The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

by Michael S. Heiser

The Sethite hypothesis collapses under the weight of its own incoherence.

Scholars agree that the passages are about the same subject matter.10 They describe an episode from the time of Noah and the flood where “angels” sinned.11 That sin, which precipitated the flood, was sexual in nature; it is placed in the same category as the sin which prompted the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah. The transgression was interpreted by Peter and Jude as evidence of despising authority and the boundaries of “proper dwelling” for the parties concerned. All of those elements are transparent in Genesis 6:1–4. There is simply no other sin in the Old Testament that meets these specific details—and no other “angelic” sin at all in the Old Testament that might be the referent.

That Genesis 1–11 has many connections to Mesopotamian literature is not disputed by scholars, evangelical or otherwise. The story of creation, the genealogies before the flood, the flood itself, and the tower of Babel incident all have secure connections to Mesopotamian material that is much older than the Old Testament.

Genesis 6:1–4, too, has deep Mesopotamian roots that, until very recently, have not been fully recognized or appreciated.2 Jewish literature like 1 Enoch that retold the story shows a keen awareness of that Mesopotamian context. This awareness shows us that Jewish thinkers of the Second Temple period understood, correctly, that the story involved divine beings and giant offspring.

Genesis 6:1–4 is a polemic; it is a literary and theological effort to undermine the credibility of Mesopotamian gods and other aspects of that culture’s worldview. Biblical writers do this frequently. The strategy often involves borrowing lines and motifs from the literature of the target civilization to articulate correct theology about Yahweh and to show contempt for other gods. Genesis 6:1–4 is a case study in this technique.

THE SONS OF GOD: Watchers, Sons of Heaven, Holy Ones

The offspring of the Watchers (sons of God) in 1 Enoch were giants (1 Enoch 7).

Interpretation of the term nephilim must also account for another Jewish phenomenon between the testaments—translation of the Old Testament into Greek. I speak here of the Septuagint. The word nephilim occurs twice in the Hebrew Bible (Gen 6:4; Num 13:33). In both cases the Septuagint translated the term with gigas (“giant”).

In reality, it doesn’t matter whether “fallen ones” is the translation. In both the Mesopotamian context and the context of later Second Temple Jewish thought, their fathers are divine and the nephilim (however translated) are still described as giants.16 Consequently, insisting that the name means “fallen” produces no argument to counter a supernatural interpretation. Despite the uselessness of the argument, I’m not inclined to concede the point. I don’t think nephilim means “fallen ones.”17 Jewish writers and translators habitually think “giants” when they use or translate the term. I think there’s a reason for that.

My view is that, to solve this messaging problem, the Jewish scribes adopted an Aramaic noun: naphiyla—which means “giant.” When you import that word and pluralize it for Hebrew, you get nephiylim, just what we see in Numbers 13:33.

But what does it all mean? Why is Genesis 6:1–4 in the Bible? What was its theological message? I’ve already noted that the goal was polemic—a dismissal of Mesopotamian religion. But that’s a little vague. Let’s explore it. Because the content of Genesis 1–11 has so many deep, specific touch-points with Mesopotamian literary works, many scholars believe that these chapters either were written during the exile in Babylon or were edited at that time.19 The scribes wanted to make it clear that certain religious ideas about the gods and the world were misguided or false. Think about the setting. The Jews, followers of Yahweh, were in Babylon, deported against their will by the greatest empire in their known world. Though captives, prophets like Ezekiel (and Jeremiah before him) had told the people that their situation was temporary—that the God of Israel remained the real sovereign. He was fully in control and was the true God. They would be set free and Babylon would crumble. For Jewish scribes, their work during the exile was an opportunity to set the record straight for posterity. And that they did.

First Enoch 8 goes on to elaborate how certain watchers corrupted humankind by means of forbidden divine knowledge, practices largely drawn from Babylonian sciences, another clear indication that the intellectual context of the story was known to Second Temple authors. Since the Babylonian apkallus were considered demonic, it is no mystery why Peter and Jude link the events of Genesis 6:1–4 to false teachers (2 Pet 2:1–4).

The famous story of the building of the Tower of Babel is about much more than an ill-fated construction project and language confusion. The episode is at the heart of the Old Testament worldview. It was at Babylon where people sought to “make a name (shem) for themselves” by building a tower that reached to the heavens, the realm of the gods. The city is once again cast as the source of sinister activity and knowledge.

You’ll notice right away that there’s the same sort of “plural exhortation” going on in verse 7 as we saw in Genesis 1:26. The verse has Yahweh proclaiming, “Let us go down and confuse their language.” As was the case in Genesis 1:26, the plural announcement is followed by the actions of only one being, Yahweh: “So Yahweh scattered them” (11:8).

