|
Post by Josh on Apr 26, 2007 17:53:27 GMT -8
Post your comments and questions on Numbers 13 and 14 as replies here.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 7, 2007 14:27:14 GMT -8
I wonder how often we desire to return to the bondage of our "old man" instead of responding to the call to do battle for our rightful spiritual territory?
Also, I think my 'favorite' part of this passage is how after the Israelites are told they will have to wander for 40 years because of their unbelief, they then, and only then, attempt to enter the promised land by their own strength, and are of course utterly defeated.
Man, that's so human.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 8, 2007 9:40:07 GMT -8
The fact that we are told here that Moses changes his right-hand-man Hoshea's name to Joshua (Yeshua- the Lord saves, the same name as Jesus) is powerful.
Joshua is a type of Christ- a military leader who will save his people from their curse by bringing them into the promised land. He is Moses' general, just as Jesus sat at the right hand of the Father.
Joshua= english Yeshua= hebrew Jesus= greek
|
|
|
Post by b on May 9, 2007 12:32:25 GMT -8
The theme of what is possible under our own power vs. what is possible under God's power leaps off the pages.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 13, 2007 17:06:17 GMT -8
Brian-
Thanks for the great teaching. Here were a couple specific points I gleaned:
1) "God's gifts (ie, the promised land or salvation) need more than passive acceptance- they must be actively fought for!"
2) God's forgiveness doesn't necessarily remove the consequences of our sinful choices (Numbers 20:21-22)
3) God is looking for "spies" that not only don't cower in the face of the enemy, but actually look forward to "giant hunting" (Joshua 14:10-15)
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 16, 2007 8:52:35 GMT -8
Brian gave me the go-ahead to post an email response of his to a question about the giants mentioned in Numbers:
I did some research to see what other Christians think about the giants, and everybody seems to be not real sure what it means.
Everybody does seem to agree that there were giant men in the time of Noah, and they were not following God. Those guys were then wiped out in the flood.
The Bible seems to imply that they were supernatural, maybe even half angel, half human. The old offspring of the "sons of God and daughters of men"thing. But everything else in the bible says that is not possible. And there are other explanations.
Hank Hanegraaf -The Bible Answer Man- gives a solid proof that the giants were not part angel on his website.
As for the guys that show up in numbers, my personal opinion is that they were huge, fierce men, and that the spies just assumed that they were the same as the giants that got wiped out in the flood.
Neither God or Moses said that they were giants, we have only the spies report, and the spies were frightened. If you were a 5 foot tall Hebrew guy wandering out of the desert, a 7 or 8 foot tall, muscular guy with a sword really would be a frightening giant.
And a few years later, the Bible talks about David killing the giant warrior Goliath. Again, Goliath was the biggest man anyone had ever seen, and a strong, brutal fighter. But David trusted God, and killed him with a rock to the head.
So in a nutshell, my opinion is that there were huge, mean warriors in Canaan. And they were so much bigger and stronger than any of the Hebrews that the only way they could get in was to rely on God. -- Brian
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 30, 2007 10:44:57 GMT -8
The Nephilim- offspring of the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" first mentioned in Genesis 6- are a bit of a puzzle indeed.
Though I tend to prefer a natural explanation when a supernatural one is not demanded, in this case I actually lean in the direction that the Nephilim were indeed the offspring of angels and men.
The main reason for this is that it is the plainest reading of Genesis 6- "sons of God" is a consistant term for angels in the OT. Also, just about every ancient mythological system has tales of illicit relations between demi-gods and men- it's clear to me that the author of Genesis is referring to the same thing, though with a different perspective-- namely that it was an evil thing done by fallen angels, not something to be celebrated.
There was a fair amount speculation about this stuff in the centuries after the Babylonian exile. A verse from the book of Jude (written by Jesus' half-brother) seems to reflect this way of reading Genesis 6:
Jude 1: 6-7 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.
It's weird, I know. This concept opens up a lot of further speculation regarding demonology and even the nature of demonic possession- some even believe the the demons that possess people are the disembodied spirits of the Nephilim- kind of second-class demons.
I won't speculate that far, just to say that although I respect a lot of what guys like Hanegraaf have to say, I think you have to jump through too many hoops to make the Nephelim out to be merely human.
But you bring up an interesting condundrum, Brian, because if the Flood destroyed the Nephilim, how is it that their descendents are said to be around as giants later on (Goliath, etc). You might be right that the connection between the two is just one of similarity and not direct descent.
But others say the reason that God authorized the wholesale slaughter of the Canaanites (and not other people groups) was that they were indeed renewed offspring of fallen angles and men.
