Nephilim (Genesis 6.4) - patristic commentary requested

[Father David Moser]

I have been asked about the meaning of the reference to "Nephilim" in Genesis (which was just read this week)


Genesis 6:4 "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days,
and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the
daughters of men, and they bore children to them."

Is there any patristic commentary on who the Nephilim were and how we are to understand this reference?

Fr David Moser

[John Charmley]

Dear Fr. David,

I am unsure whether a Coptic Orthodox commentary would be quite what you are looking for, but since the one I have is consonant with a Roman Catholic one I have, it might at least prompt someone to provide us both with an Eastern Orthodox one!

Fr. Tadros E. Malaty writes:



The word ‘Angelos’ in Greek, means a (messenger); So the word ‘Angels’ here, may refer to the (Ministers of God); as though the Sons of God or His Ministers got preoccupied with marriage to wicked women instead of preoccupation with the ministry to God ... [or it may also refer to] their fall, before the creation of man, into the sin of pride.

This expression came in the translation of ‘Aquila’ as (the sons of gods), which applies to believers, of whom was said: “I said ‘You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High’ ” (Psalm 92: 6). In other words, what the Holy Scripture referred to, either by angels or sons of gods, are the descendants of ‘Seth’, who were supposed to live like angels and ministers of God, inflamed with the divine fire of love, or like sons of God; but it happened that they were attracted to the wicked daughters of Cain, because of their beauty. Through that the righteous got yoked with the wicked, and all were corrupted; and there was need for a general renewal of the whole creation

It is to be noticed, that as man deviated to carnal lust, God called him “flesh”; or “body’ as in the Septaguint version. It is as though, with his carnal behavior, he became like a body with no Spirit; because the body with its lusts enslaves the Spirit as well, and leads it according to its ways. Concerning this, St. John Chrysostom says: [As those with the wings of the Spirit, make the body spiritual; so also those who deviate and become slaves to their bellies and their lusts, would make the soul carnal, not in the sense of its essence, but would corrupt its noble cause]. He also says: [Although they have souls, yet, as they became dead in them, He called them “flesh”; With a similar sense, the pious, although they have bodies, we say that they are (all souls) or (all Spirits)... The apostle Paul says about those who did not consummate the works of the flesh: “But you are not in the flesh” (Romans 8: 9); Whoever lives in luxury, is not living in soul nor in spirit, but in flesh].

Thus, as the sons of God preoccupied themselves with matters of the flesh, getting attached to the daughters of men, they turned into flesh and became non-spiritual. The fruit of that action was begetting (giant) children, who are fond of contemporary dignity, saying: “There were giants on the earth in those days ... Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown”
(Gen. 6: 4)

It is as though, every sin would drag on another; or as if man, delivering himself to weaknesses, would become a toy to sins, each throwing him to the other. The sons of God started by looking and admiring the carnal beauty of the sons of men; then they disregarded their spiritual mission, and turned to carnal thoughts; they became “body”, and begot violence, love of contemporary dignity, instead of the fruits of the Spirit, compassion, meekness and humility!

I hope that helps - even if only to get some more responses.

In Christ,

John

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

I have been asked about the meaning of the reference to "Nephilim" in Genesis (which was just read this week)



Is there any patristic commentary on who the Nephilim were and how we are to understand this reference?

Fr David Moser

Dear Fr,

If you can have a look at Genesis, Creation & Early Man by Fr Seraphim Rose read through ps. 243- 245.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Father Serafim]

I read that the Nephalim or the sons of God were spiritual men who abandoned their special calling to marry forbidden women i.e. like monks renouncing their vow of celibacy and marrying.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Irenaeus of Lyons speaks in surprising detail about the Nephalim. Perhaps the most important single quotation is:


"For unlawful unions occurred on earth, as angels united themselves with daughters of men, who bore them sons who, because of their exaggerated height, were called giants (cf. Gen 6.2-4). The angels then gave their wives, as gifts, wicked teachings, for they taught them the powers of roots and herbs, of dyeing and cosmetics, and the discovery of precious material, love-potions, hatreds, loves, infatuations, seductions, bonds of witchcraft, and all kinds of divination and idolatry hateful to God. When these entered the world, the things of wickedness overabounded, while those of righteousness decreased, until judgement came upon the world from God […]" (A demonstration of the apostolic preaching, 18, 19).

