Analysis of Genesis 6:4
There are just a few passages upon which the whole Nephilim-based theology, and the related Deuteronomy 32 worldview are based. Genesis 6:1-4 is the main passage which is the key text which is exploited and greatly expanded upon to drive this very unorthodox, but very progressive version of the new and improved revision of Christian doctrine. Thus, the place to start in examining these revisionist theories and teachings is that key passage in Genesis 6:
“1Now when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born to them, 2the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose. 3So the LORD said, ‘My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.’
4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and afterward as well—when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men. And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown.
5Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time. 6And the LORD regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7So the LORD said, ‘I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—every man and beast and crawling creature and bird of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them’ 8Noah, however, found favor in the eyes of the LORD.9This is the account of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation; Noah walked with God. 10And Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.11Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and full of violence. 12And God looked upon the earth and saw that it was corrupt; for all living creatures on the earth had corrupted their ways.”(Genesis 6:1-12 BSB)
This primary proof text for this whole system of theology needs careful examination to ascertain exactly what it is actually saying:
“4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and afterward as well—when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men. And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown.”
The actual literal rendering of this 4th verse is that at that time, just before the global deluge of Noah’s flood, there were these Nephilim living on the earth. Then it says “after that” is when the “the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men. And they bore them children who became “the mighty men of old, men of renown.” Obviously, it does say that these “sons of God” procreated these mighty men of renown by impregnating the daughters of men. It also makes sense to understand those “mighty men” as being giants, which is what the word “Nephilim” means. However, it is not saying that these Nephilim were the offspring of the egregious actions of those fallen angels, as many claim. In fact, it is saying almost the opposite. It actually says that these giants, the Nephilim, were there on the earth both before and after those infamous actions of the fallen angels. Whatever is meant by this key and somewhat ambiguous word, “Nephilim”, they already existed before the “sons of God” and “daughters of men” procreated that breed of “mighty men”.
However, men, such as Dr. Michael Heiser, have chosen to make an almost imperceptible but critical change in the wording of this key passage, which becomes virtually the crux of their whole theory. He states the following as if it was just an assumed fact:
“Genesis 6:4 tells us there were Nephilim on earth before the flood ‘and also afterward, when the sons of God went into the daughters of humankind.’” (Michael Heiser, The Unseen Realm, p.189)
This is not what that verse is saying. In fact, it doesn’t really even make much sense on the face of it. It would be saying that this very abnormal, unnatural, intolerable event of these fallen angels happened both before and after the flood. As it turns out, taken in context this is actually Heiser’s point, in an effort to explain away the obvious problem for his view, which is the fact that these Nephilim, that offspring of those fallen angels having sex with women, would have been wiped out by the flood. Thus, he goes on to argue that the flood could have been just a local flood (his preferred view), or that the word translated “when” (אֲשֶׁר, asher) in that verse could also be translated “‘whenever’ thereby suggesting a repetition of these preflood events after the flood” (ibid). The former contradicts clear scripture (such as Genesis 7:19-20). The latter (his second option) appears to be of his own invention as there are no lexigraphical references or translations which support this translation of that word, “asher” that it could mean whenever. It is however a key word which tells us the temporal relationship between the time of the existence of these Nephilim, and the singular event of the “sons of God” having copulated with women – both before and after that event (not the flood). Giants were already there on the earth before this singular event, as well as afterwards.
Heiser and his likeminded associates interject the flood into the text, which is eisegesis, to make it support their extrabiblical theory. However, Heiser also bases his interpretations and arguments on another overtly false premise, that the Nephilim, the giants, were the offspring of “divine beings”:
“The Nephilim bloodlines had a different pedigree. They were produced by other divine beings. They did not belong to Yahweh, and he therefore had no interest in claiming them. Coexistence was not possible with the spawn of other gods. The Nephilim bloodlines had a different pedigree. They were produced by other divine beings. They did not belong to Yahweh, and he therefore had no interest in claiming them. Coexistence was not possible with the spawn of other gods.” (Unseen Realm p. 203).(This becomes somewhat confusing as to what Heiser believes inasmuch as he also says that these giant clans, Nephilim, are natural, not supernatural “Despite their unusual size the biblical text are clear that the giant clan members were human.” (Unseen Realm, p.202, footnote 1 to Holy War) His explanations seem to be self-contradictory.)
