Insulting Nimrod
Guest post by J.M.
“Nimrod” has never been a favorite insult of mine (not that I have a “favorite” insult), but I know what it means. You probably do to.
Or maybe you don’t.
When we hear “Nimrod” we tend to think of a bumbling fool. (“We” meaning people in America – outside America this definition is not used.) Well, did you know that Nimrod is actually a guy in the Bible – the Old Testament to be specific. You can read his story here http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2010:8-12&version=NIV.
Go ahead and click there – it’s only 5 sentences.
So when you read that, did the mighty hunter who established Babylon, Uruk, Akkad, and a host of other places sound like a bumbling fool to you?
No?
So…what’s going on? Why do we use this guy’s name for an insult? Is there something hidden in the Hebrew that tells a different story?
Well, some commentaries say Nimrod was a bad dude based on one word. The word used for “hunter.” Because this word is used in Jeremiah 16.16 to refer to those who hunt humans some want to say that Nimrod hunted humans. Um, no. If I say I’m going hunting does that mean I only hunt deer? Nope. The item hunted is not contained in the word “hunted.” English and Hebrew are the same here.
So that’s not where Nimrod’s reputation comes from.
In fact the verse says “a mighty hunter before God.” This actually means he was in good standing before God. The phrase “before God” used in this type of context is a GOOD thing. Him and God were cool.
Bumbling fools ran from this mighty hunter!
The internet claims that the abuse of the name Nimrod actually comes from the much beloved children’s cartoon Bugs Bunny. Now the funny thing is – if you google this you can find several people talking about it – but no one actually provides hard evidence. According to internet claims an episode made in the 40s started the confusion. Everyone’s favorite bumbling hunter – Elmer Fudd – was, again, no match for Bugs Bunny. Well, Bugs Bunny – using SARCASM – calls Elmer “Nimrod.” Sarcasm.
Uh, Nimrod, I’m over here.
Problem….those without a working knowledge of Genesis 10 thought it was a new word that meant a bumbling fool. They completely missed the sarcasm!
Now the problem is that I cannot find any actual evidence of this cartoon. (Youtube has failed me.) Some internet links even point to an episode that does not use the word nimrod! On a side note – providing a citation that is false does not help your claim.
Now I was able to find a later Looney Toons Cartoon in which Daffy Duck calls Elmer Fudd a “Nimrod.” I had wanted to post a link to a youtube clip of it – but it was taken down for copyright infringement – so you’ll just have to take my word for it that such a clip exists.
Was Looney Tunes really the first to use this word sarcastically and the first to be misunderstood about it? The vast majority of the internet say yes. However, a wiktionary article cites a 1933 dictionary where “nimrod” is defined as a “fool.” This predates the mysteriously absent Bugs Bunny episode (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nimrod). So maybe the cartoonists meant it sarcastically, or maybe they already took it to mean a “bumbling fool.”
Wherever it was first misused, I highly suspect misunderstood sarcasm is to blame.
So what did we learn today? Three things.
1) Some people don’t get sarcasm.
2) Nimrod was actually a pretty cool guy who was close to God.
3) Every time you call a bumbling fool a “nimrod” you are actually insulting the real Nimrod.
(More articles at www.ThinkingThroughChristianity.com)
Related Posts
About The Author
This was wonderful on so many levels; TTC meets “A Way with Words.” Thanks, JoAnna!
Awesome!!!!
Amazing… !!
I would like to respectfully disagree with your assessment of Nimrod. While you’re absolutely right to say that Nimrod wasn’t a bumbling fool, he wasn’t exactly “cool” with God, either. The preposition “before” is a bit misleading (though it wasn’t in the early 1600’s when this was translated into the King James, but word meanings do change over time). It actually should read something more like “in the face of”. Furthermore, the Jerusalem Targum says: “He was powerful in hunting and in wickedness before the Lord, for he was a hunter of the sons of men, and he said to them, ‘depart from the judgment of the Lord, and adhere to the judgment of Nimrod!'” The term hunter was figurative in nature. He was aggressively seeking out men to turn from God and follow him instead. Furthermore, his name means “let us rebel”, an indication that his father, Cush (the son of Ham, who was the son of Noah cursed after the flood) named him thus and trained him to become a leader who would, in fact, rebel against God. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that Nimrod was a man of great ability and energy and was evidently the leader of those who built Babel.