While interesting, it seems a bit convenient (and a little scary) and far enough beyond the pale of what we can truly know that any theories about this are best held loosely, as you and I seem to both conclude.
|
|
aimee
Advanced Member
Posts: 136
|
Post by aimee on Jan 7, 2008 21:55:33 GMT -8
I am going to try to read the Bible through this year, through the NIV chronological Bible. It is a goal I may not make, but I'm o.k. with that and am going to give it a shot. Anyhow, when I went through this passage, a new little thought came to me. I wonder if some of the characters of Greek Mythos the 'gods' could have been based on Nephilim? It's an irrelevent thought, but it was interesting to think on. Stories of 'gods' based on real supernatural, sinful, entities. So, of course I really don't know one way or the other on Nephilim, but from the phraseology, and the way I read it they seem to be a bit more supernatural, and evil than a big human. It is kind of like the Leviathan, a mystery to some extent. They could have been a crocodlie or a whale, but the descriptions don't seem to quite fit. Could he be a relic of the dinosaur age? Job 41: 12 "I will not fail to speak of his limbs, his strength and his graceful form. 13 Who can strip off his outer coat? Who would approach him with a bridle? 14 Who dares open the doors of his mouth, ringed about with his fearsome teeth? 15 His back has rows of shields tightly sealed together;
16 each is so close to the next that no air can pass between.
17 They are joined fast to one another; they cling together and cannot be parted.
18 His snorting throws out flashes of light; his eyes are like the rays of dawn.
19 Firebrands stream from his mouth; sparks of fire shoot out.
20 Smoke pours from his nostrils as from a boiling pot over a fire of reeds.
21 His breath sets coals ablaze, and flames dart from his mouth.
22 Strength resides in his neck; dismay goes before him.
23 The folds of his flesh are tightly joined; they are firm and immovable.
24 His chest is hard as rock, hard as a lower millstone.
25 When he rises up, the mighty are terrified; they retreat before his thrashing.
26 The sword that reaches him has no effect, nor does the spear or the dart or the javelin.
27 Iron he treats like straw and bronze like rotten wood.
28 Arrows do not make him flee; slingstones are like chaff to him.
29 A club seems to him but a piece of straw; he laughs at the rattling of the lance.
30 His undersides are jagged potsherds, leaving a trail in the mud like a threshing sledge.
31 He makes the depths churn like a boiling caldron and stirs up the sea like a pot of ointment.
32 Behind him he leaves a glistening wake; one would think the deep had white hair.
33 Nothing on earth is his equal— a creature without fear.
34 He looks down on all that are haughty; he is king over all that are proud."
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jan 8, 2008 18:05:03 GMT -8
Aimee, That's really cool! Keep us posted with highlights! I'm working on adding all the books of the bible to this sub-forum so that anyone reading any book can share thoughts.
I would concur with the view that the Nephilim are the equivalent (from the Hebrew perspective) of ancient mythological gods, demigods, and heroes.
Genesis 6:4 backs this up tidily:
The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Sept 14, 2009 18:22:03 GMT -8
Yeshuafreak, what's your take on the Nephilim?
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Sept 15, 2009 11:14:00 GMT -8
actually:
hebrew: Yeshua Greek: iesous English: Joshua or Jesus
Wowo- a very deep topic.
there are a few theories and all of them are supportable:
the sons of God are those of Seth and the Dauhters of men ar e the daughters of Cain.
The sons of God are angels, and the daughters of men are humen women
the "mighty men of renown" describes the mighty "warrior Kings" of sumeria who were said to be "sons of God," like the emporer of rome was later. myth had it that they were sons of angels and women, making them the strong leader that they are. so they were given their own race: n'filim.
i support a combo of all of these views. there is another idea that cain was the offspring of satan (a fallen angel) - literally the "seed of the serpent" and that Abel was a pure offspring. the reason why cain's offspring was not accepted was becasue he was the son of a fallen angel. so he killed abel and carried on the line. later, seths daughters begot children with the sons of cain, a n'filim. there is often another interesting fact added to this theory: there was a sumerian tablet that stated that there warriar kings lived thousands of years old begore the "demiurge came and took them away." They could have lived thousands of years as n'filim and then died at the flood. proponents of this theory often point out that the reason why noach was aved is because he was "perfect in his generations"- in other words, his line was not polluted by the n'filim.
others say that the n'filim died and their spirits became demons.
there is an interesting article on one particular n'filim and the prophecy of gen "seed of the serpent" that i will be writing about soon. i will provide the link when finished.
but those are the theories- there are probably more that i cant think of currently.
shalom
|
|