Again, nothing in that key verse, or any other passage of scripture tells us that these Nephilim were produced by divine beings. However, this is again where Heiser and Alberino and their followers resort to extrabiblical sources to derive their interpretations:
“According to 1 Enoch 6:1–6, Mount Hermon was the place where the sons of God of Genesis 6 descended when they came to earth to cohabit with human women—the episode that produced the Nephilim.” (ibid p. 201)
The Hebrew word rendered Nephilim is “han·nə·p̄i·lîm” (הַנְּפִלִ֞ים), which is actually a transliteration. When translated in the Septuagint (LXX), and more often than not in our English versions it is rendered “giants”. (The root word is naphal (נָפַל): To fall, to lie, to be cast down, to fail. Thus, the connotation of evil monsters, as well as gigantism. However, even Heiser admits that this does not mean that the word as it appears in the text cited above means anything more than just giants.) This passage then is saying that they were a generic family of giants. They were there when this ignominious event happened, and afterwards, like the descendants of Anak, and Rapha. However, the critical point is that nothing in scripture tells us that the Nephilim of Genesis 6 are the offspring of the “sons of God” copulating with “the daughters of men”. All we have is a description which sounds similar – “mighty men of old, men of renown”, and may indeed be referring to giants as their offspring, but not identifying them with the Nephilim mentioned before.
Although it is in the context of the description of the depraved condition of the inhabitants of the earth in Noah’s time, before the flood, the phrase “after that” is not referring to postdiluvian versus antediluvian. In order to get to that interpretation, the passage would have to be worded like something on this order: There were Nephilim on the earth after the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men and they were the children born to them, the mighty men of old.
But that is not what this text is saying.
It also clearly does not say that either these Nephilim or the mighty men of old, were some kind of demigods, half man and half god, as per Pagan beliefs, especially Greek mythology. The fact that it tells us that these giants, the Nephilim, were there before the angels copulated with women, and before the flood, also tells us they were not some superhuman beings, half angel half god.
The following commentary makes this point:
- “In those days. Previously referred to, i.e. of the mixed marriages. And also – i.e. in addition to these nephilim – after that, – i.e. after their up-rising – when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men.” (Pulpit Commentary)
- “To an unprejudiced mind, the words, as they stand, represent the Nephilim, who were on the earth in those days, as existing before the sons of God began to marry the daughters of men, and clearly distinguish them from the fruits of these marriages. …the words “after that” represent the marriages which drew down the judgment as an event that followed the appearance of the Nephilim.” (Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament)
This is where men resort to eisegesis instead of exegesis. According to the biblical account everything on the earth, which includes all varieties of human life, which would obviously include all the antediluvian Nephilim, were “destroyed” – they drowned. Thus, there could not have been any descendants of these antediluvian creatures after this flood event. But this is where the eisegesis and overt manipulation of scripture again becomes necessary – to include Heiser’s “options” as cited above. Without any actual scripture to substantiate their claim, some contend that again after the flood there were fallen angels who had sex with daughters of men and produced another set of Nephilim (an absurd explanation since according to them this is the main reason for the judgment of the flood in the first place. (Note: There are other proposed explanations which are even less credible, such as the theory that the flood of Noah was not universal but only local, and the Nephilim surviving the flood lived in other areas not affected by the flood. Of course, this contradicts the clear description of Genesis 7:18-23, which is not in the least ambiguous. Another is that Noah, after the flood, had sex while he was drunk and it involved demonic activity, producing again these half human half demonic creatures they want to call Nephilim, or the progeny of the spirits of the Nephilim – a very confused explanation).
The root word is naphal (נָפַל): To fall, to lie, to be cast down, to fail. Thus, the connotation of evil monsters, as well as gigantism. However, even Heiser admits that this does not mean that the word as it appears in the text cited above means anything more than just giants. The closest they get to biblical substantiation is a passage in Jude:
“And the angels who did not stay within their own domain but abandoned their proper dwelling—these He has kept in eternal chains under darkness, bound for judgment on that great day.” (Jude 6)
Again, we have a passage which actually contradicts their view instead of supporting it. It is saying that those “fallen angel” of Genesis 6:4 have been kept in chains waiting for their final judgment. This is elaborated on and explained by Peter:
“…God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, held for judgment; 5and did not spare the ancient world, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;…” (2 Peter 2:4-5)
How does this in any way support the theory that they reoffended, or that others followed their lead in committing the same fatal mistake?
