Under consideration are aspects of the book Sons of God: Who We Are, Why We Are Here by Zen Garcia (Bachelor of Arts at Mercer University, 1999).
I am acquainted with Garcia due to the claim so succinctly put in the titled of another of his books, Lucifer: Father of Cain. Indeed, he denies that Adam fathered Cain (as is to clearly affirmed in Gen 4:1) and claims that Lucifer fathered him (as not even hinted at anywhere in the entire Bible).
His claim on that issue led us to a lengthy and detailed discussion which became one of the books in my five-volume Cain As Serpent Seed of Satan series, the one subtitled, Considering Zen Garcia s Claims.
Garcia notes, “I would especially like to thank Dr. Joye Jeffries Pugh” and she too is featured in my series (subtitled Considering the Claims of Various Promulgators of this Theory). Dr. Pugh and Garcia even did a series of videos together teaching that theory.
Yet, she grew concerned with him when she found out that he began claiming that we humans are here to bring Dharma which is a reference to Eastern mysticism pertaining to Hinduism and Buddhism (and he did change his first name to Zen, as in Buddhism).
Dr. Pugh has noted that the Nag Hammadi Gnostic texts are Satanic teachings. Yet, Zen Garcia actually claims:
Many biblical researchers have never heard of Sophia-Pistis and as such cannot make sense of the stories related by the Nag Hammadi codices.
It is important to note that these teachings come directly from Yahushuah to the twelve apostles after His resurrection when, as Christ, He returned to teach the mysteries of heaven before departing in ascension.
These teachings are considered the newest New Testament apocrypha and cover mysteries, secrets, and insights that were, as then, mostly untouched by earlier gospels and teachings.
Sophia-Pistis, or Pistis Sophia, refers to a Gnostic feminine deity.
Thus, Zen Garcia teaches that texts which literally corrupt biblical doctrine (by, in part, taking what the Bible states and turning it inside-out, upside-down, and backward), are actually the key teachings of Jesus/Yahushuah and enjoy the prominence of being in the apostolic line, no less.
By, “untouched by earlier gospels and teachings” we are to understand that it is because the earlier, only true, gospels are not Gnostic.
We can further see that Garcia is a Gnostic within the thank you he lists at the beginning of his book, “As always first honor to the Holy Trinity (Great Mystery): YHWH Father Creator, Yahushuah, only begotten Son, and Barbelo the Holy Spirit” with Barbelo being another Gnostic concept of feminine deity sometimes referred to as Mother-Father.
Thus, he has accepted Gnosticism to the point of inserting it into God’s very ontology, His triune nature.
Zen Garcia also notes, “I would especially like to thank…Jonathan Kleck” which is no surprise since he, along with Kleck, answer the subject book subtitle’s question, “Who We Are” as Garcia put it within a prayer in the opening of his book, “guide us in the discernment you would have us share with one another in awakening each other to the realities of what we face here on this planet as angels trapped in a fallen state”: they literally claim that we humans are Angels.
He went on to write, “I believe we are the Sons of God who were once part of the Elohim that served in the Celestial Morningstar council of Yahweh/Yahushuah’s administration prior to this incarnation as modern-day human beings.”
At this point, I will merely note that Angels/Sons of God would not need to incarnate (literally taking on flesh) since they are ontologically incarnated in a flesh of their own already.
Yet, Zen Garcia also claims, “The recreation of Adam and Eve into flesh bodies happens on the eighth day and is described in the Nag Hammadi codices as the elevation of the third creation of eighth-day dust Adam and Eve” and, “the Genesis 3 Adam is a whole different being from the Genesis 2 creature molded by the Elohim prior to humanity’s recreation on the eighth day as cited in the Nag Hammadi codices.”
The Nag Hammadi codices are not understood well by those seeking to parallel them with the fall of Genesis 3 in the Old Testament.
