{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/4684", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 4684, "subject": "Original Sin and pagan gods.", "messages": 8, "voices": 5, "first": "2006-08-09T11:38:52+00:00", "last": "2006-08-11T05:31:01+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "b sharp", "address": "bsharporflat at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-08-09T11:38:52+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "James B. Jordan writes regarding the fallen angel origin of the Nephilim:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Nephilim simply means \"powerful men\" \"great rulers,\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "but isn't the word also derived from the Hebrew for \"fallen\"?\n\nalso he writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "True, \"son of God\" means \"ruler\" in the Hebrew, and is used for angels once \nor twice, but it also >means \"believer\" and that is what it means here." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The beginning of Genesis 6 says:\n6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the \nearth, and daughters were born unto them,\n6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and \nthey took them wives of all which they chose.\n\nThis indicates to me that the \"sons of God\" were not men and their \nintercourse with human women was something different from the human \nreproduction which had already covered the face of the earth. Why would God \nneed to cleanse the earth of \"believers\" with a flood, which is described \nimmediately after?\n\nand James says:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The sons of God who married the daughters of men because they were \"good\" \n(same word used >of the fruit Eve plucked) were the Sethites who married \nwith the daughters of the Cainites. This >is clear from the context. In \nGenesis 4-5, men of the Sethite line worshipped Yahweh" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "So, the forbidden fruit Eve plucked was good? And \"The serpent's job was to \ntrain them in wisdom\". And what were these Sethite line guys doing when the \nrest of humanity was mulitplying. Why did they only discover the daughters \nof men later? I have trouble understanding all this, especially with a more \nclear, alternate explanation available.\n\nand lastly James B. Jordan writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Without interviewing him, there is really no way to know what Wolfe might \nbe thinking about >such things, hence no way to know what his allusions \nmight be. Moreover, Wolfe may be alluding >to fantastical readings of \nGenesis (e.g., Lilith) that he himself does not believe. So, be careful, \nand don't over-read." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, but aren't you the James Jordan who did interview Wolfe and to whom he \nexplicitly stated his belief in the reality of pagan gods? Regarding \nLilith, yes, James Jordan and Roy Lackey had a discussion of Wolfe's use of \nthis myth in regard to Copperhead about five years ago. Why would his use of \nLilith in BotNS be surprising? And at the risk of sounding disrespectful and \nirreverent I must ask if the admonition to be careful and not over-read also \napplies to Bible reading ;-)?\n\n-bsharp" } ] }, { "message_id": "<7.0.1.0.2.20060809103856.03fb29c0@cox.net>", "from": { "name": "James B. Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2006-08-09T15:42:49+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 06:38 AM 8/9/2006, you wrote:\nJames B. Jordan writes regarding the fallen angel origin of the Nephilim:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Nephilim simply means \"powerful men\" \"great rulers,\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "but isn't the word also derived from the Hebrew for \"fallen\"?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Or, those who fall upon others.\n But, for the rest, my point was that all of these things \nhave multiple understandings. I don't want to be taken as \"pulling \nrank\" or anything, but as it happens I am the author of two books on \nthe early parts of Genesis, so I'm aware of lots of views, very \ncommon views. I shared mine, but this is not the place to argue for \nmy views. My point was that it's hard to know which of the various \nunderstandings of these texts are the ones Wolfe tends toward, and \neven if we did know, that would not tell us whether he might be \nemploying a reading that he regards as erroneous for literary \npurposes. To wit, he may share the (most common) view that the sons \nof God are Sethites, but choose to employ the (minority) view that \nthey are angels.\n I intended only a cautionary note. @>----\n\nPat. Nutria" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "also he writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "True, \"son of God\" means \"ruler\" in the Hebrew, and is used for angels once\nor twice, but it also >means \"believer\" and that is what it means here." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The beginning of Genesis 6 says:\n6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the\nearth, and daughters were born unto them,\n6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and\nthey took them wives of all which they chose.\n\nThis indicates to me that the \"sons of God\" were not men and their\nintercourse with human women was something different from the human\nreproduction which had already covered the face of the earth. Why would God\nneed to cleanse the earth of \"believers\" with a flood, which is described\nimmediately after?\n\nand James says:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The sons of God who married the daughters of men because they were \"good\"\n(same word used >of the fruit Eve plucked) were the Sethites who married\nwith the daughters of the Cainites. This >is clear from the context. In\nGenesis 4-5, men of the Sethite line worshipped Yahweh" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "So, the forbidden fruit Eve plucked was good? And \"The serpent's job was to\ntrain them in wisdom\". And what were these Sethite line guys doing when the\nrest of humanity was mulitplying. Why did they only discover the daughters\nof men later? I have trouble understanding all this, especially with a more\nclear, alternate explanation available.\n\nand lastly James B. Jordan writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Without interviewing him, there is really no way to know what Wolfe might\nbe thinking about >such things, hence no way to know what his allusions\nmight be. Moreover, Wolfe may be alluding >to fantastical readings of\nGenesis (e.g., Lilith) that he himself does not believe. So, be careful,\nand don't over-read." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Yes, but aren't you the James Jordan who did interview Wolfe and to whom he\nexplicitly stated his belief in the reality of pagan gods? Regarding\nLilith, yes, James Jordan and Roy Lackey had a discussion of Wolfe's use of\nthis myth in regard to Copperhead about five years ago. Why would his use of\nLilith in BotNS be surprising? And at the risk of sounding disrespectful and\nirreverent I must ask if the admonition to be careful and not over-read also\napplies to Bible reading ;-)?