Commenting on Gen 6:1-8:
Precisely the same three types of offenses committed by King Lamech are attributed to these figures: (1) Abuse of marriage. They collected in their royal harems "all that they chose" (v2). (2)…They filled the earth with violence (cf. vv5,11). (3) Blasphemous assumption of the name of deity. M. Kline, Genesis: A New Commentary (Hendrickson 2016), 31.
That's a striking comparison. If the parallel holds, that suggests the Nephilim in Gen 6 are human rather than demonic. They don't spawn demigods. And that would be consistent with the human identity of Nimrod, who's described in terms evocative of that account (Gen 10:8ff.).
However, Kline's comparison needs to be fleshed out a bit. He does that somewhat in his comments on Lamech, in Gen 4:17-24 (p27).
That the Nephilim were polygamous or promiscuous is not explicit, although that's a typical M.O. of ancient pagan rulers (e.g. Gilgamesh).
The violence motif is something they share in common with Lamech. The theme of blasphemy is more oblique.
On the one hand, Kline is alluding to the fact that God mandated sevenfold retribution for anyone who assaulted Cain, whereas Lamech insolently abrogates that standard and multiplies it exponentially (seventy-seven times) in reference to his own sacrosanct person. There is a kind of deific hubris in that action.
By itself, "sons of God" (or sons of gods) may not be blasphemous, but in the pagan-flavored context of Gen 6:1-8, it may well suggest heathen rulers who adopt an idolatrous royal mythology of divine pedigree (kings as demigods). There are intriguing parallels with the thought-world of the Gilgamesh Epic and the Sumerian King List, reflecting the degenerate attitude of the Nephilim and the warrior culture they inaugurate.
Kline defends his thesis in more detail in an early article, although his argument hasn't commanded widespread scholarly assent:
No comments:
Post a Comment