The Soteriological Status of the Nephilim?

TryingToLearn

TryingToLearn

Puritan Board Freshman
I was just thinking about this today; I understand there's different views on who the Nephilim are (I personally think Genesis intends to say that while the Nephilim were giants, not all giants were conceived by demons), nevertheless, most will accept that Genesis does say that at least some demons fathered human children. My question is, has anyone ever thought of the implications of this upon the soteriological status of the Nephilim? Since they weren't conceived by human fathers (like Jesus), wouldn't they have no original sin and not be considered to be under the covenant of works (thought some think they possessed male bodies in order to do this, so if so I guess that wouldn't count)? Could any Nephilim even be saved? I understand these are speculative questions that we probably won't know the answers to until Heaven, but I was wondering if anyone's ever thought through this?
 
There are two different lines of thought on this:

1) It appears on some readings that Joshua's invasions targeted cities that were largely controlled by the Nephilim. I'm not ready to throw my weight behind that. If it is true, then Rahab might have had 1/4 Nephilim blood.

2) Intertestamental thought (up to Josephus and Origen) held that demons were the disembodied spirits of dead Nephilim.

I don't say "demons" fathered children, since the text doesn't say that. It says "sons of God," what the literature at the time understood to be Fallen Watchers.

I'm only answering your question. I'm not (at least not at this point) advancing my own thesis. In a bit I will point you to the leading literature on the topic.
 
Whatever they were, they all drowned. That may say something about their salvation status. I've heard people say that Jesus wasn't conceived from a human father because that's were we get original sin from. But I don't know about that. The chalcedonian creed is excellent and helpful. However, the birth of Christ is still very misterious and better to be left with the creed in fear of speculation and heresy.
 
Romans830 said:
Whatever they were, they all drowned. That may say something about their salvation status. I've heard people say that Jesus wasn't conceived from a human father because that's were we get original sin from. But I don't know about that. The chalcedonian creed is excellent and helpful. However, the birth of Christ is still very misterious and better to be left with the creed in fear of speculation and heresy.
Click to expand...

They were not all drowned. Joshua, Judges, and par of Samuel indicate that they survived and fought against Israel. Israel was scared to enter the promise land the first time because "the descendants of the Nephilim were there."
 
Tom Hart said:
You're sure you're reading that right? Remember who is saying this and why. (Numbers 13)
Click to expand...

I'm reading it correctly, since Moses reaffirms that in Deut. 2:10ff (and the Emim, Anakim, Rephaim are all related to the Nephilim). The Amorites are described as really tall (Amos 2:9).

The Giant clans are all related back to the Nephililm through the Anakim/Rephaim. We are specifically told that King Og was the last descendant of the Rephaim (Deut. 3:11; Josh. 12.4).

And of course, there is Goliath and the other giant clans who were exterminated by David's mighty men. My take is that what we call the Nephilim were likely wiped out, not in the flood, but in David's lifetime.
 
How did the Nephilim survive the flood?

My guess is that they didn't, but they "re-emerged" again some time after Noah. Genetic mutations? Perhaps.

Genesis is clear that every living thing on Earth was wiped out by the flood, except the inhabitants of the Ark.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
They were not all drowned. Joshua, Judges, and par of Samuel indicate that they survived and fought against Israel. Israel was scared to enter the promise land the first time because "the descendants of the Nephilim were there."
Click to expand...
You mean survived the flood? Genesis and St. Peter say otherwise....
 
SeanPatrickCornell said:
How did the Nephilim survive the flood?

My guess is that they didn't, but they "re-emerged" again some time after Noah. Genetic mutations? Perhaps.

Genesis is clear that every living thing on Earth was wiped out by the flood, except the inhabitants of the Ark.
Click to expand...

Both propositions can be logically true. Mutations via genetic splicing by the archons/kosmokratoras. That could be the phenomena behind "alien abduction/Deep State experiments."
 
Romans830 said:
8 people survived. Peter under the inspiration of the HS says so:)
Click to expand...

Sure. I'm just taking the entirety of Scripture into account.

There is a key verse in Gen 6:4: and also afterwards.

