Relatedly, I've never been a Russell Crowe fan. It's one of those inexplicable prejudices. I can't tell you why, but I just say no to Crowe. I realize that A Beautiful Mind was good... but I was disappointed when I realized it wasn't really a spy flick. Don't get me excited for a spy flick and then hope that I'll be just as excited about math. It's math.
So I don't like Bible flicks and I don't like Crowe. But I'll be the first in line to see Darren Aronofsky's Noah.
Why, you ask? Three words.
Word one: watchers.
Words two and three: Nick Nolte.I have always been fascinated by the "myth of the Watchers". This is the title given to the creative fiction(s) based on Genesis 6:1-4 that emerged in the Second Temple period. Our fountainhead text reads:
When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose. Then the Lord said, “My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever, for they are flesh; their days shall be one hundred twenty years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them. These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown.The lore that developed around this passage shortly before Jesus was born is brilliantly creative. We see elements of watchers mythology in Enochic tradition (cf. Dead Sea Scrolls), Jubilees, 1 Corinthians, 1 Peter, the Targums, etc. And now, the forthcoming film Noah. But even if you take Genesis 6 by itself, it is one of the most bizarre episodes in the Bible. Indeed the Nephalim (or "Fallen Ones"; in the Greek they're called "Giants") are without a doubt the strangest characters in the entire canon.
So I think it is quite appropriate that one of the most bizarre creatures in Hollywood—Nick Nolte—is playing Samyaza, one of these half-human-half-divine hybrids. This film will either be really interesting or unintentionally funny. Either way, count me in.
-anthony
p.s. Anthony Hopkins is playing Methuselah. I am utterly disheartened that Keith Richards wasn't cast for this part.
Just for reference: Michael S. Heiser makes an intriguing argument (based on verb morphology) that nephilim should not be understood as a Hebrew word meaning 'fallen ones', but is in fact the Aramaic word that means 'giants', explaining why the Septuagint chose to render it as γίγαντες.
ReplyDeleteAlso, don't forget to add Jude (and 2 Peter, by proxy of borrowing from Jude) to the list, since the epistle borrows extensively from 1 Enoch.
That is intriguing, Mark! Where does Heiser make this argument? I'd love to have a look.
Delete-anthony
So long as G-d does not speak in Latin ...
ReplyDeleteWait, he doesn't speak Latin?
DeleteA copy of his essay can be found here: http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/nephilim.pdf
ReplyDeleteI'm not terribly knowledgeable in either Hebrew or Aramaic, so I'd love the chance to hear an analysis of Heiser's argument from scholarly folk (if you know any) who have the qualifications to interact with it.
I know you were asking Anthony/Chris and I really would not have the expertise on this issue, but you may be interested in a couple critical posts below about this view from Deane Galbraith with links back to Dr. Heiser's responses. Deane's PhD and major research interests include the Nephilim so he would be the one in the know.
Deletehttp://remnantofgiants.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/michael-heisers-misinterpretation-of-nephilim-as-giants-not-fallen-ones/
http://remnantofgiants.wordpress.com/2013/03/08/michael-heiser-putting-the-aramaic-cart-before-the-hebrew-horse/
Thanks Mike, I would be remiss if I didn't also link this:
Deletehttps://www.eisenbrauns.com/ECOM/_3ZP1FF97L.HTM
-anthony
What do you think of Carl Gallup's view? He says the meaning of Nephilim is a bully, violent man or tyrant, and the passage is simply saying godly men were marrying pagan women. Over many generations and cultural changes, paganism and violence came to the fore and those things were idolized in that culture. There are a few videos at YouTube that Gallups did on the Nephilim. In one video, he suggests the sons of god in Genesis 6 refers to the Pharaohs who were considered gods and the sons of gods.
ReplyDeleteI am looking forward to Noah as well, and the addition of Nephilim and Nick Nolte are odd developments; mainly because they were added after the movie was 'in the can'. It appears to be an attempt to save the movie, but there is probably no hope of that. Just the same, I've been interested in this movie since I first heard of it. I am expecting a travesty though.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteDoralynn, thank you for your comment. I've seen this argument in various forms. I've never found it convincing for two reasons.
Delete1) The Gen 6 passage juxtaposes two categories that create a problem. The daughters are "of men" while the sons are "of God/the gods." We have a category distinction here that is very important. While the translation I've used above (RSV) masks this, these two phrases are set together creating a problem. The key issue here is hybridity and this problem manifests in several ways in the early chapters of Genesis.
2) They give birth to supernatural creatures (cf. giants). Every ancient interpretation of this passage takes it this way - cf. Numbers 13:33: "We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."
-anthony
Keith Richards wasn't cast for this part.
ReplyDeleteYou can't always get what you want.
Well played, sir.
Delete-anthony
I knew you're a man of taste.. :)
DeletePleased to meet you; hope you guess my name.
DeleteSuperb! From now on, my best NT scholar ever! ..but don't ask for sympathy, mh?
DeleteHere's a great website in the works on all things noah...With several pages addressing the film. http://www.floodofnoah.com/#!noah-movie-aronofsky-2014/c1m0o
ReplyDeleteI'm sure plenty of a Ron of sky fans and Bible - lovers will hate it...but after reading a script summary, I'm really looking forward to it.
Larry: I though G'd spoke Greek ;-)
ReplyDeleteSo . . . Genesis Apocryphon? I like it.
ReplyDelete