Their answer is that we have to go to a whole body of evidence which is all extra-biblical, some even Pagan Polytheistic, such as the Ugaritic texts which included Baal as one of their gods. The late Michael Heiser, perhaps the most well-known advocate of these views, widely considered the leading expert on the subject of Angels and Demons, cites the following sources from which he derives his interpretation of scripture on these subjects:
Deuterocanonical Works, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls, Ugaritic Texts, Mesopotamian Texts, Ancient Jewish Works, Josephus, Mishnah, Talmud, and Related Literature, Targumic Texts and Other Rabbinic Works, New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, Classical and Ancient Christian Writings.
While this is indeed a very impressive list of nearly 100 secular sources (at least 93 cited), it also is representative of what other Bible scholars refer to as a low view of scripture. He treats what a high view of scripture holds to be verbally inspired supernaturally revealed words of God, as though it were more the product of mere mortals, evolving in their thought processes and influenced in what they wrote by the secular and religious beliefs and worldview of the cultures in which they lived or were exposed to. Thus, according to him, to accurately understand the Genesis 6 text, and other related passages (especially Deuteronomy 32:9 and Genesis 10), we have to take into account the other extrabiblical sources which he appeals to for his enlightenment as to how to interpret the ostensibly inspired scripture. The problem with that is that there is no rational basis for assuming that these other texts are reliable, or in any degree authoritative (the essential claim for the inspired word of God), especially since they represent the whole body of ancient mythology, and false religions.
All of the advocates for this return of the Nephilim new theology (a current wave of doctrine sweeping through the church) rely heavily on a the extrabiblical noncanonical Book of Enoch. This reflects a rejection of the whole concept of a Canon, which involved a systematic and disciplined development of objective criteria on which to discern which of the many works extant during that early church era should be accepted as holy scripture inspired by God. The book of Enoch did not meet the criteria (for very rational reasons), and thus was rejected by those early church Fathers because they did not meet up to those standards. In fact, most of the books of Enoch (addressed in the following chapter, “The Book of Enoch”) are on the face of it at best fanciful, more like the Koran or the Book of Mormon, than the inspired word of God.
However, the first book of Enoch introduces a whole construct of a system of angels and demons and a spirit realm, with names and numbers. A few of these names are actually found in scripture, namely Michael, and Gabriel. Three other names are mentioned, Uriel, Raphael and Phanuel. Uriel is identified in the Bible as a chief of the Levite clan of the Kohathites. A Raphael is mentioned once in 1 Chronicles 26:7 as a son of Shemiah, and a Phanuel is named as the mother of the prophet Anna of Luke 1:26. However, according to these books of Enoch they are God’s holy angels. Even then the identification of these names involves a discrepancy. In Enoch Book 1 chapter 7 verses 1-8, God’s holy angels are identified as Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Saraqael, Gabriel, and Remiel. However, in Book 2 chapter 1 verses 32-34, there are only four, Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, and one he did not include in the previous list of 7, Phanuel.
All the rest, mostly the evil angels, are made up by whoever the actual author of this book is, which is itself a major question. According to Book 2 chapter 1 it was the Enoch of Genesis 5:18, which was the one who was writing what he saw in a vision. This is the one who is usually portrayed as being the author of the book, giving it credibility since he is the one named in Genesis, and also in Jude. But, beginning in Enoch Book 3 Chapter 2 it is Noah, grandson of Enoch. However, by the 3rd chapter it is again Enoch writing. Thus, the question, who is the author, or who are the authors of these books of Enoch?
Clearly men like Michael Heiser, and Timothy Alberino, and Gary Wayne, advocates of these return of the Nephilim theories, do not really believe the clear message of a primary doctrinal statement, a critical foundational truth of orthodox Christianity:
“16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work.” (2Timothy 3:16-17)
According to this inspired text the Word of God is enough to fully equip us. But, according to these men, we also need a lot of other sources of information, including all kinds of Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha, such as the book of Enoch and perhaps the Book of Jubilees. Their very involved theories are very similar in nature to what the Bible warns us about as an early form of heresy:
“3As I urged you on my departure to Macedonia, you should stay on at Ephesus to instruct certain men not to teach false doctrines 4or devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculation rather than the stewardship of God’s work, which is by faith.” (1 Timothy 1:3-4)
Bible scholars identify what Paul is warning about here with the cult known as Gnosticism. According to the renown Greek scholar Henry Alford it is “most probably … lists of gnostic emanations” (Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary – Alford). While Gnosticism is quite different from this modern version of Nephilimism, like Gnosticism it is composed of myths and endless genealogies of spirit beings, including the good and the evil fallen angels. Such is very mystical and requires the superior knowledge of the many extrabiblical sources, including the polytheistic pagan mythology and writings (such as the Ugaritic texts). Its purportedly biblical bases is a matter of a few texts, mostly misinterpreted and taken out of their contexts, and connected with other isolated texts, which in fact are not necessarily related when accurately interpreted. Some of those are discussed in the following, including chapters on The Book of Enoch, Psalms 82:1-6, Deuteronomy 32:819, and Genesis 10-11.
