 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > The Nephilim | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
archive
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516
| Posted 6/28/2001 1:02 PM (GMT -6) |   |
Mr_Squirrel
05/07/01 8:57 PM
The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them. These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown." Genesis 6:4 NRSV
I've heard that the "sons of God" refer to angels and that the Nephilim were meta-humans, somewhere between humans and angels, that are the possible origin for the creatures in mythology. Like the titans, and Hercules and such. Is this widely accepted among the Christian community, or is this also a myth?
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
glamdring777
05/07/01 10:40 PM
RE: The Nephi who?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I shouldn't think the idea of the nephilim being the precursors to the greek gods would be a widely accepted idea in Christianity, you can't even get anyone to talk about the nephilim as you can see by the overwhelming response to this post. ha.
I appreciated the fact that Boyd didn't ignore the nephilim in his book God at war. cool.
There are still tribes on earth today that believe that some of their women get pregnant by spirits, however the offspring are spirutal not physical. hmmmm
sorry I don't have more knowledge in this area. But at least I responded.
be blessed
glam
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
writerdad
05/08/01 12:19 AM
RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I've read on the subject, it would not be a viewpoint held by many in the Christian community. Most scholars take the position either that they were simply large men that were physically suprerior because it was pre-flood days, or that they are not sure. Doc's viewpoint is definitely in the minority. Most scholars believe it is impossible for humans and angels, which are non physical beings to have off-spring. John 17:3 Harold
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
05/08/01 11:08 AM
RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I vote myth.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
glamdring777
05/08/01 1:45 PM
RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Dubya D that sounded so much more official.
I think many scholars find a lot of things to be impossible.
I'm with Modes. St George's granddaddy may have conquorered
velociraptors.
glamdring
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
badlejeune
05/08/01 5:24 PM
RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only other occurance of the phrase "sons of God" in the OT is at the beginning of Job, and there is seems to mean "angels."
1:6 Now the day came when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD--and Satan also came among them.
Also, apparently we entertain angels an are not aware of it (Hebrews)and if that is true then they must appear as humans. Not sure about the ramifications of all this. The flood happens next in Genesis, so they all die anyway.
lejeune out
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
GregBoyd
05/08/01 9:20 PM
RE: RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the story of the Nephilim is myth, is the flood story as a whole myth? Was Jesus mistaken when he referred to Noah as a historical person? Indeed, if the Gospels are at all historically reliable, we know that Jesus held the standard Jewish view of the Old Testament as inspired and historical (as evidenced, for example, by his reference to Noah). If Jesus was wrong about this -- hardly an incidental matter -- can we affirm that he was the Son of God? Could he have been mistaken about his self-identity?
I think we need to be careful dismissing stuff as myth too quickly if our only grounds for doing so is that the story strikes us westerners as "too wierd."
The traditional interpretation of the Nephilim is that they were indeed mutant hypbrids from the unnatural impregnation of women by spirits. Stories of this sort of horror are found in various cultures -- and yet today. It's fascinating also how widespread are the stories about "giants" (often half divine) in the days of old -- often resulting from divine/human relations.
As an aside, it's a little known [and utterly bizzare] fact that high ranking Nazis [who were deeply emeshed in the occult] embraced a version of this story that put a positive spin on the Nephilim. According to this version the Nephilim were half-gods who inhabited Atlantas. They destroyed themselves by interbreeding with ordinary humans. The Germanic people, the Nazis believed, were heirs of this divine legacy -- a superior race -- which would be manifested if only the "mixed" breeding would stop. They spend a good deal of time and money trying to prove this version was historical (I've read Hess actually sent an expedition to Tibet to recover some artifacts in an attempt to prove this).
BIZZARE.
Doc
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
badlejeune
05/08/01 9:54 PM
RE: RE: RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just an aside:
I'm wondering how Jesus speaking of Noah or Paul speaking of Adam prove that they thought of these characters as being historical. Isn't it possible to use a mythical character to make a point? Do we know for certain that all second temple Jews took these stories literally? Now I believe in Adam and in Noah, but I wonder about stuff like the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. At that point it starts to sound like a parable.
anyway
lejeune
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
glamdring777
05/09/01 12:10 AM
RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
oops. I'm not with modes after all. He said 'I vote for myth'.
I misunderstood what he meant. I should have printed it out and
taken my time in thoughtfully reading it over as Mephi suggests.
What I was trying to say is that I do believe that the Nephilim existed. We have legends about dragon slaying and scientific evidence that dinosaurs existed. So I think before the flood came and drowned all the prehistoric beasts men got to slay a few themselves, ergo the legends. The story of creation may not be literal but it's full of truth. That truth was taken by the surrounding pagans fit to their belief systems and passed down. Their mythic, legendary accounts of creation are the result. I don't think it's too big a stretch to think that portions of the sagas of the greek gods were exaggerated tales from the exploits of the Nephilim. Great question Squirrel.
