choices, and free will, similar to those of humans. This is evident in the biblical account of the fallen angels, who chose to relinquish their divine estate and succumb to sin. Thus, angels are not merely ethereal beings but can also interact with the physical world, sharing in human experiences, and exercising their own free will, all within the bounds of God’s divine plan.
In Matthew 22:30 and Mark 12:25, the Bible states that angels “neither marry nor are given in marriage,” not that they are incapable of marriage or sexual relations altogether. This phrase highlights the angels’ nature as spiritual beings, unaffected by human institutions like marriage.
Genesis 6:2-4 presents a intriguing scenario, where the “sons of God” are often interpreted as human messengers or agents of God, who married the “daughters of men,” referring to the women of the sinful human population. This verse needs no interpretation, it means what it literally says.
Jaison Ndlovu (Angels Series 1-8) 
Leave a comment