Nephilim, Angel offspring?
STUDIES & DOC
Nephilim & Giants?
Did Giants Roam the World, prior to the Great Flood?
Or, Was it The Nephilim?
Or, Could Dinosaurs be the Nephilim?
By Dan L Baxley
email comments to: dan@servantsofyahshua.com
Genesis 6:4 -- read it -- In those days the Nephilim in (on, roaming) the Earth – read it again -- in those days and even after those days. There is a popular teaching that Genesis 6:4 is telling us that there were some crazy, strange people bing born of women, on this Earth, and these people, this offspring of weird, hybrid of humans, are assumed by many, to be the the “sons of God” -- the offspring coming out of the "marriage"union between fallen angels and human women. But is this the case? But, how can this be? If these are literally, "SONS of GOD", how is it translated to being SONS of Angels? And these false assumptions do not stop there. The teaching goes on to say that the product of this illicit union between human women and heavenly angels (forgive me for repeating this blaspheme), are the Nephilim, a much more magical and enticing word, than the word, Giant. I quoting this famous verse, let us figure out what this means -- to be a Nephilim.
Nephilim is translated “giants” (with out capitalizing) in the King James Bible and most other translations –
(Gen 6:4) There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. KJV
It isn’t until we get to the modern translation this word “giants” is translated “Nephilim” (with capitalization) making it seem as though this word is something other than the simple term, “giant”, or “giants”.
(Gen 6:4) The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. NIV
In this verse we see “giants” of the KJV translated as Nephilim in the NIV and we find this term in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary under #5303 – nphiyl nphil – nef-feel, nef-feel and this means, “… a bully, a tyrant, or a giant…” Here we see the confusion and why the modern translations chose to use the original, or close to it, Hebrew as opposed to making the choice between one of the three definitions this term would fit.
What is interesting is the modern translations capitalize the first letter of this term and in doing this they make more out of it than should be. None of the choices, a bully, or a tyrant, or a giant do not warrant this treatment. When reading the context of this verse the KJV translators chose “giants” as the other two choices really do not make sense. Obviously there were “bullies” and “tyrants” in those days and it appears the so called, ‘sons of God” were tyrants and bullies of sorts, claiming women of lower class whomever they choose. With this in mind the only real choice is the term “giants”.
(Num 13:33) And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, whiich come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. KJV
Here is another place the term “nephilim” is used, and we are told these were sons of Anak. No one argues Anak was an angel and it is no where suggested he ever was an angel. Anak is identified as a Canaanite made of flesh and bone. The scouts sent out were so fearful of the thought of doing battle with these “giant” men they embellished what they saw and instead of saying they were giant men they said they were “nephilim” giving a stronger and more fearsome image of what they actually saw. For one thing it very unlikely and was proven later, that they were not as “grasshoppers” by comparison to these sons of Anak. For their exaggeration to be close to being true the sons of Anak would have been, conservative figure, thirty two feet tall, or more. We know this was not the case but this explains why the scouts sent out to see what the Israelites were up against used the term “nephilim” instead of the alternate term for “giants” – Strong’s Dictionary – H7497 – rapha raphah – raw-faw – a giant, Rapha, Rephaim
(Deu 2:10-11) The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; Which also were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims. KJV
The Emims are mention and look, they too seem to be a family of great size and are called a people, not “sons of angels” but people, and they were “tall’ like the sons of Anak, the Anakims. These Emims were “accounted giants’, that is “rapha”.
By this time the “giants” are identified as “people” and are of certain families and the only time these “people” were called “nephilim” was during the scouting parties exaggerations. What this suggests to me is that the “nephilim” were more than the average “giant” and are never refereed to as “people” and later being identified as “tall men”, not “nephilim”.
Some time after the exaggeration of the scouting party, recorded in Numbers 13:33, we see these “people” no longer referred to as nephilim and that term is never used again. This, in my opinion, sets this term apart and has a different meaning in Genesis 6:4 than mere giant men. No, they are not “sons of angels”, in fact you will never find anyplace in your Bible were there is any mention of “sons of angels”. This should be enough to tell you that the “sons of God” did not produce “sons of angels”.