What people fail to realize is that these texts focus on humanity’s story post-Fall…what happened to Adam and Eve after having been transformed into their eighth day bodies, which were flesh and blood physical vessels similar to the bodies we inhabit today…
It was not until I had read and delved into the Nag Hammadi codices that I myself began to discern what had happened to Adam and Eve after they were banished from paradise and were already fallen.
Do you discern a patter? It is a Gnostic pattern: deny and corrupt what the Bible states based on Gnostic teachings.
In fact, he further noted:
It was not until I had read and delved into the Nag Hammadi codices that I myself began to discern what had happened to Adam and Eve after they were banished from paradise and were already fallen. I believe that this understanding is essential for making sense…
It’s my belief that these codices shed light on new information, which—for the earnest truth seekers—can and does fill in gaps of knowledge that would otherwise remain ambiguous…
Like the Books of Enoch, they [“The Nag Hammadi codices”] shed light into the strange phenomena that was the rebel angels and nephilim of Genesis 6. They bring insight to a story that remains seemingly veiled even to this day.
…help one to unlock the teachings of the Nag Hammadi codices, Dead Sea scrolls, as well as other apocryphal and pseudipigraphal books, for without this insight, comprehension of these teachings, in my opinion, is just not possible. (emphasis added for emphasis)
That is Gnosticism 101.
Now, one of the first things that I discussed with Zen Garcia was his assertion that originally, Adam and Eve were disincarnate spirits who did not live on Earth.
Clearly, they were both incarnated at the moment of their creation (not recreation) and it was right here on Earth: Gen chaps 1 and 2 make this abundantly clear. Yet, when Gnostic teachings come along millennia after Gen then, it must apparently be rejected and/or manipulated to force fit Gnosticism—at least, that is Zen Garcia’s modus operandi.
Gen 1 notes (granting that earth refers to various things from literal soil to our planet):
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth…God said, “…let the dry land appear.”…God called the dry land Earth…the earth…the earth…The earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them….And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth…”…the earth…the earth…the earth…the earth…
Having given a basic overview, Gen 2 follows with specifics about the how of Adam and Eve’s physical creation upon the earth:
…the earth…the earth…the earth…the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature…the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man…
…beguiling caused Eve to desire the same promise that caused Lucifer’s initial fall…This desire caused Adam and Eve to lose their bright natures or light vestures since their bodies had initially been clothed in light and immortality.
This eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil would result in their incarnation into flesh upon the lower Earth where they would be living among the devils and demons already banished there. This text even mentions that the result of eating of that forbidden fruit was in fact incarnation into the flesh.
What is odd (and/or manipulative?) is that in the book under consideration, he writes the likes of, “eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” with the implication that it was literal eating of literal fruit from a literal tree—which is for it was, in reality. Yet, as per his theory of Lucifer being Cain’s dad, he claims that those are symbolic statements that refer to sex with Lucifer.
Thus, we would have to re-read this as that, Adam and Eve having sex with Lucifer resulted in their incarnation into flesh upon the lower Earth, etc.
Yet, the tree was on Earth and since Garcia insists (at least on occasion) that tree means Lucifer then he too was on Earth at the time.
Also, eating and sex are both physical actions thus, how could they have partaken in either of those physical actions if they were not incarnated at the time? Well, such logical, chrono-logical, and bio-logical issues are non-issues when you can just wave your hand and reinterpret and misinterpret everything to fit Gnosticism from AD times which is used to reread and misread theology from BC times.
Moreover, Zen Garcia refers to, “sixth day humanity” versus, “Pre-adamic man” (for which there is no biblical data) by which he is referring to, “pre-adamic humanity or Bigfoot looking Cro- Magnon Neanderthal man.”
He further claims:
Pre-adamic man was already present on the planet with dinosaurs and the dragons that were the Nachash of Genesis 3; this is the era when the Annunaki giants ruled upon the earth. The reason the Annunaki worked to mold this early prototype apelike human into being was to alter a slave needed to mine the gold necessary for them to protect their own planet’s atmosphere.
Nachash is the Hebrew word used for serpent/snake in the case of Gen 3.