These liberal theologians, who do not accept the essential doctrine of the verbal plenary inspiration of the 66 canonical books of our Bibles, find ways to interpret this key passage, especially this 4th verse of Genesis 6, as telling us that the offspring of these fallen angels having sex with women were demigods, half fallen angel half human, the gods of pagan mythology. They then call them “Nephilim”, or the progeny of the “Nephilim”, and maintain that they were there on earth before and again after the flood, which is all based on their flawed interpretation of this key verse. Conservative Christian theologians give almost the opposite interpretation, as in the following:
“Genesis 6:1-4, then, describes how corrupt the world got when this violation was rampant. It is also a polemic against the pagan belief that giants (Nephilim,, cf. Num. 13:32-33) and men of renown (Gen. 6:4) were of divine origin, and that immortality was achieved by immorality…. …Children of these marriages, despite pagan ideas, were not god-kings. Though heroes and ‘men of renown,’ they were flesh and they died in due course, like all members of the human race. …” (The Bible Knowledge Commentary Old Testament, Allen P. Ross)
Logical Problems
Of course, the logical dilemma is to figure out how strictly spiritual beings such as angels could have sex with strictly physical beings, the women (This is discussed in Endnote). For that I have not found a satisfactory answer coming from these men.
Dr. Michael Heiser seems to gloss over this dilemma just saying the1 fallen angels somehow become embodied with human bodies, but at the same time tells us that the demons are not fallen angels, and demon possession is not a reality, but calls it demonization.
“… demons are consistently cast as disembodied spirits of dead Nephilim and their giant clan descendants. Those spirits are the offspring of the angels that sinned before the flood, so the demons cannot be those fallen angels.” [852 Heiser, Demons, p. 242] (3366)
Others have explained it as super intelligent (supernatural beings) beings which empowered or enabled these Nephilim to engage in genetic manipulation, however then describe such genetic manipulation in terms of selective breeding, which could not ever produce anything but natural human beings, albeit possibly families of giants, and possibly stronger and/or more intelligent human beings. Alberino, in an interview with a very sympathetic Michael Knowles, is asked this critical question twice, and both times avoids answering it by changing the subject to what he calls “the first cause … lusts” (YouTube, “The Book of Enoch: Atlantis, Nephilim & Giants | The Rogue Archeologist Pt 1”, 4:43 and 12:12 (.https://youtu.be/7PKZLCwzPak?si=hKBdjlOemPTYtkKY)).
Since the Bible tells us it did happen we have to assume there must be a rational answer, though it is not clearly explained in scripture. Some men have tried to explain it as “the sons of God” being sons of Seth who had sex with the daughters of Cain – but this does not seem to be consistent with accurate exegesis of the text, but is also more eisegesis than exegesis. We do know from scripture that angels did appear to men in human forms, as if they were men. But we also know they did not actually become men as they would disappear once they accomplished what they were sent for (see explanation provided at differences between Angels and Humans). On a few occasions they seemed to be more than just appearances like apparitions or dreams, such as when the angel wrestled with Jacob. However, there are a number of instances in scripture in which demons possessed human bodies (and even swine) which acted out physically (a New Testament phenomenon). A rational answer may be that these “fallen angels, the spirit beings (sometimes referred to as Elohim), possessed men who were of the giant variety (like the Anakim or Rephaim), copulated with women and produced children which were also giants.
However, this involves another question which becomes a matter of some confusion in this whole matter of who and what these Nephilim were, the definition of Giants and Giantism.