\n\n-bsharp\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Chris", "address": "rasputin_ at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-08-09T21:25:29+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "James B. Jordan writes regarding the fallen angel origin of the Nephilim:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Nephilim simply means \"powerful men\" \"great rulers,\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "but isn't the word also derived from the Hebrew for \"fallen\"?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Just wanted to throw in there that the idea of fallen angels mating with \nhuman females to beget giant children is not really a matter of translation, \nit's part of Jewish myth that goes back at least as far as the written text." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370608091533s2343fb99x6f54a26610932d29@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-08-09T22:33:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/9/06, Chris wrote:\nJust wanted to throw in there that the idea of fallen angels mating with\nhuman females to beget giant children is not really a matter of translation,\nit's part of Jewish myth that goes back at least as far as the written text." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"At least?\" Now, how would we know that? The earliest place such a myth\nis likely to be documented is in one Talmud, which dates to ... well, depends\non whether you're talking about Mishnah or Gemarah, but in any case, well\nafter the time of Christ. Figure the redaction of Genesis at the\nfourth or fifth\ncentury BC, and you've got between six and eight hundred years.\n\nMind, the stuff in the Mishnah was generally considered \"ancient\" at the time\nit was compiled, but unless you know of a reference rather older than that,\nI have trouble with the claim that these myths go \"at least as far back as the\nwritten text.\"" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\n\"Shovels are essential to the fantasy genre.\nHowever, they are primarily used by the authors rather than the\ncharacters.\" -- Stephen R. Donaldson" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Chris", "address": "rasputin_ at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-08-10T00:17:47+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370608091533s2343fb99x6f54a26610932d29@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "While it's difficult to produce references from an oral tradition, granted, \nthere isn't much reason to believe otherwise. As you note the stories were \nregarded as ancient, and with a consistency that tends to indicate an origin \nthat was not recent at the time.\n\nAlso a useful general source (I forget who it was that was raising \netymological points about \"nefilim\"):\n\nhttp://jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=24&letter=F" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/9/06, Chris wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Just wanted to throw in there that the idea of fallen angels mating with\nhuman females to beget giant children is not really a matter of \ntranslation,\nit's part of Jewish myth that goes back at least as far as the written \ntext." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\"At least?\" Now, how would we know that? The earliest place such a myth\nis likely to be documented is in one Talmud, which dates to ... well, \ndepends\non whether you're talking about Mishnah or Gemarah, but in any case, well\nafter the time of Christ. Figure the redaction of Genesis at the\nfourth or fifth\ncentury BC, and you've got between six and eight hundred years.\n\nMind, the stuff in the Mishnah was generally considered \"ancient\" at the \ntime\nit was compiled, but unless you know of a reference rather older than that,\nI have trouble with the claim that these myths go \"at least as far back as \nthe\nwritten text.\"\n\n--\nDan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\n\"Shovels are essential to the fantasy genre.\nHowever, they are primarily used by the authors rather than the\ncharacters.\" -- Stephen R. Donaldson\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370608091749v76a05b05r3cc3579293c47a00@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-08-10T00:49:45+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/9/06, Chris wrote:\nAs you note the stories were regarded as ancient, and with a\nconsistency that tends to indicate an origin that was not recent\nat the time." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, that's the rub \"Not recent\" at the time the Mishnah was\ncompiled could be any time before the Diaspora." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\n\"Shovels are essential to the fantasy genre.\nHowever, they are primarily used by the authors rather than the\ncharacters.\" -- Stephen R. Donaldson" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Bob Miller", "address": "bob_bageera at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2006-08-11T04:45:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": "<1f7617370608091533s2343fb99x6f54a26610932d29@mail.gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "??? Sorry, The Book of Enoch is older and translated, several versions, \nonline. Sure read to me like giants and the children of men mated." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/9/06, Chris wrote:\nJust wanted to throw in there that the idea of fallen angels mating with\nhuman females to beget giant children is not really a matter of \ntranslation,\nit's part of Jewish myth that goes back at least as far as the written \ntext." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"At least?\" Now, how would we know that? The earliest place such a myth\nis likely to be documented is in one Talmud, which dates to ... well, \ndepends\non whether you're talking about Mishnah or Gemarah, but in any case, well\nafter the time of Christ. Figure the redaction of Genesis at the\nfourth or fifth\ncentury BC, and you've got between six and eight hundred years.\n\nMind, the stuff in the Mishnah was generally considered \"ancient\" at the \ntime\nit was compiled, but unless you know of a reference rather older than that,\nI have trouble with the claim that these myths go \"at least as far back as \nthe\nwritten text.\"" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\n\"Shovels are essential to the fantasy genre.\nHowever, they are primarily used by the authors rather than the\ncharacters.\" -- Stephen R. Donaldson" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1f7617370608102231t62239e17h269cc825dec0fb18@mail.gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2006-08-11T05:31:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Original Sin and pagan gods.", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 8/10/06, Bob Miller wrote:\n??? Sorry, The Book of Enoch is older and translated, several versions,\nonline. Sure read to me like giants and the children of men mated." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Okay, I'll have to check that out; I haven't read very much of the\napocryphal stuff except for a few Gnostic gospels. Thanks for the\npointer." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant\n-----\nhttp://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer\n\"Shovels are essential to the fantasy genre.\nHowever, they are primarily used by the authors rather than the\ncharacters.\" -- Stephen R. Donaldson" } ] } ] }