2 Peter says the angels/Watchers who sinned were chained in gloomy darkness. That says nothing about the giant offspring.

2 Samuel 21:18​

After this there was again war with the Philistines at Gob. Then Sibbecai the Hushathite struck down Saph, who was one of the descendants of the giants.

Deuteronomy 2:11​

Like the Anakim they are also counted as Rephaim, but the Moabites call them Emim.

2 Samuel 21:16​

And Ishbi-benob, one of the descendants of the giants, whose spear weighed three hundred shekels of bronze, and who was armed with a new sword, thought to kill David.

Deuteronomy 9:2​

A people great and tall, the sons of the Anakim, whom you know, and of whom you have heard it said, ‘Who can stand before the sons of Anak?’

In the above passage, Moses himself verifies the report in Numbers 13, which means we can take the Numbers 13 report at face-value.

Joshua 14:15​

Now the name of Hebron formerly was Kiriath-arba. (Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim.) And the land had rest from war.

Joshua 11:22​

There was none of the Anakim left in the land of the people of Israel. Only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod did some remain.
 
"to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built In it only a few people, eight in all were saved through water" 1 Peter 3:20

It's ok to be wrong:)
 
Romans830 said:
"to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built In it only a few people, eight in all were saved through water" 1 Peter 3:20

It's ok to be wrong:)
Click to expand...

I never denied that. In fact, I more or less agreed with it in #10. True, in #4 I did say not all of them were drowned. I realize the tension. I'm simply quoting all of the relevant data.
 
I think the reason you're talking past each other on this thread is the misconception stated in the OP that "most will accept that Genesis does say that at least some demons fathered human children." Most don't accept that, because Genesis says no such thing. Some do believe that, and those of us who have been reading the board for a while know that includes Jacob (though he may quibble at using the word demons), but I'd imagine it's a fringe viewpoint, at least in Reformed circles.

(Edit: I see, after having read too fast, the Jacob clarified his view in post #2)

I don't really see why it's a problem to believe that there were giants in the earth before the flood, and also after the flood. Those before the flood were of course wiped out by the flood, and there were others after (clearly not descended from those before). The hang-up some people have of insisting that the giants were man-demon hybrids is what causes the confusion about how there came to still be giants after the flood. Genesis 6:4 clearly states that the giants were men.
 
Last edited:
Scottish Presbyterian said:
I think the reason you're talking past each other on this thread is the misconception stated in the OP that "most will accept that Genesis does say that at least some demons fathered human children." Most don't accept that, because Genesis says no such thing. Some do believe that, and those of us who have been reading the board for a while know that includes Jacob (though he may quibble at using the word demons), but I'd imagine it's a fringe viewpoint, at least in Reformed circles.

(Edit: I see, after having read too fast, the Jacob clarified his view in post #2)

I don't really see why it's a problem to believe that there were giants in the earth before the flood, and also after the flood. Those before the flood were of course wiped out by the flood, and there were others after (clearly not descended from those before). The hang-up some people have of insisting that the giants were man-demon hybrids is what causes the confusion about how there came to still be giants after the flood. Genesis 6:4 clearly states that the giants were men.
Click to expand...
Point of clarification: I don’t believe the beney ha Elohim were demons. A demon is just an unclean spirit
 
Scottish Presbyterian said:
I think the reason you're talking past each other on this thread is the misconception stated in the OP that "most will accept that Genesis does say that at least some demons fathered human children." Most don't accept that, because Genesis says no such thing. Some do believe that, and those of us who have been reading the board for a while know that includes Jacob (though he may quibble at using the word demons), but I'd imagine it's a fringe viewpoint, at least in Reformed circles.

(Edit: I see, after having read too fast, the Jacob clarified his view in post #2)

I don't really see why it's a problem to believe that there were giants in the earth before the flood, and also after the flood. Those before the flood were of course wiped out by the flood, and there were others after (clearly not descended from those before). The hang-up some people have of insisting that the giants were man-demon hybrids is what causes the confusion about how there came to still be giants after the flood. Genesis 6:4 clearly states that the giants were men.
Click to expand...
The original question was about the status of their Salvation. I said they all drowned so that may show it.
 