This text makes it quite clear that Irenaeus knew (well) the Book of Enoch, and that it influenced his reading of Genesis (this is clear also from various passages in his longer work, The detection and overthrow of knowledge falsely so-called).

Interestingly, Irenaeus ties the above actions of the Nephalim directly into the spread of the consequences of Adam and Eve's original sin to the whole of the world.

INXC, Matthew

[Paul Cowan]

Dear Matthew,


"For unlawful unions occurred on earth, as angels united themselves with daughters of men, who bore them sons who, because of their exaggerated height, were called giants (cf. Gen 6.2-4).

I am trying, but having difficulty reading this with a nonphysical slant. I can see how the angels (and I am assuming fallen angels) united with women in a sence they taught them "the dark side", but when you quoted

who bore them sons
Are you saying angels had physical union with women to produce offspring? If they are incorpreal and we are corpreal how do the two mingle?

If this happened in the past, why could it not still happen today? Why do the things of the past seem to not happen today? Perhaps that is a thread of it's own.

Forgive if I am seeing too much into this, but just don't want to remember the wrong thing when I repeat it to someone else. Thanks

Paul

[John Charmley]

Dear Paul,

Thus far I am sticking with the Coptic commentary, which does not require us to go down the road which is, I think, a little mind-boggling.

F.Serafim's comments go down the same road as the Coptic ones, and do, it seems to me, make perfect sense of the passage - as well as according with our own contemporary experiences. In that sense, what happened in the past still happens.

In Christ,

John

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

From the footnotes in the book Genesis, Creation & Early Man by Fr Seraphim Rose it appears that the tradition found in Enoch that the Nephalim were angels is followed by the Jewish writers Flavius Josephus and Philo of Alexandria as well as St Ireneaus of Lyons as Matthew points out.

There is however another tradition that the 'sons of God' are actually sons of Seth. Many other Frs follow this tradition- St John Chrysostom, St Ephraim the Syrian, St John Cassian, St Augustine, St Athanasius, St Cyril of Alexandria & St Gregory Palamas among others.

Both traditions are read in a similar way by the Holy Frs as a gradual unravelling, due to, as Matthew says, the effects of the sin of Adam & Eve.

It's striking that the Frs were so faithful to the OT text that they followed its ancient depiction of a gradual moral unravelling of mankind. Humanity has a primeval fall with Adam & Eve. But in a sense this is repeated a number of times- the slaying of Abel by Cain, the sons of Seth, the Flood, the Tower of Babylon and at other points.

At each point when these falls occur it is fundamental in the sense that it has universal effects and explains some flaw now characteristic of mankind's society. And these falls are progressively worse. In a sense many within the Church, the Frs included, still continue the same outlook by seeing history as a series of dispensations.

Looked at the other way around it's interesting how much of this is based on a longing for Paradise and a hope, despite appearances, that it really not only existed but actually corresponds to something still within man's deepest being. Thus the progressive falls explain how we got from Paradise to here. They also suggest that our longing for Paradise is not complete madness.

A nice thought for Great Lent.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Robert Hegwood]

This is one of those places that each explaination leaves as many questions as it answers.

If they were angels of some kind one wonders how such unions were actually possible, and what were the children of such unions soteriologically?

If they were the descendants of Seth then what is the point of a special place of confinement, "Tartarus" for their souls, why not just go where all other unrighteous souls went before Christ? Also since the text says this happens twice, once before and once after the flood how can the previous dynamic produced the same beings since Cain's descendants are gone? Does "Ham" become the new Cain or something?

The point about the plunge into wickedness on the part of humanity is the same in both though.

