of life implanted in man at creation, the tenor of the decree being that
this shall not 'abide'[1] in man eternally or indefinitely, but only in such
measure as to admit a maximum life of 120 years. There are two
difficulties in this interpretation: (a) It has no connexion with what
precedes, for everything the v. contains would be quite as intelligible
apart from the marriages with the angels as in relation to them.[2]
(b) The following words (
Hebrew characters) have no meaning: as a reason for the
withdrawal of the animating spirit they involve a hysteron proteron;
and as an independent statement they are (on the supposition) not
true, man as actually constituted being both flesh and spirit (27).
(4) The most probable sense is that given by We. (Comp.2 305 ff.), viz.
that (Hebrew characters) is the divine substance common to Yahwe and the angels, in
contrast to (Hebrew characters), which is the element proper to human nature (cf. Is. 313):
so Ho. Gu. The idea will then be that the mingling of the divine and
human substances brought about by illicit sexual unions has introduced
a disorder into the creation which Yahwe cannot suffer to 'abide'
permanently, but resolves to end by an exercise of His supreme power.—(ii.)
We have next to consider whether the 120 years, taken in its
natural sense of the duration of individual life (v.i.), be consistent with
the conclusion just reached. We. himself thinks that it is not: the
fusion of the divine and human elements would be propagated in the race, and could not be checked by a shortening of the lives of individuals.
The context requires an announcement of the annihilation of
the race, and the last clause of the v. must be a mistaken gloss on the
first. If this argument were sound it would certainly supply a strong
reason either for revising We.'s acceptation of 3a, or for understanding
3b as an announcement of the Flood. But a shortening of the term of
life, though not a logical corollary from the sin of the angels, might
nevertheless be a judicial sentence upon it. It would ensure the extinction
of the giants within a measurable time; and indirectly impose a
limit on the new intellectual powers which we may suppose to have
accrued to mankind at large through union with angelic beings.[3] In
view of the defective character of the narrative, it would be unwise to
press the antagonism of the two clauses so as to put a strain on the
interpretation of either.
4. The Nĕphîlîm were (or arose) in the earth in those days]
Who were the (Hebrew characters)? The name recurs only in Nu. 1333,
4. (Hebrew characters)] G (Greek characters); Aq. (Greek characters); Σ. (Greek characters); S (Syriac characters);
TO (Hebrew characters). The etymology is uncertain (see Di. 123). There is no,
- ↑ On this traditional rendering of (
Hebrew characters) see the footnote, p. 143.
- ↑ Bu.'s argument that the v. is detachable from its present context is, therefore, perfectly sound; although his attempt to find a place for it after 321 is not so successful (see p. 3 above).
- ↑ Just as in 322. 24 man is allowed to retain the gift of illicitly obtained knowledge, but is foiled by being denied the boon of immortality. The
