Giants (Nephilim, Rephaim)

Mr. Mask

New Member
Been trying to find out what I can about the Giants known as Nephilim or Rephaim. So far, I've found out interesting bits from the Bible, Chuck Missler, and a documentary I found called, "Giants: The Mystery and the Myth".

Is anyone else interested in this subject? Has anyone else looked into it. I'm curious what insights others might have on this topic.
 

Mr. Mask

New Member
Update: Checked out the Documentary. It had some good stuff, and some very weird stuff (stuff to do with the giants being a race of aliens that bred with ape-like women to get the humans of today). The weird stuff was weird, and annoying. Still, it had some interesting stuff, like the remnants of structure that apparently was made by decree of Nimrod (maybe it was the Tower of Babel? I'm not sure).


If anyone is curious, I can give you the synopsis of the important bits.
 

tomfoolery_79

New Member
I'm interested (minus the aliens bit). There are lots of wrong theories out there including that angels/demons "married" and had children with women resulting in Nephilim. One thing that people forget is anamolies in the bell curve. What I mean is, often times scientists will find a skeleton and make vast generalizations about the entire group. Imagine if you found Andre the Giant's skeleton, you'd make the wrong assumption that people of his time were...."giants". Likewise if you found someone with a protruding jaw or long arms, etc etc etc.
 

Mr. Mask

New Member
I'm interested (minus the aliens bit). There are lots of wrong theories out there including that angels/demons "married" and had children with women resulting in Nephilim. One thing that people forget is anamolies in the bell curve. What I mean is, often times scientists will find a skeleton and make vast generalizations about the entire group. Imagine if you found Andre the Giant's skeleton, you'd make the wrong assumption that people of his time were...."giants". Likewise if you found someone with a protruding jaw or long arms, etc etc etc.
Aside from technicalities (angels could be seen as alien, in that they aren't of the Earth), I don't like alien views so much either, specially not their one (some people like the idea of aliens creating humans, oddly enough).

Haven't heard the one about half-angel-demons procreating with humans, before... it sounds rather baseless.

They mention cases of multiple skeletons of over seven feet being found--but I'm having trouble finding much evidence. Maybe I'll be able to find something about the very large skulls they mention (there were pictures of those, I think).


What Does God Say About... Nephilim? Not much.
Yes. There are a few passages in relation to the Nephilim, but not a lot is said. I've found out some interesting things from ancient stories relating to giants, though.



Are the two of you familiar with the passages related to Nephilim? They are easy to pass over (didn't notice them till it was pointed out), so I thought I should ask.
 

Daniel434

New Member
Been trying to find out what I can about the Giants known as Nephilim or Rephaim. So far, I've found out interesting bits from the Bible, Chuck Missler, and a documentary I found called, "Giants: The Mystery and the Myth".

Is anyone else interested in this subject? Has anyone else looked into it. I'm curious what insights others might have on this topic.
I take a more controversial stance in that I believe in the Nephilim as the off-spring between fallen angels and women. I believe these are the angels spoken of in Jude 6-7:

6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.
To sum up Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum and his stance on this issue; He believes this was a Satanic attempt to corrupt the seed of the woman mentioned in Genesis 3:15 to prevent the birth of the Messiah as he views (and I do as well) Genesis 3:15 to be a Messianic passage. It is a controversial stance, and I know that most Biblical scholars would disagree with me.
 

Abba San

Legacy of Elijah [LoE] - Proud Grandfather
I take a more controversial stance in that I believe in the Nephilim as the off-spring between fallen angels and women. I believe these are the angels spoken of in Jude 6-7:

It is a controversial stance, and I know that most Biblical scholars would disagree with me.
I'm not sure that is accurate...I think most Bible scholars would at least consider it a possibility if not agree with you.
 

Mr. Mask

New Member
Chuck Missler takes that view, and he's a pretty intellectual guy. The Sons God (translated from a word always associated with angels) taking women and having an evil offspring was a common view for a very long time.

I see a lot of evidence for the theory of corrupting the seed, but one thing confuses me. Thought Satan wasn't sure what God was planning? Got that impression somewhere, that Satan doesn't know what is being planned--but it might be a misinterpretation.
 