And I have the sneaking suspicion that whatver the historical reality recorded by this text was that the decline of man was the point of the story and wonderations and speculamentations on what was actually happening has the same value as the conversation of the old monks trying to find a definative interpretation about one of the finer points concerning Melchezidek? If I recall the story as shared...here on monachos somewhere I think...the elder they went to and asked to resolve the issue hit himself in the mouth and reproached himself for leaving prayer to attend to such trivialities. Sad to say his fine example aside...I still wonder though...just a little.

[Ken McRae]

"Are you saying angels had physical union with women to produce offspring? If they are incorpreal and we are corpreal how do the two mingle?"

From what I've understood, the Fathers taught that the fall of man radically
altered our physical anatomy, both externally and internally. Perhaps a similar
phenomena occurred to some of the angels when they fell, making it possible
for them to mingle with humans. At any rate, human science has reached a
point now where pro-creation can be performed in a pitre dish, or glass tube.
Genetic engineering is a reality, and if the Lord tarries long enough, where will
that science lead us in the future? The point is this: if the fallen angelic host
did, in fact, mingle themselves with humans, as St. Irenaeus states, it is not
impossible that they used some form of advanced technology, far superior to
what we have even today, to make it happen. God and man are united in one
man, the God-Man, so why is it impossible for angelic nature to be joined to
human nature? Food for Thought: Mischievous Angels or Sethites? (http://www.khouse.org/articles/1997/110/)

[Athanasius Abdullah]

Dear all,

A while ago, I sought to investigate the opinion of all the Fathers of the first four centuries who addressed the issue of the identity of the 'Sons of God'. Here were my results:

Were the Sons of God incorporeal Angels?

b. 100 - St Justin Martyr - YES
b. 115 - St Iraneous of Lyons - YES
b. 150 - St Clement of Alexandria - YES
b. 160 - Tertullian - YES
b. 133 - St. Athenagoras of Alexandria - YES
b. 240 – Lactantius – YES
b. 275 - Eusebius of Caesarea - YES
b. 306 - St Ephraim the Syrian - NO
b. 315 - St Hilary of Poitiers - YES
b. 340 - St Jerome - YES
b. 344 - St John Chrysostom - NO
b. 354 - St Augustine – NO
b. 360 – Sulpicius Severus - YES
b. 374 - St Ambrose – YES

That the 'sons of God' were Angels, is, I believe, further implied in Jude's epistle:


6And 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. 7In 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. 8In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings.

In XC
Athanasius

[Athanasios Walter]

I have been asked about the meaning of the reference to "Nephilim" in Genesis (which was just read this week)Before coming to Orthodoxy, I read a supposed translation of the book of Jasher, which means the book of the upright. Since I don't know what is the Orthodox position regarding this book, I can't speak for its authenticity.

I don't remember all, so I may be mistaken with some of the details. According to this book, the lineage from Adam to Noah is actually a line of rulers, of which Noah was one of them. Basically, Genesis 5 is a chronology of kings. And these rulers in the Mesopotamia region were referred to as sons of God by the people. And in the process of time, these princes became harsh, and began to take women from the common people, or wives from their husbands by force. This is what is meant by when the sons of God (princes) saw that the daughters of men (of the land) were fair and took them wives of all they chose. Much like Sodom and Gomorrah.

Then Noah (also a son of God, because he is in the lineage) is excepted from these other sons of God, because he did not take a wife until almost 500 years old, and then he only took one wife, and he found favor with God, because of this.

So according to this book, the Nephilims are nothing more than the children of whose fathers were princes and their mothers, wives stolen from their husbands.

Does this book make any sense? Is what is written there orthodox?

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

According to this page from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Jasher_(Pseudo-Jasher)), this Book of Jasher is a fraud for which the writer served time in jail in 1756.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Athanasios Walter]

Thank you Fr Raphael for your response.

Actually, that is not the version I got the information from. It is from the "Sefer haYashar (midrash)" printed in Hebrew in 1625. In the same link, Wikipedia says that this version, as oppose to the others, incorporates genuine Jewish legend. I have read there are other versions of the book of Jasher which are fraud, except this one. This is not my personal opinion, because I don't know, other than that this particular version is accepted by the Jews, I think.