Glamdring
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
05/09/01 7:58 AM
RE: RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You wager much credibility on a single verse with many alternate interpretive possibilities. Why assume that the "sons of God" are angels?
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Mephi2K
05/09/01 8:16 AM
Uh, Oh...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, the slippery slope of "biblical truth". You deny ONE thing being true, where do you stop? Right, Doc? And Modes, I really don't think there's THAT many alternative possiblities, given 1) the context and 2) the few other OT usages of the phrase and 3) etymological study (from Nephal (fallen ones) What are the alternatives that you propose, Modes?
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
05/09/01 10:02 AM
RE: Uh, Oh...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm...
I'll go with Philo, Augustine and Cyril of Jerusalem and say that they where either the descendants of Seth or another "righteous" tribe and the "daughters of men" may have been decendents of Cain. But so little is at stake here that I will not spend much time on it.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
glamdring777
05/09/01 11:23 PM
Oh Yeah
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look who turned conservative. Name dropper.
Why would you assume they were righteous?
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
05/10/01 8:42 AM
To all:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay people, last one on this for me:
Glam,
I have not changed my position, just clarified it:
The stories about angels cross-breeding with humans I do regard as myth or legendary...the Bible does not teach that this is clearly the case, rather people let their imaginations run with these texts by assuming that the clause "sons of God" must mean angels.
Doc, of course you know you overstate the matter when you say THE TRADITION as though there was a unanimous vote on this at one point! As I said, I will agree with the TRADITION which views this story as grounded in the relations had between two people groups, one regarded by this narrator as obedient to God the other not, as per Philo, Augustine, and Cyril not to mention the many contemporary scholars who agree...shall we not include these people in THE TRADITION of Biblical interpretation?
Does this mean that I discount all stories which challenge my oh-so-unchecked western assumptions? Of course not. I could turn the question back on you and ask you whether you thought the flood was COMPLETELY GLOBAL or merely localized... This would be to recognize a bit of critique of the text on your part as well, would it not?
BTW#1: God did not destroy the world because of the Nephilim! It was rather because every imagination of the human heart was and is evil. See Gen. 6:5, it speaks of the wickedness of humankind!! And it is reiterated in 9:21.
BTW#2: What about the assertion/implication of the Jesus that angels seem to be asexual (Matt. 22:30)? People, this is not an open/shut case of crystal clarity...
It may be that the Nephilim were these "Bizzare" creatures which you all seem to want to say, but who will demonstrate that this is so? How will it help you in witnessing to others? How does this support the proclamation of the Gospel today? In short WHO CARES??!! We are talking about a hapax occurance or at least very nearly so.
The responsible position, IMHO, on this text, is to admit the ambiguity of the text, and hold very tentatively to whatever conclusions you might draw on it, exegetically. Furthermore, REFRAIN from drawing on it by way of inference/implication/application, due to its opacity. To run with certainty in the directions some seem inclined to run in, based on the sort of exegesis I have seen so far, is very nearly tantamount to "telling lies about the Bible," as a great prof. of mine was fond of saying. It is at least a bit foolhardy. Be discerning about what you dwell on for the sake of the many who may read these posts and wonder what sorts of important things Christians spend their time on...
Pot shots that should probably not be posted:
1. Next lets argue about whether or not we should baptize for the dead. That will kill some brain cells and keep us distracted for a while!
2. Somebody show me bones of a human/angel cross-breed and I will reopen this one in my mind...Particularly if doc is right and there are so many myths (from other cultures), which appearantly he wants us to take at face value as well, which "confirm" this particular reading of this passage. There ought to be one around by now, wouldn't you say?
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
nina41
05/10/01 1:42 PM
RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It could be that such an abnormality of human traits could not be explained because the lack of scientific knowledge. There is a disease known as "acromegaly" which affects growth hormone production. In the pituitary gland the growth hormone somatotropin is produced, if an excessive amount is released after puberty abnormalities will occur. Such abnormalities include increased height, weight and muscle mass. So my friends the Nephilim could have just been humans with a medical problem undefinable in that era.
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ModesofThought
05/11/01 8:21 AM
RE: RE: The Nephilim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nina41 suggests:
"It could be that such an abnormality of human traits could not be explained because the lack of scientific knowledge."
Yes, it certainly could be! It seems a more lucid proposal than some I have heard.
| | Back to Top | | |
 | Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 10:53 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|