It’s at this point that most Bible readers presume there’s nothing more to think about. That’s because other Old Testament passages that speak of this event tend to be omitted from the discussion. The most important of these is Deuteronomy 32:8–9 (ESV): 8 When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. 9 But the LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage. Deuteronomy 32:8–9 describes how Yahweh’s dispersal of the nations at Babel resulted in his disinheriting those nations as his people. This is the Old Testament equivalent of Romans 1:18–25, a familiar passage wherein God “gave [humankind] over” to their persistent rebellion. The statement in Deuteronomy 32:9 that “the LORD’s [i.e., Yahweh’s] portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage” tips us off that a contrast in affection and ownership is intended. Yahweh in effect decided that the people of the world’s nations were no longer going to be in relationship to him. He would begin anew. He would enter into covenant relationship with a new people that did not yet exist: Israel.

Most English Bibles do not read “according to the number of the sons of God” in Deuteronomy 32:8. Rather, they read “according to the number of the sons of Israel.” The difference derives from disagreements between manuscripts of the Old Testament. “Sons of God” is the correct reading, as is now known from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

THE DEUTERONOMY 32 WORLDVIEW So what happened to the other nations? What does it mean that they were apportioned as an inheritance according to the number of the sons of God? As odd as it sounds, the rest of the nations were placed under the authority of members of Yahweh’s divine council.7 The other nations were assigned to lesser elohim as a judgment from the Most High, Yahweh.

Israel was holy ground because it was Yahweh’s “inheritance,” in the language of Deuteronomy 32:8–9. The territory of other nations belonged to other elohim because Yahweh had decreed it. Psalm 82 told us that these lesser elohim were corrupt.2 We aren’t told how the elohim Yahweh assigned to the nations became corrupt, only that they were. It is clear from Deuteronomy 4:19–20; 17:3; 29:25; and 32:17 that these elohim were illegitimate for Israelite worship.

Dirt from Israel was the means by which Naaman showed his faith and kept his vow to the true God, Yahweh.

In Acts 7:2–4, Stephen says: The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham while he was in Mesopotamia, before he settled in Haran, 3 and said to him, “Go out from your land and from your relatives and come to the land that I will show you.” 4 Then he went out from the land of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran. And from there, after his father died, he caused him to move to this land in which you now live. The important element to catch here is in the first line: Yahweh appeared to Abraham. Abraham’s first divine encounter in Mesopotamia involved a visible appearance of Yahweh. Genesis 12 is a follow-up. Abraham and Yahweh had talked before—face to face.

The fact that the Old Testament at times has Yahweh appearing in visible form should now be on your radar. We’re going to see a lot more of him (pun intended). One of my favorite passages that features Yahweh made visible is 1 Samuel 3, the story of the young soon-to-be prophet, Samuel. Many readers will no doubt be familiar with it. The chapter opens with the cryptic statement, “The word of Yahweh was rare in those days; visions were not widespread.” The reader is predisposed by the comment to expect a vision of the “Word of Yahweh.”

And Samuel grew up, and Yahweh was with him. He did not allow any of his prophecies to go unfulfilled. 20 All Israel from Dan to Beersheba realized that Samuel was faithful as a prophet to Yahweh. 21 And Yahweh appeared again in Shiloh, for Yahweh revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh through the word of Yahweh (1 Sam 3:19–21).

I was amazed the first time I saw this passage for what it was really saying. Yahweh “appeared” to Samuel with regularity in verse 21. The first verse of the chapter makes a clear association between the Word of the Lord and a visionary experience—not a mere auditory event. The idea of the visible Word—the visible Yahweh—in human form is nailed down by the “standing” language. Some passages go beyond presenting Yahweh in visible, human form. Genesis 18 is perhaps the most startling example where Yahweh is not only visible, but embodied.

AT THE CLOSE OF THE LAST CHAPTER I NOTED THAT THE “WORD OF YAHWEH” being a visible appearance of God as a man raised certain questions. One of those was how a first-century Jew would have parsed the idea of Jesus being the “Word made flesh.” True, there was Old Testament precedent for Yahweh being visible and embodied. That phenomenon would have helped a Jew accept at least the idea that God could show up in human form.

THE ANGEL OF YAHWEH The heart-wrenching story of Genesis 22, where Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his covenant son Isaac, is our next stop. It’s something of a transitional passage. We’ve seen that Abraham has had several encounters with Yahweh. The expression used to convey the visible, physical nature of those encounters has, to this point, been “the word of Yahweh.” Genesis 22 marks a shift in the language for a visible Yahweh figure to the “Angel of Yahweh.” Although the Angel of Yahweh appears earlier than Genesis 22 (Gen 16:7–11; 21:17), this particularly appearance begins to blur the identities of Yahweh and his angel. Genesis 22:1–9 relates how Abraham has taken Isaac, at the bizarre command of Yahweh, to Mount Moriah to offer his son as a burnt offering. We pick up the story in verse 10. 10 And Abraham stretched out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. 11 And the angel of Yahweh called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham! Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” 12 And he said, “Do not stretch out your hand against the boy; do not do anything to him. For now I know that you are one who fears God, since you have not withheld your son, your only child, from me.”