Giants/Giantism
Giantism, also known as gigantism, does run in families, and is to some extent known to be genetic.[i] Giantismis a condition found in nature, albeit quite rare (estimates are about 1/3,000,000 in humans). It is related to a variety of known causes, some of which are genetic, hence runs in families. Certain DNA mutations have been found in about 29% of cases. However, more than half of the cases reportedly cannot be linked to genetic causes (such as those listed below). Thus, the notion that there is such a thing as a race of giants is not consistent with known science, though some genetic mutations causing giantism are passed on in families. Biblically that would have been the descendants of Anak, the Anakites, and the sons of Rapha, the Rephaim. Medical definitions of Giantism and its causes are as follows:
The Genetics of Giantism
“As a 2022 review Trusted Source notes, gigantism can run in families. Some genetic disorders that can cause gigantism include:
- neurofibromatosis 1
- McCune-Albright syndrome
- multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1
- Carney complex
- 3PA association
- isolated familial somatotropinomas
- X-linked acrogigantism”
(Medical News Today, “What to Know About Gigantism” (Gigantism)
“Gigantism is very rare. The most common cause of too much GH release is a noncancerous (benign) tumor of the pituitary gland. Other causes include:
- Genetic disease that affects the skin color (pigmentation) and causes benign tumors of the skin, heart, and endocrine (hormone) system (Carney complex)
- Genetic disease that affects the bones and skin pigmentation (McCune-Albright syndrome)
- Genetic disease in which one or more of the endocrine glands are overactive or form a tumor (multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1) or type 4
- Genetic disease that forms pituitary tumors
- Disease in which tumors form on the nerves of the brain and spine (neurofibromatosis)
(”Gigantism”, Mount Sinai Health System – New York City, (https://www.mountsinai.org/health-library/diseases-conditions/gigantism)
The Rephaim and Anakim and the Giants
As previously noted “giants” are not a race, but come in families, such as the sons of Rapha (1 Chronicles 20:6-8 BSB or Interlinear) known as the Rephaim, and the sons of Anak known as the Anakim (Numbers 13:33, Deuteronomy 9:2 Interlinear). Giants have always existed, both before and after the flood. According to Numbers 13:33, the giants the spies sent by Joshua saw in the land of Canaan, which are called “Nephilim”, were the ancestors of the Anakim. The remains of thousands of giants have been found in America, which are only identifiable racially as American Indians, Native or Indigenous Americans (though the definitions of race versus ethnicity are not well defined), primarily of Asian descent. “Since the 1700s there have been over 3,000 giant skeletons reported in America by 1,194 individuals in 885 reports around the Nation. The Native Americans reported giant histories to Europeans since first contact centuries ago.” (“The Nephilim – Was There a Giant Problem in America?” (https://youtu.be/FlxROOvmNuk?si=F2XrzqfNS9_nncTw))
There are 18 references to the Rephaim in 17 passages in the NASB, most referring to the land or valley of Rephaim. From Genesis 15:20 we understand that this name Rephaim is actually a people group which inhabited an area in the land of Canaan, which was promised to Abraham. Thus, it does not only refer to “giants” in general, but a family or tribe of giants, which were often compared to another family of giants referred to as the Anakin. Similarly, the Anakin are a family of giants, which scripture tells us are the sons of Anak.
(Genesis 14:5) Chedorlaomar (Kedorlaomer), king of Elam, with a coalition of three other kings (Tidal king of Goiim, Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar) “conquered the whole territory of the Amalekites, as well as the Amorites who lived in Hazazon-tamar.” They defeated the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, and their coalition of 3 other kings, which included the Rephaites. However, Chedorlaomar’s coalition made the mistake of taking Lot, Abram’s nephew, who was living in Sodom. Abram (with 318 men) then attacked and defeated Chedorlaomar’s armies, retrieving Lot.
However, what would seem to be the most significant reference to the Rephaim, which is completely overlooked, is the passage in Deuteronomy cited below. According to that passage “only Og king of Bashan was left of the remnant of the Rephaim” and “God also handed over to us Og, king of Bashan, with all his people, and we struck them until no survivor was left” (Deuteronomy 3:3 & 11). Thus, according to this passage the Rephaim as a people ended when Joshua conquered the land of Bashan.