My goal is to introduce people to the relevant literature on the topic. All of it is peer-reviewed and has passed muster at the highest of academic levels. I would rather people work through the literature than repeat what they believe their tradition says.

Reicke, Bo. Disobedient Spirits and Christian Baptism: A Study of 1 Peter 3:19 and Its Context (Acta Seminarii neotestamentici Upsaliensis 13; Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard, 1946; reprinted by Wipf and Stock, 2005).

Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Leiden; Boston; Köln; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999). I know, it's from Brill. Nothing we can do about that.

Guy Williams, The Spirit World in the Letters of Paul the Apostle: A Critical Examination of the Role of Spiritual Beings in the Authentic Pauline Epistles (FRLANT 231; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009)

Ronn Johnson, “The Old Testament Background for Paul’s Principalities and Powers,” (PhD Dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 2004)

David E. Stevens, “Daniel 10 and the Notion of Territorial Spirits,” BibSac 157 (2000): 410-431

Clinton E. Arnold, “Returning to the domain of the powers: Stoicheia as evil spirits in Galatians 4: 3, 9,” Novum Testamentum 38, no. 1 (1996): 55-76

John C. Collins, “Watcher,” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2nd ed. (ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst; Grand Rapids, MI; Eerdmans, 1999)

Richard J. Bauckham, 2 Peter, Jude (Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word, 1998). MUST READ

Amar Annus, “On the Origin of the Watchers: A Comparative Study of the Antediluvian Wisdom in Mesopotamian and Jewish Traditions,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha19.4 (2010): 277–320. This is the most important article written on the topic.
 
Question: If demons are the spirits of the dead Nephilim, then how did Papua get so many evil spirits? Do they cross land and see to conquer new lands?
 
BayouHuguenot said:
I'm reading it correctly, since Moses reaffirms that in Deut. 2:10ff (and the Emim, Anakim, Rephaim are all related to the Nephilim).
Click to expand...
Please demonstrate how the Emim, Anakim and Rephaim are "related to the Nephilim."
BayouHuguenot said:
The Amorites are described as really tall (Amos 2:9).
Click to expand...
So...?
BayouHuguenot said:
My take is that what we call the Nephilim were likely wiped out, not in the flood, but in David's lifetime.
Click to expand...
How did they survive the flood? That seems to me a slight hurdle in your theory.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
My goal is to introduce people to the relevant literature on the topic. All of it is peer-reviewed and has passed muster at the highest of academic levels. I would rather people work through the literature than repeat what they believe their tradition says.
Click to expand...

I'm not anti-intellectual, far from it. I do think though when it comes to theology and interpretation of Scripture, being peer-reviewed and passing muster at the highest of academic levels are vastly overrated credentials.
 
Scottish Presbyterian said:
I'm not anti-intellectual, far from it. I do think though when it comes to theology and interpretation of Scripture, being peer-reviewed and passing muster at the highest of academic levels are vastly overrated credentials.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but these guys are working with the languages, the texts, thought-patterns of the ancient world. Scripture didn't descend from heaven in a Platonic vacuum. Background studies are very important. Academic works are needed. There is a reason why G. K. Beale's commentary on Revelation is superior to mere "sermonic/application" commentaries on Revelation.
 
Last edited:
The texts I've quoted connect the Anakim with the Nephilim. Numbers 13. It doesn't matter that the sinful Israelites quoted it, since Moses verified their report in Deut. 1-3

As to surviving the flood. That's literally what the text says. Genesis 6:4 says they were on the world afterwards as well.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
The texts I've quoted connect the Anakim with the Nephilim. Numbers 13. It doesn't matter that the sinful Israelites quoted it, since Moses verified their report in Deut. 1-3

As to surviving the flood. That's literally what the text says. Genesis 6:4 says they were on the world afterwards as well.
Click to expand...
BH,

Not sure why you keep qouting genesis 6:4. That verse is before the flood. Genesis 7 says everything on earth died during the flood. Peter confirms that. You're contradicting yourself for no reason.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top