Hello Pleiades,
I just saw your post, two months after you posted it. I don’t write for this blog anymore so it’s actually a miracle I came across your post. All that to say, I’d like to respond to your comments. And I do appreciate that you took the time to respond to the post.
The phrase in question is “a mighty hunter before God” (כְּנִמְרֹד גִּבּוֹר צַיִד לִפְנֵי יְהוָה; or if the Hebrew characters don’t show up: knimrod gibor tsayid lifney YHWH). The preposition used (lifney) did originate (way back in pre-Biblical Hebrew) from the idea of “to face of” meaning “in the presence of.” But, as with all languages, meaning is not static. The preposition actually has a brooder meaning in Biblical Hebrew. If you consult the HALOT lexicon (2:942; 2nd column) you will see that while this preposition began as a mixture of words it has become grammaticalized into a simple preposition which can mean “before” (most common), or “according to the opinion of,” or “in the manner of.” The translation of “before” is not misleading. Also, I’m not sure why you reference the King James, that has no bearing on what the Hebrew means. (Also cf. Arnold/Choi pg 115-16)
As for your discussion on what the Targums do with this verse; I should have looked at the Targums before I posted this blog. But that does not change my argument. Targums are a much later compositions and they are not translations but translations mixed with rabbinic opinions and teachings. The Targum Neofiti (one Targum of Genesis) dates to 1504 AD; and the other Targums are similar in date – though they might have originated earlier than the 16th century AD, there is no solid evidence as to when they originated. And even if it originated in the 1st century AD as some propose (at least for Neofiti), that it still long after the writing of Genesis and it has no bearing on what the Hebrew text of Genesis actually says. The Targums are notorious for adding things into the text – such as Targum Pseudo-Jonathan adding Og to the story of Noah – having him hang onto the roof of the ark throughout the flood in order to survive (see Gen 14 in Targum Pseudo Jonathan)
Though, admittedly, that probably does explain where the misunderstanding of the meaning of Nimrod comes from. I should have caught that before I posted this blog entry. The misunderstanding of “Nimrod” apparently occurred quite early.
As for Nimrod’s name. Yes, the root is related to “rebel.” But you must be careful to not put so much emphasis on the name; because by doing so you are also reading into it your assumption as to who Nimrod could have rebelled against – if he did rebel, maybe he rebelled against his parents; or from having a strict curfew. Names don’t always mean something. Deborah’s name (“bumble bee”) has no bearing on her life. And Isaac was given the name “laughter” because his *mother* laughed – this does not mean that we read all the stories of Isaac as though Isaac is laughing continuously throughout his life. Neither should we assume that Nimrod was a rebel against God. It is best to not pin interpretations on names unless the scriptures explicitly make a connection – like it does with Abraham – otherwise you stand a chance of reading your own assumptions into the text and not allowing the text to speak for itself.
As for his relationship to the curse Noah gave in chapter 9 – Nimrod was not under the curse. Read the context very carefully. Noah did not curse Ham, but his son Canaan. Nimrod is not a descendant of Ham’s son Canaan. No curse.
I’m intrigued by your allusion to evidence that Nimrod built Babel. What is that evidence? Nothing in scripture says this. If it is something from Jewish tradition/targums – well that’s as reliable as the Christian myth that NASA discovered proof about the missing day from Joshua’s time…
I can vouch for the truth of the legend. I remember watching a specific episode many times as a kid. Bugs cartoons were repeated endlessly, and we loved them. At one point, when I was about 10, around 1960, I researched the term Nimrod out of curiosity, and feeling a little cool myself that I knew who Nimrod really was, having a sharper feel for bugs’ derision. What’s more, I remember watching that same cartoon around 1980, wondering if the use of Nimrod might enter our vocabulary to mean a fool. So, the legend is true and indeed Bugs is the source of the revised definition of Nimrod. However, I’ve also been unable to find the original episode. I didn’t recall Daffy Duck using that phrase, but if he did, that’s evidence for Bugs saying it as well. And, concordantly, Bugs also used the term “Maroon”, which use itself deserves attention.