The references to the Rephaim, and their progenitor Rapha, and the Anakim or Anakites are as follows:
Rephaim Descendants of Rapha
“1Then we turned and went up the road to Bashan, and Og, king of Bashan, came out with all his people to meet us in battle at Edrei. 2But the LORD said to me, ‘Do not fear him, for I have handed him and all his people and his land over to you; and you shall do to him just as you did to Sihon king of the Amorites, who lived in Heshbon.’ 3So the LORD our God also handed over to us Og, king of Bashan, with all his people, and we struck them until no survivor was left. 4We captured all his cities at that time; there was not a city which we did not take from them: sixty cities, all the region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. 5All these were cities fortified with high walls, gates, and bars, besides a great many unwalled towns. 6We utterly destroyed them, as we did to Sihon king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children of every city. 7But all the animals and the spoils of the cities we took as our plunder. 8So at that time we took the land from the hand of the two kings of the Amorites who were beyond the Jordan, from the Valley of Arnon to Mount Hermon 9(Sidonians call Hermon Sirion, and the Amorites call it Senir): 10all the cities of the plateau, all Gilead, and all Bashan, as far as Salecah and Edrei, cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan. 11(For only Og king of Bashan was left of the remnant of the Rephaim. Behold, his bed was a bed of iron; it is in Rabbah of the sons of Ammon. Its length was nine cubits, and its width four cubits by the usual cubit.)” (Deuteronomy 3:1-11)
“15Once again the Philistines waged war against Israel, and David and his servants went down and fought against the Philistines. But David became exhausted. 16Then Ishbi-benob, a descendant of Rapha, whose bronze spear weighed three hundred shekels and who was bearing a new sword, resolved to kill David. 17But Abishai son of Zeruiah came to his aid, struck the Philistine, and killed him. Then David’s men swore to him, ‘You must never again go out with us to battle, so that the lamp of Israel may not be extinguished.’ 18 Some time later at Gob, there was another battle with the Philistines. At that time Sibbecai the Hushathite killed Saph, a descendant of Rapha. 19Once again there was a battle with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan son of Jair the Bethlehemite killed the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam. 20And there was also a battle at Gath, where there was a man of great stature with six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot—twenty-four in all. He too was descended from Rapha, 21and when he taunted Israel, Jonathan the son of David’s brother Shimei killed him. 22So these four descendants of Rapha in Gath fell at the hands of David and his servants.” (2 Samuel 21:15-22)
“4Some time later, war broke out with the Philistines at Gezer. At that time Sibbecai the Hushathite killed Sippai, a descendant of the Rephaim, and the Philistines were subdued. 5Once again there was a battle with the Philistines, and Elhanan son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam. 6And there was also a battle at Gath, where there was a man of great stature with six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot—twenty-four in all. He too was descended from Rapha, 7and when he taunted Israel, Jonathan the son of David’s brother Shimei killed him. 8So these descendants of Rapha in Gath fell at the hands of David and his servants.” (1 Chronicles 20:4-8)
The valley of Rephaim
“Three of the thirty chief men went down to David, to the rock at the cave of Adullam, while a company of Philistines was encamped in the Valley of Rephaim.” (1 Chronicles 11:15)
Land of the Rephaites
“18On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your descendants I have given this land—from the river of Egypt to the great River Euphrates— 19the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, 20Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, 21Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites, and Jebusites.” (Genesis 15:20)
The Anakim/Anakites (BSB)
“8So we passed by our brothers, the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir. We turned away from the Arabah road, which comes up from Elath and Ezion-geber, and traveled along the road of the Wilderness of Moab. 9Then the LORD said to me, ‘Do not harass the Moabites or provoke them to war, for I will not give you any of their land, because I have given Ar to the descendants of Lot as their possession.’ 10(The Emites used to live there, a people great and many, as tall as the Anakites. 11Like the Anakites, they were also regarded as Rephaim, though the Moabites called them Emites.” (Deuteronomy 2:8-11)
