Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
98 online now:
dwise1, PaulK, Tanypteryx (3 members, 95 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,045 Year: 5,157/6,534 Month: 0/577 Week: 68/135 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   NEPHILIM mYsteries
Member (Idle past 617 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Message 114 of 134 (316457)
05-31-2006 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by simple
05-29-2006 11:21 PM

The angels married women, so again, what was so wrong?

yes, good eye. but again: the connection between the angels marrying human women and the flood is nonexistant in genesis. it never once said that there was anything wrong with it.

Call it what you like. They had no marriage papers.

not what *i* like, what the bible says:

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

the story is the reason men and women get married. i've even heard this verse read at a wedding. the very next verse says:

And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

the bible calls adam and eve "man and wife." it does so again in genesis 3:

Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife...

Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

i think it's fairly safe to say they were married.

they ate from a tree called "knowledge" and in biblical hebrew, "to know" is a euphemism for sex. they were kicked out of the garden for it.

(i don't personally hold this belief, but i know some people read it that way)

A common misconception, I know. I have heard it lots. Mostly from churches that think sex is sin in some sad way, or evil.

it's only a misconception because it can be read that way. לָדַעַת (ladat, or yada- conjugated) can be read as "to know" as in knowledge, or "to have sexual intercourse" as a common euphemism. i won't quote very many verses to demonstrate this; i'm sure you can find a ton. but here's one to further illustrate my above point:

וְהָאָדָם, יָדַע אֶת-חַוָּה אִשְׁתּוֹ

v'ha-adam yada et-chavah ishto

and-the-man knew (d.o.)-chavah woman(his)

and the man "had sex with" "eve", his wife

True. But their shortcomings are usually not sex. David did more than boff the girl, he had her husband killed.

yes, also true. like i said, god rarely punishes sex alone. even in a rather prominent case of god killing someone for a sex-related sin:

Gen 38:9-10 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

god kills onan because wasn't fulfilling his family duty, not because of the sexual issue.

Female male sex was not the issue, forced or not. We know what the daughters did was wrong. Not as wrong as men with men.

now, this is another common misconception. (actually, maybe even the one before it, too)

Gen 19:4-5 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, "Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them."

the bolded word, "men," is הָאֲנָשִׁים, ha-anashim. now this is a peculiar quirk of hebrew, but we happen to have carried this over to english quite literally.

in hebrew, feminine singular nouns tend to end in a heh ה or tav ת. everything else tends to be masculine. feminine plurals tend to in -ot ות and masculine plurals tend to end in -im ים.

the word for man is 'ish: איש
so the the word for woman is 'ishah: אישה

now, the plurals for men and women are weird. this isn't important to the point, but just recognize that these are abnormal plurals.

a group of all men is anashim: אנשים
a group of all women is nashim: נשים

(instead of ishim and ishot. i'm not sure WHY, that's just how it is). now here's the important part. what if we have a group of both males and females? or if we don't know the gender of the group?. gender reverts to the masculine plural.

so a group of both men and women, or indeterminant gender, is anashim: אנשים. our bolded word above.

that means that there is no way to tell that it was a group of all men on this word alone. it also means that the citizens of sodom probably didn't know the gender of lot's visitors. but even more importantly, genesis 19:4 has this phrase:

כָּל-הָעָם, מִקָּצֶה

kol-ha-am m'qatzeh

all-the-nation from-border

or, "all the people for area." the word specifically refers to the people as a whole, including the women. so even presuming that the "yada" in this passage means sex, there is still very little way to read this passage as about butt-sex.

rather, it's about treatment of guests. sodom was destroyed inhospitality, or even trying to rape visitors, if you like.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by simple, posted 05-29-2006 11:21 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by simple, posted 05-31-2006 12:42 AM arachnophilia has replied

Member (Idle past 617 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Message 116 of 134 (316487)
05-31-2006 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by simple
05-31-2006 12:42 AM

Of course they were. It was sex, and agreement to God, not some church that made it so.

if that should say "agreement OF god" then i agree with half of it. i'm not sure that sex defines marriage. (quite the opposite, if you ask married couples...)

Kind of like having phone sex with the devil. they listened to him. That was a crime.

yes, the sin was listening to the snake instead of obeying god.

He wasted the seed, I think, was the bad thing.

no, read it again. onan's brother died, and it was his duty to father an heir for his brother's line. (this much is explained by the bible.) because he knew that his child would not be his, he pulled out. enjoyed the sex, without following through on his duty.

it has nothing to do with waste.

Well, women can be lesbians too.

genesis 19 is specifies no gender. it is not about which gender was having sex with which gender. it was about rape and inhospitality.

But men with men seems particularly abhorant to God. No use argueing this.

leviticus particularly calls it an abomination. also included as abominations are graven images, eagles (our national graven image), crustaceans (red lobster), and pigs (ham and cheese on unlevened bread is right out).

The new testament clinches the deal here.

and the new testament seems to be referring to a particular KIND of homosexuality, pederasty, which was common in the greek-speaking world. (in fact, apparently every instance of the word paul uses in other greek literature refers to such relationships).

i think we can ALL agree that pederasty is icky, as are all other forms of child molestation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by simple, posted 05-31-2006 12:42 AM simple has taken no action

Member (Idle past 617 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Message 118 of 134 (316635)
05-31-2006 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by John Williams
05-31-2006 3:23 AM

Re: The Nephilim were Giants?
It is known that the name, 'Rpum', has been found in the Ras Shamra tablets of Ugarit which dated to the 1200's bc. These were warrior gods who traveled by chariot to attend feasts of El in Syria.

that is very interesting and helpful information.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by John Williams, posted 05-31-2006 3:23 AM John Williams has taken no action

Member (Idle past 617 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Message 123 of 134 (324699)
06-22-2006 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by John Williams
06-22-2006 1:48 AM

math nitpick
Yes, most ancient Semitic male skeletons excavated in Palestine have generally ranged from 5'3 to 5'7 ... This makes an average of 5'5.

no it doesn't. the average would depend on distribution within that general range.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by John Williams, posted 06-22-2006 1:48 AM John Williams has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by lfen, posted 06-22-2006 4:12 AM arachnophilia has taken no action
 Message 125 by John Williams, posted 06-22-2006 11:04 PM arachnophilia has taken no action

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022