Aeneas asked a question in a comment to an earlier post about the faked giant human skeleton:
I’d like you to comment on the dinosaur bones angle as well. It is certainly not an unreasonable theory for all the stories of giants in the past, including the Bible. I lean towards believing your theories on Gen. 6, but I think this one should at least be considered.
Aeneas (and others) may not be familiar with all my views of Genesis 6, namely the giant issue, so I thought I’d answer this question with a post.
I don’t think for a minute that the biblical giants were 10-20-30 feet tall. I think they were (like today) 6-8 feet tall. The giants of the Bible were not unusually tall BY OUR STANDARDS. Based on human skeletal remains that have been recovered from the biblical period (and there aren’t many – they didn’t embalm, and less than 10% of the Holy Land has been excavated by any standard of thoroughness), the average male height was a few inches over five feet tall, with women shorter. This is typical around the world for ancient times. Great height was unusual. The average height in modern times on into today is greater because of better nutrition, longer life spans, medical advances, etc. I personally don’t believe that the biblical giants were much over seven feet tall, which would have been HUGE compared to the norm (imagine walking into a settlement where 6-7 feet was the norm when everyone you knew was a foot shorter!). According to the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, which has as a slightly different text than the one Jews have used since the first century AD) and Dead Sea Scroll readings for the Goliath story, Goliath was actually 6 feet 6 inches (and for those who wonder, it is Og of Bashan’s COFFIN that measures around 12 feet, not Og – read Deut 3:11 – so we really don’t know how tall he actually was — I’d guess he’s within my proposed range). That is the best reading for the original text based on the cumulative text-critical issues in 1 Sam 17-18 and the broader book of Samuel itself (i.e., textual critics have long known that the Masoretic text of 1 Samuel is in poor shape in many places, compared to the Septuagint, which is frequently agreed to by the Dead Sea scroll text of Samuel). If yo u know Hebrew and might enjoy reading about the textual mess of 1 Samuel, I’d recommend P. Kyle McCarter’s 1 Samuel commentary in the Anchor Bible series. There are more thorough and technical discussions of the text of 1 Samuel, but this one is more readable (still, it won’t be easy for those uninitiated in academic biblical studies and textual criticism).
Consequently, there is no need to appeal to dinosaur bones for the biblical giants. Dinosaur bones as the explanation for purported giants in non-biblical writings like Josephus are a good explanation. That issue was the subject of Adrienne Mayor’s Princeton dissertation (or maybe it was a thesis – can’t recall just now) which was published:
The First Fossil Hunters: Paleontology in Greek and Roman Times.
Mayor now has a second volume, devoted to the same issue in Native American legends:
Fossil Legends of the First Americans
Good question, Aeneas!
I agree–I think the “giants” reported in the Old Testament and other ancient texts were people who were a foot or so taller than the observers. On the topic of biblical giants such as Goliath, Anakim, Philistines, and other giants in antiquity, you might be interested in my article:
A. Mayor. “Giants in Ancient Warfare” MHQ: Quarterly Journal of Military History 11,2 (1999): 99-105.
Note: First Fossil Hunters was not a Princeton dissertation, nonfiction book published by Princeto University Press
I enjoy reading PaleoBabble!
Adrienne Mayor
mayor: Wow – Adrienne, I’m honored to have you as a reader! If you didn’t get some sort of degree for your work behind First Fossil Hunters, you should have. One of the coolest books in ancient studies I’ve seen in a long time.
I looked for the article in the databases for which I have access from home, but none of them could get me to a full text version. I’ll look it up at the local university. I did find some other full-text goodies you’ve produced, one of which I’ll post about.
Thanks!
Just wondering how you get “coffin” from Deut 3:11. I’ve always seen it translated as “bed” and checking half a dozen translations on Biblegateway.com translates it as “bed” or “bedstead”. Do you think the triple emphasis on great size (he was a nephilim from the nephilim and his bed was 6’x13′) is a matter of exaggeration by the author?
Then there’s the well-known Num 13:33 “we felt like grasshoppers next to them” that suggests to me a greater size difference than a foot or so. I suppose that could also be a matter of exaggeration as well but that explanation seems to make the text say less than it actually says.
Thanks for the insightful answer and also the great references. What about how Gen. 6 fits into a historical timeline, and how does what we know (or at least think we know) about primitive man fit with the nephilim? Although I was brought up going to church, my education was from a strict scientific perspective. Now I’m trying to reconcile that with this new paradigm. How does the history of dinosaurs, Neanderthals, primitive man etc. fit in with what we learn from Gen.–in your opinion?
