Were Nephilim (Gen 6) judged differently by God?

It makes more sense that the sons of God, here, were the priests of the people of God.

Notice they were present at Sinai before the Law made the Levites priests:

Exodus 19 "Also let the priests who come near the LORD consecrate themselves, lest the LORD break out against them.”

Before this, there is no written provision for how priests were chosen.

We do see, in Genesis, certain names of children mentioned in the lineages and then "..other sons and daughters". These children whose names are mentioned: Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, etc., are literally "men of renown". They are named.

When we consider these two issues together we can see how certain people in their family, typically the oldest male, would become the priest of the family. They were the ones with the most experience about following God and living within His economy. This axiom is preserved in the reverence for elders even today.

So, if the "sons of God", people who preserve the ways of the Lord God in all things, chose to marry whatever woman they wanted, even those outside their own people, that would have disrupted the culture built by God's people. God would not have been pleased.

I am not going to debate someone who applies Christianology to things before God made Christianity, the Following of Christ.

You believe what you want.
Other than natural born Jews, everyone else was not even an heir to Abraham until Jesus made it possible.

15% of the content in the New Testament is the Oral Tradition of Enoch. Jesus, Peter, John, Paul, James, Luke, and Jude all have quotes from it throughout the New Testament. This usage solidifies the Jewish tradition from Noah's teachings, who is from the lineage of Enoch. And in these teachings, Enoch describes the War in Heaven.

Don't forget, Abraham (Shem) is Noah's great grandson, who is Enoch's great grandson.

So Heirs and Joint-Heirs come from Enoch through Abraham.

It's why the Jews kept the Oral Traditions of Enoch including Jesus Himself quoting them. It's a Family/Lineage treasure.

Right. I've already addressed this. Equating the book of Enoch to scripture = bad doctrine.

Abraham received the promises of the covenant between God and God. In Christ, we also receive those promises because they were secured by the payment of His own life.

Everything that was made was made through Christ. With wisdom, you can see His fingerprints on all of creation.

"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead..."

Answer my question, and I will answer yours.

It wasn't a bad doctrine when Jesus used it or Peter, John, Paul, James, and Jude...natural heirs. Also, if you don’t keep your eye on chicken and ducks they’ll cross-breed into chucks or dickens.

But to you, a joint-heir (adopted son) it is?

Furthermore, we know physical DNA does not prevent people from becoming the children of God. That reality is a spiritual change and then new bodies are given later. Even so, those who have been translated from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of God are "new creations". Since their bodies stay intact this, too, speaks of a spiritual transformation.

"Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new."

The incorporating the Enoch fables into scriptural truth leads to all kinds of bad doctrine.
Ironically, people who do so are more apt to believe that demons copulated with people to ruin God's plan when a much simpler explanation is apparent: the enemy created a book the contents of which have no business being included with scriptural knowledge.

It wasn't a bad doctrine when Jesus used it or Peter, John, Paul, James, and Jude...natural heirs.

Not demons. Fallen angels.

Apparently you don’t know the difference.

Oh my gosh, you're serious.

How embarrassing.

No need for you to be embarrassed son.

Most immature Christians mistake the two.

In a culture rich with oral traditions, quoting Enoch does not necessarily mean they were quoting the book of Enoch.

I believe they were because it's all documented in the Talmud, which I studied in Synagogue. The ancient Hebrews only had the words of Enoch and Noah passed them down along with the Flood Story until God gave Moses the Torah. Then they had the Torah, Enoch, Jasher, and many others. And the history of the Jews shows these traditions would have been alive and known in Jesus' day.

You have no convictions for teaching other fables, huh?

But if you knew that the understanding of the Jews was still in darkness concerning the wisdom of God why would you accept their explanation for anything?

Certainly not to non a Christian. As your profile says. You need the Gospel first.

Would you like me to deliver it you?

It wasn't darkened until Jesus.

“God gave them a spirit of stupor,
eyes that would not see
and ears that would not hear,
down to this very day.”