CCEL has a copy on their site at http://www.ccel.org/a/anonymous/jasher/home.html
And the relevant passage regarding the topic is at http://www.ccel.org/a/anonymous/jasher/4.htm

But to be certain, the book of Jasher is not the point, only what it says regarding the topic. But, even if this particular version of the Jews is not Orthodox, then that obviously answers my question, and will have to dispose of it.

[Owen Jones]

Thanks to this thread for pointing out something I had not noticed, that man's material, spiritual and moral decline was not a once and for all event, but a progression. Interesting implications for our redemption.

[Andreas Moran]

I hope Richard Dawkins isn't reading this thread!

[John Charmley]

I hope Richard Dawkins isn't reading this thread!

Dear Andreas,

I rather hope - for the sake of the immortal soul he denies he has - that he is!

In Christ,

John

[Andreas Moran]

Well, John, you know what I meant. Such a topic wouldn't be a starting point for the dispelling of his delusion.

[RichardWorthington]

Is there any patristic commentary on who the Nephilim were and how we are to understand this reference?

Dear Fr David,

Does this post Sons of God, Daughters of men, and Giants of renown help? There is a possible patristic reference at the end!

Richard

[Michael Stickles]

Coming to this rather late, but while the positions of some Fathers were mentioned in earlier posts, there are few links, so I thought I'd add a few (note that I'm not certain of exactly what regard the Church has for a few of these):

Book of Enoch - Angels. See Chapters 6-7 of Book 1 (http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/ethiopian/enoch/1watchers/watchers.htm).
Julius Africanus - Angels. In a fragment of his Chronography (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.v.v.ii.html).
St. John Cassian - Sons of Seth. In Chapter 21 of his 8th Conference (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf211.iv.iv.ix.xxi.html).
St. Augustine - Sons of Seth. In Chapter 23 of Book 15 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.iv.XV.23.html) of The City of God.
Tertullian - Angels. In Chapter 7 of On the Veiling of Virgins (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iii.iv.vii.html).
Archelaus - Angels. In Chapter 32 of his disputation with Manes (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.vii.iii.xxxi.html).
St. Irenaeus - Angels. Inferred by how he references Enoch in Chapter 16 of Against Heresies (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.vi.xvii.html).
St. Justin Martyr - Angels. Chapter 5 of his Second Apology (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-secondapology.html).

I'll try to put up a few more later.

In Christ,
Michael

[Michael Stickles]

A few more links, noting what the interpretation is for the "sons of God". Same disclaimer as the last post. Also, some works linked as citing various Fathers are not Orthodox (or even Christian).

St. Clement of Alexandria - Angels. The Instructor, Book 3, Chapter 2 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iii.iii.ii.html) (near the bottom).

St. Ephrem the Syrian - Sons of Seth. Commentary on Genesis, 6.3.1 (not available online, cited in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (http://books.google.com/books?id=mw4uH4RIywEC&pg=PA124&lpg=PA124&dq=clement+alexandria+%22daughters+of+men%22&source=bl&ots=i76r1aCA00&sig=IYY5Lv1_dtp_NJEXRsPZmDCjiO4&hl=en&ei=5YSoSaH5MKHYMOfDyekC&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result)).

Nemesius of Emesa - Angels. On the Nature of Man, 58 (not available online, cited in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (http://books.google.com/books?id=mw4uH4RIywEC&pg=PA124&lpg=PA124&dq=clement+alexandria+%22daughters+of+men%22&source=bl&ots=i76r1aCA00&sig=IYY5Lv1_dtp_NJEXRsPZmDCjiO4&hl=en&ei=5YSoSaH5MKHYMOfDyekC&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result)).

St. John Chrysostom - Men, not angels (quote I found was not specific as to who they actually were). Homilies on Genesis, 5:136-7 (not online; cited in Gateway of the Gods (http://books.google.com/books?id=iFHOfvFtMwIC&pg=RA1-PA54&lpg=RA1-PA54&dq=chrysostom+angels&source=bl&ots=WxlCb-_yBB&sig=oPl0O8o3xsJoTKbNtHgptKfMDn8&hl=en&ei=54ioSdOFBZXoMIu_3LoC&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PRA1-PA54,M1)).