Kyrel Ruth

New Member
I take a more controversial stance in that I believe in the Nephilim as the off-spring between fallen angels and women. I believe these are the angels spoken of in Jude 6-7:



To sum up Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum and his stance on this issue; He believes this was a Satanic attempt to corrupt the seed of the woman mentioned in Genesis 3:15 to prevent the birth of the Messiah as he views (and I do as well) Genesis 3:15 to be a Messianic passage. It is a controversial stance, and I know that most Biblical scholars would disagree with me.
I have been taught this as well, and I believe it.
.
 

Daniel434

New Member
@ Mr. Mask, Abba San, and Kyrel Ruth:

Wow, I thought I was in the minority on this one!

Mr. Mask said:
Thought Satan wasn't sure what God was planning?
Hrmm. You raise an excellent question. I will have to think and research about this one. Satan was perhaps aware of what God meant when he spoke to him in Genesis 3:15 [NIV]:

And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
Satan once held a high authority in heaven and certainly knew of the Trinity. But to say that he knew The Second Person of the Triune Godhead would come down in human flesh to die for the sins of man, now that like I said, is an excellent question. I'll have to get back to you on that one, or maybe it is just something we will never know this side of eternity. If anyone has better insight, please share.

EDIT: Another possibility, Dr. Fruchtenbaum is just wrong on this. ;) Perhaps the angels sinned / rebelled against God as did Satan and it was not an orchestrated event so to speak.
 
Last edited:

Atown

Christian Gamers Alliance Amazon Store Manager
Staff member
I've done a decent amount of research because well... i like this stuff a lot :D

The book of Enoch actually explains a lot but the earliest transcript we have is about 200bc . it is considered apart of the Ethiopian cannon and was found with its brother book, the book of giants, with the dead sea scrolls.

There are a lot of theories, and weird oddities. I personally take genesis literally and take an eastern mind set on the issue, e.g. well God could have and according to the Bible allowed this to happen, there were giants, and now there really arent any. I cant explain it to prove that it is fact, but paradoxes are allowed in eastern mind set, so it makes sense to a westerner to logically choose an eastern thought :D .

I also theorize that remnants of nephilim could be neanderthals


CLARIFICATION: and I do this having read recently, "The Unknown Cloud," written by a monk in 1300AD, DO NOT READ THE BOOK OF ENOCH OR THE BOOK OF GIANTS UNLESS - you already have a strong walk with God and are unable toe walk in the leading olf the holy spirit as to not take things out of context or allow things to affect the idea's or convictions, especially relating to the relationship with God and salvation.
 
Last edited:

Neirai the Forgiven

Christian Guilds List Manager
Just a warning: The Book of Enoch is listed as pseudopygraphia, or "ancient books that were clearly not written by who they say they were." Certain scholars have decent reason to believe that the Book of Enoch was written in Greece during the time period around when Christ was born on earth. Others argue that it was written three to four hundred years before Christ was born.
 

Mr. Mask

New Member
Wow, I thought I was in the minority on this one!
On quite a few forums, you would've been. Seems this one is quite good :).

Hrmm. You raise an excellent question. I will have to think and research about this one. Satan was perhaps aware of what God meant when he spoke to him in Genesis 3:15 [NIV]

Satan once held a high authority in heaven and certainly knew of the Trinity. But to say that he knew The Second Person of the Triune Godhead would come down in human flesh to die for the sins of man, now that like I said, is an excellent question. I'll have to get back to you on that one, or maybe it is just something we will never know this side of eternity. If anyone has better insight, please share.

EDIT: Another possibility, Dr. Fruchtenbaum is just wrong on this. Perhaps the angels sinned / rebelled against God as did Satan and it was not an orchestrated event so to speak.
Seems we come to the same conclusion :D. 'Course, no way of knowing, but we can speculate a bit.

One thing I realize, typing this post, is that the angels who did this were confined to Tartarus. It doesn't mention Satan being punished for this deed, though. This makes me think they did it more of their own accord (though I guess they were in Satan's camp, at the time).


I've done a decent amount of research because well... i like this stuff a lot

The book of Enoch actually explains a lot but the earliest transcript we have is about 200bc . it is considered apart of the Ethiopian cannon and was found with its brother book, the book of giants, with the dead sea scrolls.

There are a lot of theories, and weird oddities. I personally take genesis literally and take an eastern mind set on the issue, e.g. well God could have and according to the Bible allowed this to happen, there were giants, and now there really arent any. I cant explain it to prove that it is fact, but paradoxes are allowed in eastern mind set, so it makes sense to a westerner to logically choose an eastern thought .