The first thing to notice is that when the angel of Yahweh speaks to Abraham, Abraham recognizes the voice. He does not ask the identity of the speaker, as though the voice is unfamiliar. He does not fear that he is harkening to the voice of another god. The reader, however, knows that the source is not Yahweh per se, but the angel of Yahweh. The word translated “angel” here is the Hebrew word mal’ak, which simply means “messenger.” The next observation is very important. The Angel speaks to Abraham in verse 11, and so is distinguished from God. But immediately after doing so, he commends Abraham for not withholding Isaac “from me.” There is a switch to the first person which, given that God himself had told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac (Gen 22:1–2), seems to require seeing Yahweh as the speaker.

These passages interchange Yahweh, the Angel of Yahweh, and the “presence” (panim) of God as the identity of the divine deliverer of Israel from Egypt. There weren’t three different deliverers. They are all the same. One of them, the angel, takes human form. If Deuteronomy 4:37 is read in light of Exodus 23:20–23, then the presence and the Angel are co-identified. This makes good sense in view of the meaning of the “Name” which was in the Angel.

How is it that the psalmist would pray that “the Name” protect anyone? Israelites wouldn’t get much protection from a string of consonants (Y-H-W-H). The point of the psalm is that trusting in the Name means trusting in Yahweh himself—he is the Name.

And the angel of Yahweh went up from Gilgal to Bokim and said, “I brought you up from Egypt, and I brought you to the land that I had promised to your ancestors. I said, ‘I will never break my covenant with you. 2 And as for you, do not make a covenant with the inhabitants of this land; break down their altars.’ But you did not listen to my voice. Why would you do such a thing? 3 Now I say, I will not drive them out from before you; they will become as thorns for you, and their gods will be a trap for you.” 4 And as the angel of Yahweh spoke these words to all the Israelites, the people wept bitterly (Judg 2:1–4).

Gideon said, “Oh, my lord Yahweh! For now I have seen the angel of Yahweh face to face.” 23 And Yahweh said to him, “Peace be with you. Do not fear; you will not die.” 24 And Gideon built there an altar to Yahweh, and he called it “Yahweh is peace.” To this day it is still in Ophrah of the Abiezrites (Judg 6:11–24).

That there are two clearly separate Yahweh figures becomes more dramatic after verse 19. Gideon asks the man (who is logically the angel of Yahweh) to stay put while Gideon makes a meal for him. The stranger agrees. When Gideon returns, he brings the meal to the tree (v. 19). The narrator has the Angel of God receiving it. Again that’s logical, since the angel had sat there at the beginning of the story. Now comes the shocker. The angel of Yahweh burns up the sacrifice and then leaves (v. 21). But we learn in verse 23 that Yahweh is still there and speaks to Gideon after the Angel’s departure. Not only did the writer blur the distinction between the two figures, but he had them both in the same scene. RAMIFICATIONS The most familiar way to process what we’ve seen is to think about the way we talk about Jesus. Christians affirm that God is more than one Person, but that each of those Persons is the same in essence. We affirm that Jesus is one of those Persons. He is God. But in another respect, Jesus isn’t God—he is not the Father. The Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Father. Nevertheless, they are the same in essence.

The reason for Israel’s circumstances was that it wasn’t sufficient that only Israel knew Yahweh was Most High among all gods, and that Israel was his portion. The other nations had to know that as well. Scripture makes it clear that Israel’s deliverance had that effect. Israel was in Egypt precisely so that Yahweh could deliver them—thereby conveying this theological message.

Azazel is regarded as the name of a demon in the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient Jewish books.17 In fact, in one scroll (4Q 180, 1:8) Azazel is the leader of the angels that sinned in Genesis 6:1–4. The same description appears in the book of 1 Enoch (8:1; 9:6; 10:4–8; 13:1; 54:5–6; 55:4; 69:2).

The high priest was not sacrificing to Azazel. Rather, Azazel was getting what belonged to him: sin.

As for the Avvim, who lived in villages as far as Gaza, the Caphtorim, who came from Caphtor, destroyed them and settled in their place) (Deut 2:8–23).

In effect, Bashan was considered the location of (to borrow a New Testament phrase) “the gates of hell.” Later Jewish writers understood these conceptual connections. Their intersection is at the heart of why books like 1 Enoch teach that demons are actually the spirits of dead Nephilim.17

The first encounter of Israel with the inhabitants of the land involves the Anakim. The report of the spies contains the sweeping comment that everyone they saw in the land was unusually tall. There are good textual reasons for not taking this statement as a literally true assessment in terms of its comprehensive nature. We’ve already noted that the biblical writers at times use sweeping generalizations that are not intended to be precise. For instance, Genesis 15:16 and Joshua 7:7 referred to the occupants of the land as “Amorites” when it is abundantly clear that there were other ethnic groups in the land.7 The term “Canaanite” is also used in the same imprecise way (Gen 12:6; 28:1, 6).