Matt: the word for “bed” here is refers to a piece of furniture on which one reclined. Many scholars consider it a sarcophagus. Even if it was a bed, we still don’t know how tall he was – taller than most others, for sure.
I don’t think Num 13.33 requires that the Anakim be any larger than a foot or so taller than any Israelite – the simile used would still apply. Sort of like a junior high school football team’s offensive line lining up against the NY Giants defensive front four. No comparison.
aeneas: Dating anything pre-Flood is a fairly hopeless proposition. There are no external chronological correlations (unless you opt for a local flood – but that means you have to guess which flood sediment layer in a given ANE site is the biblical flood – hazardous). The only way to approach chronology here is do to the old Bishop Ussher thing – take the years of the lifespans of the people so described by the OT and count backward. The problem with that is that (a) the textual traditions don’t agree; (b) the genealogies may be artificial (i.e., selective for some literary purpose, like the one in Matthew is).
I don’t see dinosaurs in the Bible at all (Leviathan, Rahab, and Behemoth are not dinosaurs – they are mytho-poetic chaos monsters that are also found in other ancient texts, like that of Ugarit). I also don’t see any evidence for Neanderthal in the biblical text.
Ok, let me try and ask this more clearly. In your opinion, does the sequence of events laid out by evolutionists–besides God’s interaction with people– sit well with you? That is, do you think that when early man first appeared on the scene, God decided to round up a couple of them as his representatives? If so, would Neanderthals, or any other simian related creatures, be creatures that simply did not get chosen as imagers of God? I know we can’t say for sure, but I simply would like your view of it because I can’t quite sort it all out.
aeneas: No. I believe the jury is still out on a lot of this stuff. It still remains to be seen whether Neanderthal was not human; are there transitional forms ? (the transitional fossils (like Lucy) were reconstructed with fragments of a skull and a femur that was found dozens of yards away – it was just assumed that they belonged together). That sort of thing. I’m willing to consider the idea that God used such beings as a starting point for humans, or that humans evolved as part of a divine plan, but I need to see more evidence (and better evidence) than what is offered. I say this because the text of Genesis has some language in it that lends to evolutionary ideas. I think genetics will at some point be helpful one way or the other, but I also think that Darwinists are so radicalized by this time (note the reaction to EXPELLED and intelligent design in general) that any discipline that shows the science of human evolution as accepted in their camp today is wrong, it would be censored (until, presumably, they could cook something up that would be “more proof”). Science is historically VERY intolerant of any ideas that challenge accepted paradigms – it usually takes generations to die off before attitudes change.
well im a very tall person and a tall buks basket bal;l player visited our school and i felt puny.
im almost 6 ft(not bad for a 13 year old)
i think people in the ancient biblical times where about 3-5 feet tall. imagine them looking up at that bucks player lol i wonder how tall he was…. maybe 8-9 ft.
the bible says they were able to go between their leggs wiht put noticing.
the bible says that goliath was 9ft and 5 inches tall (u said they were 6.9 which is what the dead sea scrolls say. i belive the bible is rights couse they measured in cubits, the dead sea scroll probably measured in their already giant feet:) lol
P
__|__
|
|
__|__
| |
_P_ | |
_|_ | |
3-5 ft | | | | 8-12 ft
o my internet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<=,( they ruined my wonderful picture !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! boohooobooohooo
it took my 30 minmutes to do it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
llllllllllaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaggggggggggggggggggg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dam waist of time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mike, I am curious that on one hand you dismiss the idea of great reptilian beasts recorded as living creatures by early man around the world as mere myth, when you do acknowledge in one of your papers, and I believe in your novel, that the seraphim are a kind of winged reptilian entities based on the true meaning of the Hebrew word. Virtually every human culture acknowledged living, sentient flying reptiles, that were often regarded as gods, and the Bible acknowledges they were at least “assstants” to God. If the God of the Bible is real, then wouldn’t the Seraphim be also? And isn’t it possible they may be responsible for many of the world’s dragon beliefs?
While I do enjoy Adrienne’s work, there is a problem with attributing every fantasic beast to fossil bones. Yes, the Greeks and Romans believed enormous giants, cyclops, etc. did live in earlier times, as their discovered bones proved, but were all dead by their own times in the classical world. But these same people did report seeing living, flying ‘dragons’ in their own times, and such cryptic animals continued to be reported all over the world, and are still even seen today, though no one would call them “dragons” now for fear of ridicule.
what are you talking about? I don’t believe dinosaurs are mythical – ??