I also theorize that remnants of nephilim could be neanderthals


CLARIFICATION: and I do this having read recently, "The Unknown Cloud," written by a monk in 1300AD, DO NOT READ THE BOOK OF ENOCH OR THE BOOK OF GIANTS UNLESS - you already have a strong walk with God and are unable toe walk in the leading olf the holy spirit as to not take things out of context or allow things to affect the idea's or convictions, especially relating to the relationship with God and salvation.
Some of the text in the book of Enoch may be related to what people knew of Enoch and life before the flood, at the time of its writing. It's a pity that much of the book uses exaggerated legend rather than serious recording--since this makes it hard to find valuable information amongst the misleading information.

As for there being no giants... I think it was their habits which did it. Various ancient legends talk about fierce giants who were cannibals. At one point or another, the people manage to wipe the giants out (the Native American tribes allied against the tribe of giants, for example).

The people known as Neanderthals are reckoned to be pretty short on average, so it's likely they were a different group.


I agree, and also recommend no one read the book of Enoch seriously. If one read it seriously, it'd change their view of Christianity quite a bit, since the book has legend in it rather than God's inspiration.



Thanks Neirai! That link will be very useful to this discussion. Will look over those verses, in case I realize anything or had missed some of them in the past.
 

Atown

Christian Gamers Alliance Amazon Store Manager
Staff member
As for there being no giants... I think it was their habits which did it. Various ancient legends talk about fierce giants who were cannibals. At one point or another, the people manage to wipe the giants out (the Native American tribes allied against the tribe of giants, for example).

The people known as Neanderthals are reckoned to be pretty short on average, so it's likely they were a different group.
Hence, if it was 1 time spot in history in which it happened, a consistent de-evolution of them would occur into what we now know as neanderthals :)
 

tomfoolery_79

New Member
I disagree. It's not logical to interpret Jude that way, it's a stretch. I agree with Loren, that God/Bible do not say much on the topic and that more than what is revealed is risky speculation. If someone really is interested in this, pick up your Systematic Theology book by Wayne Grudem which all of you should own and read the chapter on Angels/Demons. He addresses this topic directly and makes biblical and logical arguments against it. If you don't own it, add it to your library.
 

Mr. Mask

New Member
Hence, if it was 1 time spot in history in which it happened, a consistent de-evolution of them would occur into what we now know as neanderthals
From the accounts I've seen so far, they seem to have been wiped out pretty thoroughly.


I disagree. It's not logical to interpret Jude that way, it's a stretch. I agree with Loren, that God/Bible do not say much on the topic and that more than what is revealed is risky speculation. If someone really is interested in this, pick up your Systematic Theology book by Wayne Grudem which all of you should own and read the chapter on Angels/Demons. He addresses this topic directly and makes biblical and logical arguments against it. If you don't own it, add it to your library.
Which parts are you referring to, Tom? Do you mean just my bit of speculation as to the angels acting of their own accord?
 

Daniel434

New Member
I disagree. It's not logical to interpret Jude that way, it's a stretch. I agree with Loren, that God/Bible do not say much on the topic and that more than what is revealed is risky speculation. If someone really is interested in this, pick up your Systematic Theology book by Wayne Grudem which all of you should own and read the chapter on Angels/Demons. He addresses this topic directly and makes biblical and logical arguments against it. If you don't own it, add it to your library.
I do not believe it's a stretch. I do think it is a mystery. What exactly is Jude referring to when he says that angels left their proper domain and went after strange flesh? If you have answers, please supply them. :)

Here it is again from the NET:

1:6 You also know that 27 the angels who did not keep within their proper domain 28 but abandoned their own place of residence, he has kept 29 in eternal chains 30 in utter 31 darkness, locked up 32 for the judgment of the great Day. 1:7 So also 33 Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighboring towns, 34 since they indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire 35* in a way similar to 36 these angels, 37 are now displayed as an example by suffering the punishment of eternal fire.
At the bottom of my post I'll post the NET Bible notes on 35.

My Systematic Theology is that of Charles Ryrie and Arnold Fruchtenbaum. My favorite book on theology is:
Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology by (ofc) Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum. Wayne Grudem is certainly a great scholar, but, I've always valued the Jewish mindset to Scriptures. I find it very valuable. Also, I'm a dispensationalist, so naturally my Systematic Theology is extremely different than that of Wayne Grudem who is a reformed (covenant theologian) Calvinist.