So, his view is that, “pre-adamic humanity” were, “Bigfoot looking” and, “prototype apelike human,” “Cro- Magnon Neanderthal man” until the Annunaki stepped it and reengineered us.
By Annunaki, he is referring to, “Nephilim of Genesis 6 or the Annunaki of Sumerian legend…it’s my assertion that the Annunaki, or those from heaven to earth came, are the same Nephilim (fallen angels, not giants) of Genesis 6.” By, “those from heaven to earth came” he is clearly clumsily paraphrasing Zecharia Sitchin’s fallacious mistranslation of Nephilim as, “those who from heaven to earth came.”
Zen Garcia notes, “Satan arrived to this planet with a group of fifty other Annunaki somewhere between 450,000 to 432,000 years ago.” He (mis) identified Annunaki as Nephilim but has Satan being one of other Annunaki which would make him a Nephil thus, this is an incoherent category error.
He also writes of, “Annunaki angels” yet, Satan is not an Angel, he is a Cherub.
He writes of, “Annunaki giants,” whatever he may imply by the vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage modern English word giants. Well, he goes on to write, “the giants or the men of renown of Genesis 6, the children of Anak, or Annunaki.”
Based on his paraphrasing Gen 6:4, by giants he is merely referring to a rendering (not even translating) of Nephilim.
Thus, contextually, Annunaki giants merely means Annunaki Nephilim. Of course, that only complicates things since Nephilim did not exist until after, “men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born to them” (Gen 6:1).
Yet, if we have learned anything is that we are not to think that the Bible says what it means and means what it says since Zen Garcia can come along millennia after the fact and redefine what is meant by men and by born and by daughters and by earth and scramble to chronology as well: anything to fit Gnosticism.
Yet, he complicates matters and is even more anachronistic when he writes, “men of renown of Genesis 6, the children of Anak, or Annunaki…The land of Canaan was filled with giants who were the tribes of Anak or the Annunaki.”
I can only imagine that he imagines that Anak has something to do with Annunaki because when transliterated into English, the two words share the English letters A, N, and K.
According to Zen Garcia, Annunaki-Giants-Nephilim-Angels came to Earth somewhere between 450,000 to 432,000 years ago. Yet, the 100% Earth born human Anakim did not exist until centuries post-flood (whenever Garcia might date that) and they were named after Anak, Arba’s son (Joshua 15:13) and not some extraterrestrials.
As for, “The land of Canaan was filled with giants who were the tribes of Anak or the Annunaki” well, “The land of Canaan was filled with giants who were the tribes of Anak,” period, which, actually, were not even a tribe since they were a clan of the Rephaim tribe.
Yet, Zen Garcia claims, “Annunaki and Nephilim, are reptilian in nature and descend from the skies to the Earth to initiate formal contacts with pre-adamic human cultures.” But why, “Annunaki and Nephilim” if they are one in the same?
Many people consider my work contentious simply because I quote extensively from a wide variety of sources which include the Nag Hammadi codices, Dead Sea Scrolls, apocryphal, pseudepigraphal, Sumerian, Babylonian, Masonic, Satanic, Luciferian, Egyptian, Celtic, Mayan as well as Old Testament, New Testament, and extra biblical sources.
The reason I provide such extensive citation is so the reader can verify for himself or herself the sources used in tying and piecing together the story that I will unfold here.
Speaking for myself, I do not consider his work contentious simply because he quotes such sources. Rather, I consider it contentious, and fallacious, because of the same patter I discern when I consider pop-researcher Gary Wayne, et al., which is that they not only merely quote such sources but incorporate that which such sources say into their theology.
They will appeal to anything and everything written by anyone at any time and anywhere for any reason just as long as they are able to derive something, anything, from them and then claim authority—even if they have to take texts out of context to make pretexts for prooftexts and water everything down so give the appearance of cohesion.
Thus, the issue is not extensive citation but contextually incoherent citations.
One result of their approach is incoherence since they are attempting to mash together so many contradictory and/or unrelated texts.