So Joshua struck the whole land, the hill country and the Negeb and the lowland and the slopes, and all their kings. He left none remaining, but devoted to destruction all that breathed, just as the LORD God of Israel commanded. 41 And Joshua struck them from Kadesh-barnea as far as Gaza, and all the country of Goshen, as far as Gibeon. 42 And Joshua captured all these kings and their land at one time, because the LORD God of Israel fought for Israel. 43 Then Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to the camp at Gilgal (Josh 10:28–43 ESV).

Other people living in those regions and towns were naturally also under threat—they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Joshua and his army didn’t check identification, so to speak, or interview the occupants to weed out non-Anakim. When they arrived at a place under kherem, the intent was to leave no Anakim alive.

The destruction seems wanton, but it isn’t. The logic of the kherem emerges in Joshua 11:21–23 (ESV).

There was none of the Anakim left in the land of the people of Israel. Only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod did some remain.

Joshua 11:21–23 tells us that in both campaigns the object was the Anakim.11 As if this were not enough of an indication to draw the reader’s attention to the Nephilim bloodlines, the writer adds in verse 22, “Only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod” did some of the Anakim remain. Why add that note? Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod were Philistine cities. One needs only to recall Goliath of Gath and his brothers to understand that the writer of Joshua is setting the stage for the fact that annihilation of these bloodlines would continue into David’s era.

We know that Israel ultimately failed. The seeds of that failure were sown in the events of the conquest. For whatever reasons—lack of faith or lack of effort, or both—Israel failed to drive out their enemies. They allowed vestiges of the targeted bloodlines to remain in the land in the Philistine cities. They chose to coexist (Judg 1:27–36).

JESUS AS THE NAME In an earlier chapter, we learned about the Angel of Yahweh, in whom was the Name, another term for the essence or presence of Yahweh (Exod 23:20–23).4 The New Testament applies that concept to Jesus in several passages. For example in John 17, the famous prayer of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane,

In this regard it is worth noting that, just as “the Name” was another expression for Yahweh, so “the Name” was used to refer to Jesus.7 For example, in Romans 10 we read: 9 If you confess with your mouth “Jesus is Lord” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth one confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord is Lord of all, who is rich to all who call upon him. 13 For “everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved” (Rom 10:9–13). The important thing to note here is that the quotation of verse 13 comes from Joel 2:32. In that Old Testament text we read: “everyone who calls on the name of the Yahweh shall be saved.” The apostle Paul deftly links “confessing Jesus is Lord” in verse 9 with the statement of the Old Testament prophet. This happens many times, especially in Paul’s writings.8 The Name and Yahweh were interchanged in Israelite theology, so that trusting in “the Name of Yahweh” meant trusting in Yahweh. Likewise, trusting in the name of the Lord, who is Yahweh in the Old Testament quotation, is the same as confessing Jesus as Lord.

JESUS AS THE ANGEL OF YAHWEH The identification of Jesus and the Angel who is the visible Yahweh by virtue of embodying the Name is made explicit in Jude 5: Now I want to remind you, although you know everything once and for all, that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, the second time destroyed those who did not believe.

The context of Isaiah 40 is a new beginning for Israel. Judah, the remaining two tribes, had spent seventy years in captivity in Babylon. God brought them out of exile and back to the land. However—and this is frequently overlooked—the other ten tribes never emerged from exile. They were lost, scattered among the disinherited nations. But the coming of the messiah will result in redemption for all the tribes. Yahweh will draw his children from every tribe and nation, whether Abraham’s literal descendants or not.

A voice is calling in the wilderness, “Clear the way of Yahweh! Make a highway smooth in the desert for our God!” (Isa 40:3).

Mark wants readers to see that a new exodus event is happening. The kingdom of God is back, and this time it will not fail because it’s being led by the visible Yahweh, now incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth.14 The imagery is even more startling when we factor in Jude 5, a passage we looked at earlier in this chapter. Jude has Jesus leading a people out of Egypt. The reference was to the visible Angel, who was Yahweh in human form, who brought Israel out of Egypt into the promised land (Judg 2:1–2; cf. Exod 23:20–23).

Jesus picks Mount Hermon to reveal to Peter, James, and John exactly who he is—the embodied glory-essence of God, the divine Name made visible by incarnation. The meaning is just as transparent: I’m putting the hostile powers of the unseen world on notice. I’ve come to earth to take back what is mine. The kingdom of God is at hand.