“16Now when all the fighting men among the people had died, 17the LORD said to me, 18“Today you are going to cross the border of Moab at Ar. 19But when you get close to the Ammonites, do not harass them or provoke them, for I will not give you any of the land of the Ammonites. I have given it to the descendants of Lot as their possession.” 20(That too was regarded as the land of the Rephaim, who used to live there, though the Ammonites called them Zamzummites. 21They were a people great and many, as tall as the Anakites. But the LORD destroyed them from before the Ammonites, who drove them out and settled in their place, 22just as He had done for the descendants of Esau who lived in Seir, when He destroyed the Horites from before them. They drove them out and have lived in their place to this day.” (Deuteronomy 2:16-22)
“1Hear, O Israel: Today you are about to cross the Jordan to go in and dispossess nations greater and stronger than you, with large cities fortified to the heavens. 2The people are strong and tall, the descendants of the Anakim. You know about them, and you have heard it said, ‘Who can stand up to the sons of Anak?’ 3But understand that today the LORD your God goes across ahead of you as a consuming fire; He will destroy them and subdue them before you. And you will drive them out and annihilate them swiftly, as the LORD has promised you.” (Deuteronomy 9:1-3)
“21At that time Joshua proceeded to eliminate the Anakim from the hill country of Hebron, Debir, and Anab, and from all the hill country of Judah and of Israel. Joshua devoted them to destruction, along with their cities. 22No Anakim were left in the land of the Israelites; only in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod did any survive.” (Joshua 11:21-22)
“6Then the sons of Judah approached Joshua at Gilgal, and Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite said to him, ‘You know what the LORD said to Moses the man of God at Kadesh-barnea about you and me. 7I was forty years old when Moses the servant of the LORD sent me from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land, and I brought back to him an honest report….12Now therefore give me this hill country that the LORD promised me on that day, for you yourself heard then that the Anakim were there, with great and fortified cities. Perhaps with the LORD’s help I will drive them out, as the LORD has spoken.’ 13Then Joshua blessed Caleb son of Jephunneh and gave him Hebron as his inheritance. 14Therefore Hebron belongs to Caleb son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite as an inheritance to this day, because he wholly followed the LORD, the God of Israel. 15(Hebron used to be called Kiriath-arba, after Arba, the greatest man among the Anakim.)” (Joshua 14:6 & 12-15)
“13According to the LORD’s command to him, Joshua gave Caleb son of Jephunneh a portion among the sons of Judah—Kiriath-arba, that is, Hebron. (Arba was the forefather of Anak.) 14And Caleb drove out from there the three sons of Anak—the descendants of Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai, the children of Anak.” (Joshua 15:14)
The Giants – Goliath and his brothers
“4Then a champion named Goliath, who was from Gath, came out from the Philistine camp. He was six cubits and a span in height, 5and he had a bronze helmet on his head. He wore a bronze coat of mail weighing five thousand shekels, 6and he had armor of bronze on his legs and a javelin of bronze slung between his shoulders. 7The shaft of his spear was like a weaver’s beam, and its iron point weighed six hundred shekels.” (1 Samuel 17:2-7a)
“22And Benaiah son of Jehoiada was a man of valor from Kabzeel, a man of many exploits. He struck down two champions of Moab, and on a snowy day he went down into a pit and killed a lion. 23He also struck down an Egyptian, a huge man five cubits tall. Although the Egyptian had a spear like a weaver’s beam in his hand, Benaiah went against him with a club, snatched the spear from his hand, and killed the Egyptian with his own spear.” (1 Chronicles 11:22-23)
There were families of Giants identified in scripture as descendants of Rapha and Gath, though the Egyptian was probably neither, nor was he a Philistine, nor from Gath. See also 1 Chronicles 20:4-8 cited above.
ENDNOTE
The Absurdity of the Nephilim Conspiracy
The Nephilim theories involve the following logic. Angels left their proper realm (the heavenly realm) to have sexual intercourse with human females, and that produced a race of giants which are called “Nephilim”. What could be wrong with this picture?
First, the angels are by definition spiritual beings which do not have physical bodies (Alberino denies this making very absurd arguments, including denying that there is any “supernatural” – he exposes himself as a Materialist). Sexual intercourse requires physical reproductive organs which include the production of sperm, which spiritual beings do not possess. Human beings (and virtually all physical living creatures) are very uniquely designed to be capable of reproductive functions. It is an absurdity to even contemplate a purely spiritual creature being able to impregnate a physical creature – unless one purports that the spiritual creature has the creative powers, which according to the Bible only God has (as in the creation of Adam and Eve, and the supernatural impregnation of Mary with His only begotten son, Jesus). Thus, no matter what you call them, angels, Cherubs, or “sons of God”, or “fallen angels” or demons, it is absurd to contend that such purely spiritual beings could impregnate a human woman.