For example, Zen Garcia ends up with multiple worlds and multiple humanitys and multiple Adams which he must create in a desperate attempt at cohesion: we got a taste of that in his reference to Annunaki aka Anakim aka Nephilim aka Giants aka Angels aka Sons of God.
I find that their approach leads to three basic reactions because the presentations are so very chaotic, by definition:
1) Instant dismissal.
2) Devoting a significant part of one’s life to tracking down all of their sources so as to ensure that the context from which they are taken (including tracking down linguistics issues—recall the whole A, N, K thing) match the context into which they are put and cohere.
3) Just sit back and be ignorantly and gullibly enamored with that which I term neo-theo-sci-fi-tall-tales, which seems to be the reaction of those who become their fans and due to thinking: wow, he knows so much stuff of which I’m unaware!!!
We continue with an example of how Zen Garcia is all but forced to violate Ockham’s Razor’s adage that we ought to not multiply entities without necessity—well, Garcia has a necessity since his grand-all-encompassing theory does not work without such multiplication since any one iteration fails him.
Here is the example:
The First World Age ended also in cataclysmic deluge, but not the same one Noah was spared from. The deluge of Noah’s day occurred during the Second World Age and after the fall, incarnation into flesh, and incursion of the watchers during the time of Jared.
Speaking of Annunaki aka Anakim aka Nephilim aka Giants aka Angels aka Sons of God, note that Zen Garcia wrote of, “a hybrid race of beings termed by the Bible as giants or men of renown.” Now, that would be Nephilim aka Giants and indeed, they were hybrids.
Yet, if it refers to Annunaki then they were not hybrid.
If to Anakim then they were not hybrid.
If to Angels/Sons of God then they were not hybrid.
Garcia offers this warning:
…most do not associate the rebel angels with the Nephilim of Genesis 6 or the Annunaki of Sumerian legend.
Most believe these beings to be different groups of mythological entities; however, in my work I have found them to be one and the same.
If one does not know that these beings are one and the same, one might possibly be set-up for the strong delusion that these fallen ones are benevolent and that they are—and were—the de facto creators of humanity.
This is the strong delusion spoken of in 2 Thessalonians, “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.”
I am unsure who are the, “most” to whom he was referring but to, “associate the rebel angels with the Nephilim of Genesis 6” (not necessarily, “the Annunaki”) was the traditional, original, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christian commentators alike for many, many centuries and continued on until today—see my book On the Genesis 6 Affair’s Sons of God: Angels or Not?: A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim.
Yet, it does seem to me that some people do reject the Angel view after encountering Garcia’s brand of neo-theo-sci-fi-tall-tales, they seem to opt for throwing out the coherent baby with the watered-down bathwater.
The listen to me because my claims are unique pop-research ploy is that people unaware that Nephilim and the Annunaki of Sumerian legend are one in the same, “might possibly be set-up for the strong delusion” which, apparently, will be a greater delusion than believing someone who sells themselves as a Christian teacher of Christianity but who is a Gnostic teacher of Gnosticism.
It is odd that he somberly warns again the deception that, “these fallen…were—the de facto creators of humanity” and yet, that is precisely what Zen Garcia teaches: the whole thing about how pre-Adamic Bigfoot-looking-prototype-apelike human-humanity were Cro-Magnon-Neanderthal until the Annunaki stepped it and reengineered us.
Garcia specifies some unbiblical mixture consisting of when, “The rebel angels were joined by the fallen watchers.” Recall that he must multiply all of the characters in his grand theory since sticking to the actual ones fails his desired ends.
In this case, he, for some reason, jumps from the modern English word, “angels” to, “watchers” which is a translation of a Second Temple Era manner whereby to refer Angels. Thus, I can only imagine that he opted for a word swap dude to that in neo-theo-sck-fi-tall-tale circles, one is not cool unless they are influenced by 1 Enoch/Ethiopic Enoch to refer to Watchers rather than the boring ol‘ Angels.
