I hadn't realized that some angels were terrestrial rather than
celestial, and mortal rather than immortal. The mortal, terrestrial
evidently married. Were the offspring haploid? Are some angels not
"ministering spirits" but physical entities? Are some of them, or their
offspring, still around? I ask because Noah is certainly, in Hebrew
usage, a son of God.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 15:11:06 -0400 "David Opderbeck"
Interesting. Matt. 22:30 and Mark 12:25 are distinguishable b/c they
talk about angels "in heaven." Luke 20:34-36 seems to tie not marrying
to a state without death, and angels to the state without death, though
the syntax in English is unclear. And Jesus is responding here to
Pharisees who knew of and presumably accepted (?) the Watcher tradition,
so it seems unlikely that they would have seen Jesus' comments here as
contradicting that tradition. More likely it is those angels "in
heaven," rather than the fallen Watchers, which have a share in the
eschaton where there is no marriage.
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM, D. F. Siemens, Jr. <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Let me come at this from a different angle. Are you going to accept
Enoch's claim that the "sons of God" are angelic beings, or Christ's
statement in Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25, Luke 20:34-36?
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:47:46 -0700 "Bethany Sollereder"
I'm not sure if the Hercules analogy was the best possible. Perhaps a
reference to popular hagiography would have been better... perhaps like
St. Boniface and Thor's Oak. Powerful legend (that after the first axe
stroke, a wind blew the tree down to reveal its rotted inner core) is
built around a kernel of historical truth.
In Adam's case, it behooves us to consider the mythologies of the nations
surrounding post-Exodus Israel and how dialogue with those cultures
shaped how they saw the world and themselves. The incredible
similarities in terms of motifs like seas of chaos, magical trees,
serpents, gardens, exile, floods and so on cause the dissimilarities in
regards to the nature and character of God and humans to stand out in
stark contrast. The "kernel of historical truth" need be little more
than "God created, every human sins, and God has since been working
towards redemption". If nothing else, the character of God that is
portrayed is certainly historical truth!
I agree that "this is one of those questions that requires careful
treading" but I don't think that after long, deliberate, and careful
study we should hesitate to draw conclusions that we can hold
confidently, even if also provisionally.
-- David W. Opderbeck Associate Professor of Law Seton Hall University Law School Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology To unsubscribe, send a message to email@example.com with "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.Received on Wed Apr 9 16:28:54 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 16:28:54 EDT