However, the passages of scripture which are their primary texts, Genesis 6:3-4 combined with Jude 6-7, does tell us that before Noah’s flood there were angels “who did not keep their own domain but abandoned their proper dwelling place,…” who “indulged in sexual perversion and went after strange flesh…”. The only rational explanation for this would have to be that these fallen angels actually entered into and possessed human men, as we see numerous instances of recorded in scripture – such as the demoniac Legion of Luke 8:27-30, and the demon possessed of Matthew 4:24 and 8:16-17 (In the passage in Luke such demons even entered into and possessed a herd of pigs). Without a human body with the organs and functions which can produce an orgasm no sexual intercourse is possible, nor is their any rational basis for sexual lusts. However, what goes on in the mind of a person is actually spiritual in nature. Thus, a spiritual being can apparently share in that immaterial spiritual experience, which explains demon possession.
Then we have the issue of the offspring (erroneously called “Nephilim” – a misreading of Genesis 6:4) of this unnatural union between the spiritual beings and physical women. While the fallen angels, or demons, do not have DNA or Genes, the men they possess do. Thus, their offspring could not be any more or less than that which was in their Gene pool when combined with the mother’s Gene pool. This means that such offspring could not be anything more than human – the product of the physical conception process. They can’t be some kind of supernatural creatures, both divine like God or Angels, and human, as in the demigods of Greek mythology (such as a Hercules). However, that is exactly what such would be theologians claim to be truth – men such as Timothy Alberino and his favorite theologian, Michael Heiser. And to compound their error they call them the Nephilim.
However, that key passage in Genesis, 6:4, does say the following:
“4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of mankind, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”
While it is debatable and debated as to what that last phrase is referring to, whether “those … mighty men” refers back to the first subject noun “Nephilim”, or the “children” of the immediately preceding phrase, it is not significantly consequential. First, the Nephilim which is just a transliteration of the Hebrew word for “Giants” (when translated into English), were the mighty men of old – just as postdiluvian giants such as Goliath and his brother, possibly Nimrod, or even present-day giants could be described. As this verse so clearly states, those Giants, or Nephilim existed before the “sons of God came into the daughters of men and … bore children to them,”, and also after this ignominious event. If “those …mighty men” refers back to the Giants, or Nephilim, then the whole case being made for this Nephilim conspiracy disappears like an ill-conceived mirage.
However, even if reference is being made there to the offspring of the sexual encounter between fallen angels or demons and women, the rational basis for the Nephilim conspiracy claims is unsubstantiated. As discussed above, such would only be possible by such spiritual beings possessing and controlling a human subject, meaning that the offspring would have to be purely human. If that offspring were what became the “mighty men who were of old, men of renown”, which does sound like possibly the Giants such as Goliath, or men like Nimrod (“the mighty hunter”), they were no more or less than the product of the human father’s and human mother’s gene pool. But that said, it seems very likely that one of those human genetic donors would have themselves been giants (i.e. Nephilim). Following that line of reasoning, it also seems reasonable that when these fallen angels picked which human beings they wanted to indwell and posses they would be not only the pagan heathens, but the relatively super men of the day, such as those from a human family of giants (such as Rephaim or Anakim). Thus, the offspring would have also been giants, but nothing more than human beings, of which some still exist today (see “15 Real Life Giants That Exist Today” https://youtu.be/sPHD98Q9BaY?si=VWdxzDCPzHGnrewk)
Thus, in conclusion, the whole concept and premise of what I am calling the Nephilim Conspiracy, is fatally flawed not only from a scriptural basis (verbally inspired scripture), but from the standpoint of logic and pure reason. Incorporeal entities (angels or spirits) engaging in the physical act of sexual intercourse with corporeal entities (physical, material human beings) is as absurd and irrational as absurd can be – an impossibility. It is also a case of very flawed exegesis, rearranging the wording and mistranslating the key words of the key text, which amounts to eisegesis, the opposite of exegesis.
Furthermore, it is all primarily based on the authority of a book, which is one of many nonbiblical books, in this case pseudepigraphic, the book of Enoch (but only book 1 and for some book 2, out of the 5 books are accepted as factual or reliable, according to Alberino). While ostensibly referred to by some early church fathers, it was rejected by the majority by the early 4th century (AD 303) as not being considered canonical – the texts inspired by god, because it did not meet the objective criteria for canonicity. Indeed, an objective evaluation reveals very good reasons why it should not be considered “inspired by God”, or canonical, as discussed in the chapter about the Book of Enoch.
end times revisited 