Garcia argues that, “another group of the Lord’s angels challenged Him…claiming that they had been born into flesh bodies…” but missed that biblically, Angles were indeed, “born into flesh bodies”: they are described as looking like human males, performing physical actions and without a single word about how such is not their nature, their ontology, how they were born.
He has them, “transformed them into bodies of flesh” as punishment but such is not a biblical concept. Rather, it is a Gnostic concept: Garcia has Adam and Eve plus Angels being incarnated as punishments and Gnosticism condemns the physical realm as being evil in nature while biblically, it was created, “good”—it then fell and will be redeemed.
For some odd reason, he has them very specifically, “lusting after the daughters of Cain” and actually wrote, “Genesis 6, which discusses the fallen angels mating with the daughters of Cain and creating a race of giants” but Genesis 6 discusses no such thing: it was the general daughters of men and not specifically daughters of Cain.
Zen Garcia wrote:
When Yahushuah was sacrificed on the cross on the hill of Golgotha (which means Goliath of Gath), he actually fulfilled the prophecy of Genesis 3:15, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”
Christ, as the seed of the woman, was—on the day of His crucifixion—crushing the skull of Goliath, whom as a hybrid giant was of the seed of the serpent, nipping at the heel of the Lord.
While it does not seem to be the case that Golgotha directly means Goliath of Gath, I ponder if he has read my book What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim? A Styled Giantology and Nephilology since therein, I concluded that the linguistics imply just that.
However, there is no viable reason to think that Goliath had anything to do with the, “seed of the serpent.” At least not in the way that Garcia is (mis) reading it. Goliath was of the seed of the serpent in the same way that anyone committing ungodly actions is since that is all about actions, not generics.
There is also no reliable indication that Goliath was, “a hybrid.”
Now, since Garcia calls him a, “giant” without defining that vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage term then we must consider it in three ways:
Giant as in Nephilim: was not nor could have been since they did not make it past the flood in any way, shape, or form.
Giant as in Repha: yes, that is the tribe to which he pertained. Now, his clan were the Anakim and so Garcia might attempt to argue that Num 13:33 correlates Anakim with Nephilim and yet, that is one mere sentence that merely records an evil report stated by utterly unreliable guys whom God rebuked—and mention of Anakim is utterly missing from the Septuagint/LXX version of that verse.
Even Zen Garcia noted, “hybrid giant lines, were then wiped out…The rest would be slaughtered in the ultimate judgment of a world-wide deluge.”
Giant as in unusually tall: most reliably, based on the preponderance of the earliest data, he was four cubits and a span/just shy of 7 ft.
Those hybrid seed lines that they brought into being, specifically the hybrid giant lines, were then wiped out and led by the Lord’s angels to war against one another.
The rest would be slaughtered in the ultimate judgment of a world-wide deluge with the Lord, sparing Noah (still pure in his generations, meaning uncorrupted by fallen angel DNA) and his family, so that they could then re-populate the planet in pure and replenished innocence.
Pray tell, why would, “the Lord’s angels to war against one another” since, by definition, the Lord’s angels are the loyal ones? The only somewhat relevant event of which I am aware is, “war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels fought back” (Rev 12). Yet, that is a post-Jesus’ resurrection event.
Note that he has it that, “pure…uncorrupted…re-populate the planet” yet, he also claimed that the post-flood Goliath was a hybrid so, did God fail?
Moreover, he wrote:
Four of these angels will be loosed from the river Euphrates during the end of days, or as in the days of Noah.
After the flood, the children of Ham resurrect worship of the fallen watchers who then infiltrate their lines birthing hybrid giant lines in Philistia and Bashaan…
As we had an incursion of fallen angels and giants during the time of Jared and Enoch prior to the flood of Noah, so shall the same be repeated here in the last days as we approach the harvest and the separation of the wheat and the tares.
Claiming post-flood Nephilim implies God failed: He meant to be rid of them but could not get the job done, the flood was much of a waste, He missed a loophole whereby they survived or just came right back—and then one must literally invent a story about how they survived or came back, just as Zen Garcia did.
