A syntactical problem for the Sethite thesis

The Sethite thesis holds that the “sons of God” (beney elohim) in Genesis 6 were the human descendants of Seth, and not the fallen Watchers.  Among other problems, this view has to hold:

Heiser writes:

“The verb form (began) is third masculine singular.  Since the word ‘adam, which is often rendered mankind…in modern translations, does not actually appear in the verse, the most natural reading would be that Seth began to call on the name of the Lord.  If this is the case, then the Sethite view needs to extrapolate Seth’s faith to only men from that point on, since it is the sons of God who must be spiritually distinct from the daughters of mankind” (Kindle loc. 10377).

Heiser goes on to point out hat if you insert “humankind” into the text, you undermine the Sethite thesis, for then you have other human lineages calling on the name of the Lord.


6 thoughts on “A syntactical problem for the Sethite thesis

  1. Pingback: Notes on Heiser’s Unseen Realm, 2 | Outlaw Huguenot

  2. Pingback: Review: Unseen Realm (Michael Heiser) | Outlaw Huguenot

  3. Pingback: Did David Kill the Sons of Seth? | Outlaw Huguenot

  4. Pingback: Lists of Giant Clans | The Tents of Shem

  5. Pingback: Genesis: NIVAC (John Walton) | Cosmic Geography

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s