[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Bethberry

I want to make sure that my words aren't misunderstood. What I was referring to with the term "this POV" was this idea I presented of historically unfolding understanding. I was acknowledging a problem with the idea I presented, rather than suggesting anyone else's ideas were arrogant.

I get it. Thanks for the clarification.

Originally Posted by alatar

In the New Testament we have demonic possession and less, if any, children of the 'sons of God' (as in Genesis 6).

The questions then seem to be, (1) "Why did the fallen angels stop incarnating themselves some time after the Flood, but not as a result of it; and when?" And related: (2) "Why did the fallen angels choose demonic possession as their evil-de-jour?"

The questions seem linked. Maybe the fallen angels got smarter and began to realize that they could be much more effective as invisible, possessing agents, rather than as physical beings wielding physical power while trammeled to many (if not all) of the limitations thereof.

What's even a bit more confusing is that the Nephalim are considered "heroes of old," which to me seems to be placing them in a somewhat positive light.

That does seem to have a positive connotation, doesn't it? The problem is that we can only guess at who these "heroes of old" were by way of judging the appelation. My "tortuous" tendency is to link these to the demi-gods of various mythologies both known and unknown in our time.

If the fallen could produce hybrid offspring, then why not the unfallen doing the same to provide a counter?

I've thought about this. Could there have been a second Fall involving precisely this temptation? Fodder for a great feinged history, this would make! (I'm already working on it by the by) No proof for this, just speculation, but it does seem to be (absent the idea of it being a second Fall) what Tolkien posed as Melian's story.

Did Tolkien have this superbeing/human pairing because he too believed that Genesis 6 spoke of angels mating with humans?

At the conference I went to I picked up a book that talks about this very thing.

It seems to me that Tolkien has made more sense (mythologically speaking) of this mysterious passage in Genesis than anyone else. He discusses the "Children of God" at great length in numerous letters (Letters, pp. 146-47, 203-4, 284-86, etc.) and in The Silmarillion. Tolkien explains that Men and Elves are known as "Children of God" and that the Valar, who were also created beings but of far greater age and knowledge, loved and yearned after them. All of this fits the Genesis stories very well.

So says this writer. I personally had not felt this way, which is why I have been working on my own feigned history using a my own "tortuous" understanding of precisely the same passages. For any who cares to learn more about that, check out this post and this one too. Enough of that.

Originally Posted by alatar

My point was that if, as you state, that they are to be imprisoned or were imprisoned, then what is the need to drown them?

It seems harsh, but apparently the lines of seed had to be cut off so that they could not pollute the seed through Noah. However, this answer is weakened because of the Rephaim and Nephilim still extant in Canaan when the Hebrews crossed the Jordan. Weakened but not undone. God gave the Hebrews a Law they failed to keep more than they kept it, and God still achieved his purpose in spite of their disobedience; God's big enough to be able to overcome the obstacles of destructive seed. Then why drown the humans? I don't know. A 'fresh' start? It's more complicated than that, and God's purpose is fraught with mystery, so that's the best I can offer for now.