A Textual Comparison Between the Torah and the Book of Enoch
Genesis 6 is one of the most debated passages in Biblical literature.
Rather than speculate, we will examine:
1 What the Torah explicitly states
2 What the Book of Enoch explicitly states
3 Where interpretation begins
Precision matters.
🕎 1. The Torah Text — Genesis 6:1–4
Genesis 6:2
וַיִּרְאוּ בְנֵי־הָאֱלֹהִים אֶת־בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם כִּי טֹבֹת הֵנָּה
וַיִּקְחוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרוּ
Translation:
“The sons of God saw the daughters of man that they were good; and they took wives for themselves, from all whom they chose.”
Notice carefully:
• The phrase used is בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים (Benei HaElohim)
• The Hebrew word for angels — מַלְאָכִים (Malachim) — does not appear in this passage
The Torah does not define who the “sons of God” are within Genesis 6.
It simply states the phrase.
Genesis 6:4
הַנְּפִלִים הָיוּ בָאָרֶץ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם...
Translation:
“The Nephilim were on the earth in those days…”
The Torah:
• Mentions the Nephilim
• Does not define the term
• Does not call them giants explicitly in the Hebrew
• Does not describe their origin
The root נפל (naphal) means “to fall.”
But the Torah does not explain the word “Nephilim” within the passage itself.
The term is left undefined.
📖 2. The Book of Enoch — Expansion of the Narrative
Now we compare this with the Book of Enoch, a Second Temple Jewish text.
1 Enoch 6:1–2
“And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied…
that the angels, the children of heaven, saw and lusted after them…”
Enoch explicitly identifies the Sons of God as:
• Angels
• Children of heaven
There is no ambiguity in Enoch’s wording.
1 Enoch 7:2
“And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three hundred cubits.”
Here, the offspring are explicitly described as giants.
This is where the “giant” interpretation becomes fully developed.
The Torah does not provide this detail.
Enoch does.
📚 3. Additional Tanakh Context
The phrase Benei Elohim appears elsewhere.
Job 1:6
“Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD…”
In Job, the phrase clearly refers to heavenly beings in a divine council setting.
This is often cited in support of the angelic interpretation of Genesis 6.
However:
Genesis 6 does not explicitly connect itself to Job.
The connection is interpretive.
⚖️ 4. What the Torah Does NOT State
The Torah does not explicitly state:
• That the Sons of God were angels
• That they were fallen angels
• That the Nephilim were giants
• That angels cohabited with women
Those details are expanded upon in the Book of Enoch.
That distinction matters.
🧠 5. Interpretive Models
There are several major interpretations:
1 The Sethite view (sons of Seth marrying daughters of Cain)
2 The angelic view (as developed in Enoch)
3 Royal or divine rulers abusing power
The Torah itself does not explicitly resolve the question.
Enoch strongly supports the angelic interpretation.
But the two texts remain distinct sources.
📌 6. My Position (Clearly Stated)
I find the Enochic tradition compelling.
However, I do not attribute Enoch’s expanded narrative directly to the Torah text.
The Torah is concise.
Enoch is expansive.
Both deserve careful reading — but not conflation.
Final Thought
Text first.
Interpretation second.
Expansion third.
Clarity builds authority.https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8xfNQmn/