*35 tn Grk “strange flesh.” This phrase has been variously interpreted. It could refer to flesh of another species (such as angels lusting after human flesh). This would aptly describe the sin of the angels, but not easily explain the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. It could refer to the homosexual practices of the Sodomites, but a difficulty arises from the use of ἕτερος ({etero"; “strange,” “other”). When this is to be distinguished from ἄλλος (allos, “another”) it suggests “another of a different kind.” If so, would that properly describe homosexual behavior? In response, the language could easily be compact: “pursued flesh other than what was normally pursued.” However, would this find an analogy in the lust of angels (such would imply that angels normally had sexual relations of some sort, but cf. Matt 22:30)? Another alternative is that the focus of the parallel is on the activity of the surrounding cities and the activity of the angels. This is especially plausible since the participles ἐκπορνεύσασαι (ekporneusasai, “having indulged in sexual immorality”) and ἀπελθοῦσαι (apelqousai, “having pursued”) have concord with “cities” (πόλεις, poleis), a feminine plural noun, rather than with Sodom and Gomorrah (both masculine nouns). If so, then their sin would not necessarily have to be homosexuality. However, most likely the feminine participles are used because of constructio ad sensum (construction according to sense). That is, since both Sodom and Gomorrah are cities, the feminine is used to imply that all the cities are involved. The connection with angels thus seems to be somewhat loose: Both angels and Sodom and Gomorrah indulged in heinous sexual immorality. Thus, whether the false teachers indulge in homosexual activity is not the point; mere sexual immorality is enough to condemn them.
The Bold is my emphasis ofc :)

Just a warning: The Book of Enoch is listed as pseudopygraphia, or "ancient books that were clearly not written by who they say they were." Certain scholars have decent reason to believe that the Book of Enoch was written in Greece during the time period around when Christ was born on earth. Others argue that it was written three to four hundred years before Christ was born.
Actually, Jude refers to the book of Enoch in verses 14-15 and the assumption of Moses in verse 9.
 
Last edited:

tomfoolery_79

New Member
Jews have a vested interest in misinterpreting the Bible. For example, "Let us make man in our image." They suggest it's angels there too and not the Trinity. The Trinity would make reference to Christ and that doesn't fit their dogma.

I think Jude is pretty obvious, he is talking about the general rebellion of the angels in heaven. When Satan rebelled and a third of the angels rebelled with him they gave up their proper domain in heaven and were cast into hell. Sodom and Gomorrah rebelled (sinned, specifically sexual sin) and therefore were "cast" from there prominence as well. Burned with sulfur, if you will.

I believe Calvanism is biblical and therefore I am too am a calvanist.
 
Last edited:

tomfoolery_79

New Member
*35 tn Grk “strange flesh.” This phrase has been variously interpreted. It could refer to flesh of another species (such as angels lusting after human flesh). This would aptly describe the sin of the angels, but not easily explain the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. It could refer to the homosexual practices of the Sodomites, but a difficulty arises from the use of ἕτερος ({etero"; “strange,” “other”). When this is to be distinguished from ἄλλος (allos, “another”) it suggests “another of a different kind.” If so, would that properly describe homosexual behavior? In response, the language could easily be compact: “pursued flesh other than what was normally pursued.” However, would this find an analogy in the lust of angels (such would imply that angels normally had sexual relations of some sort, but cf. Matt 22:30)? Another alternative is that the focus of the parallel is on the activity of the surrounding cities and the activity of the angels. This is especially plausible since the participles ἐκπορνεύσασαι (ekporneusasai, “having indulged in sexual immorality”) and ἀπελθοῦσαι (apelqousai, “having pursued”) have concord with “cities” (πόλεις, poleis), a feminine plural noun, rather than with Sodom and Gomorrah (both masculine nouns). If so, then their sin would not necessarily have to be homosexuality. However, most likely the feminine participles are used because of constructio ad sensum (construction according to sense). That is, since both Sodom and Gomorrah are cities, the feminine is used to imply that all the cities are involved. The connection with angels thus seems to be somewhat loose: Both angels and Sodom and Gomorrah indulged in heinous sexual immorality. Thus, whether the false teachers indulge in homosexual activity is not the point; mere sexual immorality is enough to condemn them.

The bold is my emphasis. It could not as well. Interpretations are just that, conjecture based on reason and logic. Again, since the bible isn't clear I consider this speculation and nothing more.
 
Top