You stated above “I don’t see dinosaurs in the Bible at all (Leviathan, Rahab, and Behemoth are not dinosaurs – they are mytho-poetic chaos monsters that are also found in other ancient texts, like that of Ugarit). ”
I agree that dinoaurs went extinct approximately 65MYA, though people from the dawn of history still record seeing/interacting with huge reptilian beasts, and often regarded them as gods or assistancts to the gods, as could be implied by the Seraphim in the Bible which were often depicted as “dragons” in early Christian art. My point is that you seem to dismiss these sightings and interactions as myths on one hand, yet attest to the seraphim as actual creatures in your novel, and acknowledge the Seraphim as being winged reptilian creatures in your paper on the Seraphim. What I am not sure of, is if you also regard the Seraphim as creatures of myth, like Behemoth and Leviathan.. Many fundamentalists claim that the world wide dragon legends are attributed to people seeing surviving dinosaurs, yet their own bible suggests they are heavenly creatures. Do you consider them merely poetic myths like the behemoth and leviathan? Curiously. Yahweh’s description of having smoking nostrils and fiery breath are identical to that of the Leviathan, and dragons in many cultures.
ah – right, I don’t think Leviathan and Rahab and Behemoth are dinosaurs. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think dinosaurs aren’t real! I also don’t think seraphim have anything to do with dinosaurs (the latter were terrestrial).
I never questioned your belief in dinosaurs. I questioned your dismissal of other reptilie like monsters mentioned in the bible as myths, while apparently acknowledging the Seraphim as real (and which were frenquently depicted as dragons in Christian art). As you now, many creationists state that worldwide dragon legends are attributed to their belief that dinosaurs and men dwelled on the planet together 6000 years agod oblivious to the fact that early Christian beliefs acknowledged dragons as heavenly creatures.
seraphim were not huge dragon monsters. We know what they were conceived of as being: the king’s throne guardians. The term has an Egyptian flavor (they had serpentine imagery for throne guardians). The same *idea* is expressed in a Babylonian context by the word “cherub” (karub). There they were not conceived of as serpentine, but as bull-ish or leonine. I don’t believe that kings or God kept dragons in their throne room! The animals used to depict guardianship are picked because of either their native characteristics or their role in mythologies. The biblical writers use the motifs and their respective Egyptian / Babylonian contexts dependent on audience. Their point is simple: there are divine beings that guard God’s throne. There is no need to take it literally, as though God hired dragons during the 8th century BC (Isaiah’s time) and then fired them and hired bovine or leonine guards in the 6th century BC (Ezekiel’s day). A lot of the imagery in the prophets is designed to simply communicate ideas to an audience who has seen royal iconography before. In Isaiah’s day, some of the Israelite kings employed Egyptian iconography (cf. Hezekiah, contemporary with Isaiah – look for pictures on the web of his roayl seal – it is Egyptian in artistic terms); in Ezekiel’s day, the iconography was used of Marduk, and the prophet’s goal is to displace Marduk in favor of Yahweh as a theological statement. Quite effective to his audience – the serpentine stuff would have been lost on them.
All of this is quite normal with respect to theological belief: there is a God, there are other divine beings “up there” with God; they serve in hierarchy; some of them are throne guardians. The Bible says all of these things; there is no need to take descriptions of a SPIRITUAL world and transfer them to the physical world to get dragons on EARTH.
So do you think, then, that there is no connection between the description of the beings in question and what they actually look like? Is it all purely based on what the intended audience was familiar with?
I’m not sure what this question means.
My apologies, I’ll try to be more clear. I was responding to your previous comment about the serpentine nature of Seraphim being linked to Egyptian throne guardians, and Cherubim being more linked to the Mesopotamian throne guardians, thus being more lionin or bullish. During one time period when Egypt was more dominant in the minds of the Israelites, the Serpahim are used, and during a later Period when Babylon and Assyria are dominant in the minds of the Israelites, the Cherubim are used. Presumably in both cases the different throne guardian being, and the different imagery associated with each is used because of the familiarity of the intended audience (Israel) with that imagery.
I’m trying to understand how your view of this plays out in terms of these (seraphim and cherubim) being real celestial beings. I assume that you think they are real divine beings based on what I’ve read and heard from you regarding the Divine council and the inspiration of scripture etc.