The context of Genesis 6 should demonstrate the “nephilim”, or giants of those days is most likely pertaining to the giant beasts – you know, the Dinosaurs. Look at the verse again and you see it never says these “nephilim” are the sons of angels. In fact it never says the “angels of God” took wives and it never says “sons of God” either. Hold on now, give me a minute – you see the term “God” used in this verse is “Elohim” in Hebrew and means “gods” in English so to properly read this would suggest “sons of gods”, not sons of THE GOD or YHWH.
Lets go a little further and you will see the “sons of gods” is correct as this important turning point in mans pre-flood history records a time when “giants” roamed the Earth at the time of this turning point, when men, claiming some kind of divine appointment, like Kings appointed by the “gods” to rule lesser men began to take multiple wives from the lower classes as opposed to continuing to within the divine ruling families. If it were meant these men were really angels they would have been called “sons of YHWH” not the vague term “Elohim”.
Next reading down we come to the verse following and we see the term “GOD” in all caps. This indicates His Name, YHWH –
(Gen 6:5) And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
“And YHWH saw that the wickedness of man …’” Did you catch that? “...the wickedness of Man...” not angels and this in the very next verse following the controversial verse #4. And, just a small note -- the word, GOD, in all caps replaces the Name of the God of Israel, which is also the True God of all Creation -- YHWH, or YaHWeH. By the context, however, it is not the fallen angels whom the God, YaHWeH is angry with, it is the "wickedness of man." Also, as noted before, a question that common sense can and does answer -- How is it that these "sons of God", become the offspring of fallen angels? If they are indeed, the sons of the Living God and Creator of all things, how is it moved to a different meaning, as "sons of the angels"? This is truly a doctrine of Devils -- 1 Timothy 4:1 -- read it.
Continuing:
The “nephilim” should not be capitalized and used as a designation of creatures that were around on Earth during this time of Kings taking wives of whomever they choose with no concern for anyone else nor for the family line mixing blood high and low and doing as they pleased as opposed to being good and true leaders of the people they became abusers of power.
I think the “nephilim” were giant animals and if not then perhaps they were giant men or giant people as mentioned later whom the Israelis eventually wiped out. If these had be offspring of angels I hardly think the Israelis could have done that. In fact, if these had been part angel and part human, like Hercules, then they would be ruling us, don’t you think?
What is not said speaks volume --
- Sons of gods – meaning many gods
- Sons of angels – never mentioned, not once in the whole of your Bible.
- Rebel angels would not be called “sons of god”, they would be called demons or devils – sons of devils.
- Nephilim means giants of a different kind, not of people
- Nephilim is never called children of angels
- Nephilim is never called children of the sons of gods
- Nephilim is never called children
- Nephilim is never called sons of people, Rephaim, or Rapha are giants of a people.
- Nephilim is not children of angels
- Nephilim is the Hebrew for the English word "giant' -- maybe it is also the word for Diosaur, a word not available back in those days?
Nephilim and the NIV
(Num 13:33) We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them." NIV
A final word on the “nephilim” and the modern translation, in this case the NIV. When the term “nephilim” is capitalized it presents this term as if applied to a certain breed or family, like the family of Israel 13:30 ) were not of this opinion and urged the leaders and the people of Israel
It is my opinion that the lying scouts identified the giants as the people of Anak but falsely called them “nephilim” -- as the Rabbinical tales would tell it, over grown humans, angelic hybrids, that eventually turned to eating, literally cannibalizing humans, never able to satisfy their hunger, due to their large size. Technically, according to the writings of Enoch, these were creatures that could not ever have survived on this planet. (Be alert, if you go to the Enoch link, be careful not to be seduced, as some have, by the fantasy nature of that work of fiction -- yes, people of old, were just as capable of writing fictional tales as fictional authors today, and film makers too. No on believes that Star Wars, is a real account, do they? Maybe a thousand years from now, someone will -- the Book of Enoch is the Star Wars of another time. Just keep that in mind.)
Email questions or comments to: dan@servantsofyahshua.com