Nephilim?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Consistent

Puritan Board Freshman
Hey all-

I am a moderator on Theology Cafe and had a user ask me about this. I am very encouraged by this discussion, thank you.

I asked a friend of mine at Westminster about this and he said that it is significant to understand that Genesis 1-4 is a prologue to Torah and Torah is a prologue to the historicals and the prophets. He also believes that Genesis was written during a time that Israel needed to be reminded of who they are, and the author has this intent in mind.

Is it at all significant that Israel given to gentile women, fell into idolatry and fell into judgment, and God in Gen.6 looks upon the acts of the Nephilim and condemns the earth? Is their a parallel here?

What are your thoughts...I am seeking advice.

In Christ-

John
 

Robin

Puritan Board Junior
Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
It's really clear in context of Genesis 4-6 that the 'sons of God' were the believers in God and their descendants and families after them. They were in covenant with God. When they married daughters of men, or the ungodly (those not in covenant with God), they sinned and polluted God's gracious covenant community. Thus, the flood, as Noah was seen to be the last of God's elect left on the earth at this time as a result of so much covenant breaking and inter-marriage with the pagans.

Not very titillating, Gabe....boring....uninteresting...uncontroversial....but Biblical and considers the context of the whole of the Text!

I hope your post won't be overlooked.....even though, it's boring...

Robin :cool:
 

Bladestunner316

Puritan Board Doctor
Its not a matter of fancy Robin its a matter of truth though it may be shunned for whatever reason angels did cohabitate with woman and they gave birth to the nephilim which are the descendnts of Goliath.

If the above you qouted is true then prove why men grew to such extroidinary heights? If I had sex with an unbeleiver and had child would that kid be 15 feet tall?

Blade
 

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
It is not angels. Gabriel is right. It is ridiculous and fanciful Jewish fables to believe in some kind of interspecies (really more than that) procreation, especially when one of the species is non-material.

Kevin Carroll did some excellent woirk on this passage last year. Perhaps he will share it with us.
 

Bladestunner316

Puritan Board Doctor
Sorry Fred-Robin,
Im going to spend time on this when availbale and write on it ante-dilluvian is my favorite subject. Basically both me and augusta vs fred-gabriel-robin are much like the early church in respect to this we agree to disagree. The early church divided on this passage on whether it was seth's line or angels. The outcome in general was the same a Flood. So Im going to refrain from this discussion respectfully.

Blade
 

Robin

Puritan Board Junior
Originally posted by Bladestunner316
Those same jewish fables are the ones that tell of creation? should we ignore that too? Still didnt answer my question.

Blade, with all due respect....can you spell "Kabbalah"?

R.
 

Bladestunner316

Puritan Board Doctor
Please dont start with me. Do some research. You would be suprised here I will help you LINK.

You disrespect yourself by not providing any material to back your claim.

So should I toss out the bible because pagans have distorted its truth? I guess the flood is to much to grasp because there are SO many references to it from non-jewish-christian sources?

What about the virgin birth? because its 'allegedly' borrowed from paganism?

Man we sure can except so many xfilish type things from the bible but this man sure is pushing it even though church fathers and historians believed it?

I guess we should de-canonized Jude while were at it since he quotes enoch seven as a Prophet and his words as Scripture(allthough that is debated amongst the church).

In Christ,
Blade

P.S. Please when I say Im respectfully bowing out dont tempt me to get back into this. I hope this is enough to appease you. For now Im through. And if you mean no disrespect then respect my request. Im done discussing for now I will let the board know when I want to talk about this. I felt your candid remark need a response.

[Edited on 5-22-2005 by Bladestunner316]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top