Thus… Do you think the descriptions of these beings (seraphim and cherubim) provided in scripture are purely based on whatever imagery the Israelites happen to be familiar with at the time.
or
do you think that these beings actually do in some way look like the descriptions provided? If the latter is the case perhaps the imagery/iconography of the various cultures (Egypt with its serpentine guardians and Babylon with its leonin/bullish guardians) are actually based on some kind of memory of, or experience with real divine beings?
this isn’t complicated. If one believes in a “spiritual world” (a realm different than our own or outside our own universe in some way), then it is reasonable to think that realm has entities in it. Whether one wants to use spiritual vocabulary or the vocabulary of quantum physics or string theory, I don’t care. ANY entity other than a creator (in the Judeo-Christian sense) *must* be made of something, and so the vocabulary of physicists is viable. But I digress. In biblical literature, some of these entities are believed to be in the service of God, part of his throne entourage — in the case you cite, “throne guardians.” The ancient biblical writer, seeking to put forth that idea, uses the vocabulary at his disposal — vocabulary designed to communicate to his contemporary audience (he’s using words and imagery they will understand, and which he understands). Seraphim hearkens back to Egyptian imagery, and is familiar to the biblical audience of the time because Judah’s kings (like Hezekiah – cf. Hezekiah’s seal, discovered by archaeologists) used Egyptian iconography for their own royal iconography. Later, when Egypt was off the scene and Assyria and Babylon had an impact on royal iconography, terminology for the same idea changed (recall that the Bible tells us both kingdoms used or installed puppet rulers in Israelite territory, and Judah wound up exiled to Babylon).
Would you say then that Seraphim and Cherubim are just different descriptions of the same type of being, as opposed to two seperate classes of celestial beings?
yes; that is the point of both the words and iconography.
Dr. Heiser, I don’t know if you get alerted to posts this old or if you will ever see this question, but I was wondering about your comment above, “I don’t think for a minute that the biblical giants were 10-20-30 feet tall. I think they were (like today) 6-8 feet tall.” My question is, why not for even a single minute? (The length below is only because I know you like people to do their homework, which I’ve tried to do before asking the question).
1.
A. According to some credible evidence (see citations in Kenneth Way’s thesis “Giants in the Land,” 10: http://media.gobbc.edu/TREN/tren/006-1192.pdf), bones of skeletons as high as 3.2 meters have been found in Palestine. B. Newspaper reports from the 1800s throughout America regularly cite finds of skeletons between 9 – 12 feet, and though the same lists have been copy/pasted (i.e. plagiarized) ad nauseum on the web thus tending to discredit them, I’ve verified that at least some of them are true, though sometimes improperly cited. Giants by the names of Aymon, Baron Bentenreider, and Hans Braw in Bohemia and Germany LIVING in the 1500s were between 8 – 12 feet. Johann Georg Keyssler, Travels through Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Switzerland, Italy, and Lorrain Vol. 1 (London, G. Keith, 1760), 51-52.
2. Your own writing agrees that, however it happened, the fathers of the nephilim were the Watchers, which are obviously preternatural persons and whom you seem to suggest in the Facade and other places were quite tall, though you don’t speculate as to how tall as far as I can see. My question is, how could we know the upper limit on such a union would only be 8 feet?
3. Clyde Billington (“Goliath And The Exodus Giants: How Tall Were They?” JETS 50.3 [2007]: 506-07) gives an argument that the LXX’s “four cubits” for Goliath could plausibly be the much larger Egyptian cubit. Thus, the idea is that the LXX is changing the unit of measurement much like we do in our translations saying that he is 9’9″. If our “foot” were called a “cubit,” we would be charged with changing the text too. I’m aware of Hays’ reply, especially about 4QSama, and do find Billington’s argument to be difficult to accept for the DSS. Nevertheless, the idea at least generates some thinking that the LXX and Mas. each give the heights for Goliath at over 9 ft (and with a 5 ft. Egyptian cubit, it would be over 10 feet).
General answer: Because there is no credible evidence to that effect.
Specifically, in order:
1A. If you actually have access to the published literature by Way, this claim is not included. I have the PDFs of his articles to date and nothing of this sort is in them. I alos have correspondence with him where he corrects (I guess) the video by saying the remains he has seen are around 7 feet.
1B. There is no way to establish whether these late 1800s reports are true without the actual skeletal evidence and DNA testing. For example, if one found an unusually large femur, it would have to be tested as to whether it is human — as opposed to the stuff Adrienne Mayor has chronicled in her book, The First Fossil Hunters, where such skeletal remains actually turn out to be dinosaur bones or large prehistoric mammal bones. To be blunt, without an actual full skeleton or other part of the body that can scale, and DNA confirmation that said body part is human, these reports are nothing more than hearsay evidence.
2. The Facade is a novel. If Goliath was a descendant of nephilim, and presuming that can be understood literally, he’d be 6’6″.
3. Billington’s argument is nothing more than special pleading. That is, just because he *assumes* the LXX could be changing the unit doesn’t mean that is factual. In other words, it’s a complete non-argument that lacks verification.
So to this point, there is nothing that substantiates this in any real way.
Sorry, the comment posted before I was ready and I wasn’t even sure if I wanted to ask the question in the first place. You can answer if you like … or not. Thanks.