St. Cyril of Jerusalem - Sons of Enoch. No quote found; view claimed in God at War (http://books.google.com/books?id=Hj791_BeAF0C&pg=PA342&lpg=PA342&dq=cyril+jerusalem+%22daughters+of+men%22&source=bl&ots=usnN704GOx&sig=HQtaSYyEKkouOXpFRfK_J04TsGE&hl=en&ei=TI-oSZewA6WoM93-jOIC&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result).

Lactantius - Angels. Epitome of the Divine Institutes (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0702.htm), Chapter 27.

St. Methodius - Angels. Discourse on the Resurrection (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0625.htm), Part III, I.7.

[Sal Ferreira]

every time I have read Genesis 6:1 - 6:8, Man's Wickedness, in the Old Testament it has left me confused.
Can anyone offer clarification for this piece of Scripture.
Nerphilim are only mentioned in a couple of places with no explanation, other than their corruption is what led to the Great Flood and the salvation of Noah and his family.
Major quote lines:
"So when the son's of God saw the daughters of men were beautiful, they took wives for themselves of all they chose."
"Now there were giants(Nerphilim) on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them"

[Antonios]

I just read this article (http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/articles/205/genetics,-ufos-birth-antichrist/)and have added it to this thread. As has been discussed elsewhere in this forum, many believe the UFO phenomenons (which incidentally are becoming more and more numerous of late) are demonic manifestations. This view is also gaining ground by renowned ufologists. Some, as in the article I have linked to, have suggested there is a connection with the nephilim mentioned in Genesis 6 (as well as a couple of other areas in the bible). If one takes the earliest understandings of these creatures shared by the ancient Jewish scholars and the early Church (that they are indeed the product of fallen angels and humans), then it draws interesting inferences, especially in regards to end times prophecy.

Specifically in regards to this article, it is suggested that the advent of genetic engineering and the emergence of the antichrist are intrinsically linked. A relevant prophecy attributed to St. Seraphim of Sarov is this: "Jesus Christ, the true God-Man, the Son of God the Father, was born in Israel by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and the true Antichrist, the devil-man, will be born amidst the Russians. He will be the son of a fornicating woman of the tribe of Dan and the son of the devil through the artificial transfer to her of the seed of the man, with which the spirit of darkness will settle in her womb."

Does anyone know more about this particular prophecy of St. Seraphim? While the article mentions it, it does not provide any reference information.

[Michael Stickles]

A relevant prophecy attributed to St. Seraphim of Sarov is this: "Jesus Christ, the true God-Man, the Son of God the Father, was born in Israel by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and the true Antichrist, the devil-man, will be born amidst the Russians. He will be the son of a fornicating woman of the tribe of Dan and the son of the devil through the artificial transfer to her of the seed of the man, with which the spirit of darkness will settle in her womb."

Does anyone know more about this particular prophecy of St. Seraphim? While the article mentions it, it does not provide any reference information.

I found the same prophecy at the blog Orthodox Eschatology (http://orthodoxeschatology.blogspot.com/2008/10/let-us-consider-some-further-prophecies.html), the footnote to it reads:


St. Seraphim, from various sources, including a text supplied by Fr. Victor Potapov. See also Literaturnaia Ucheba, January-February, 1991, pp. 131-134 (in Russian).

A lecture by Fr. Seraphim (Rose) at a ROCOR Youth Conference, reprinted at the site Death to the World (http://deathtotheworld.com/seraphimrose/articles/futureofrussia.html), says this of the origin of St. Seraphim's prophecy of his own resurrection, which I think comes from the same overall prophecy, though I haven't confirmed that:


One great prophecy of the future of Russia was known to only a few before the Revolution; it was so daring that the church censor would not allow it to be printed. It was found in the same collection of manuscripts of Motovilov that gave the world the famous “Conversation” of St. Seraphim on the acquisition of the Holy Spirit.