If I had to guess, Garcia pinpointed Philistia and Bashaan since Goliath hailed from the former and King Og from the latter. And yet, Og is another non-issue since he too was a Repha and we have no physical description of him—at least not until folklore from many millennia later, see my book The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?
In all of this, keep in mind that Garcia complicated his own tall-tale by asserting, “Nephilim (fallen angels, not giants)” which is fallacious as per Gen and even as per the Bible contradicting 1 Enoch/Ethiopic Enoch which is folklore from millennia after the Torah. Fallen Angels fathered Nephilim.
Yet, he also wrote of, “rebel angels and nephilim” but if it is a case of, “Nephilim (fallen angels” then it cannot be a case of two distinct groups, “rebel angels and nephilim.” It appears that his grand theory is such a chaotic concoction that he cannot even keep it straight.
Ironically, he notes that, “the stories were mixed, distorted, and changed during the evolution of humanity” yet, even as he claims the Gnosis whereby to unravel it all and set it all aright, he shows that he is only succeeding in increasing the mixture, distortion, and changes.
As for the cryptic reference to, “the end of days, or as in the days of Noah” he went on to write, “the Lord predicted that as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the days of the second coming of the Son of Man.”
Indeed, “the Lord predicted” that and it is one of the most abused and misused verses amongst pop-researchers. What they do is just what Zen Garcia did: they quote half or even one verse and then assert to what it refers and that is something to do with Nephilim.
Yet, what Jesus said, His meaning, His emphasis, was:
Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man.
They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.
Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot—they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all—so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed (Luke 17).
Thus, it pertains to examples of being unaware or unconcerned with coming judgment.
Regarding, “the Sumerian king list and another similar king list proposed by Berossus—a Hellenized Chaldean philosopher and astrologer commissioned by Antiochus I to account for pre-human history” Zen Garcia notes, “the first rulers on the list were demigods in the sense that they were hybrid beings, children of the Nephilim coupling with the peoples of pre-adamic humanity.”
Again, it may be a fool’s arrand to inset biblical chronology into this but he has Nephilim/Annunaki coupling with pre-adamic humanity even though, again, the actual Nephilim came about post-Adam, when Adamite men (the only sort that ever existed) began to multiply and daughters were born to them.
Yet, Zen Garcia has Nephilim/Annunaki also as being the fallen Angels themselves. Well, same difference since the biblical fall/sin of Angels is very close in time (likely the normative nine months) to the emerging of biblical Nephilim—emerging form the womb.
Zen Garcia notes, “There are even modern-day reports of giants still living in the land within Afghanistan” but that is merely an internet hoax based on a couple of anonymous guys making vague claims about generic regions.
Moreover, it was promulgated by two contextually very unreliable people: LA Marzulli and the plagiarist Stephen Quayle, both of whom literally make their living by selling tall-tales and both of whom teach un-biblical Nephilology—for proof of these claims see my book Nephilim and Giants as per Pop-Researchers.
Garcia appeals to, “Barry Chamish, a secular journalist from Israel” who wrote a book titled The Return of the Giants, “His book asserts that many Isreali citizens not only reported incidents dealing with either UFO craft or with the 7-foot, round-faced giants cited as occupying them…Barry’s work verifies that UFOs are associated with giants and that they are indeed returning.” Thus, God must have missed the UFO loophole.
Chamish is quoted as promising, “absolute proof” in the form of, “the village of Yatzitz, twelve miles east of Rishon Letzion. The giants had opened a new axis after Kadima, a triangle of twenty miles linking Rishon Letzion, Holon and Yatzitz,” whatever that is supposed to mean.
Yet, the point is that at that locale, “Herzl Casatini, the village security chief…opened the door and stood face to face with a nine-foot tall creature in metallic clothes, whose face was hidden in ‘a haze.’ He shut the door and called the police. They arrived and discovered deep boot tracks.”
It would appear that absolute proof of a return of to whomever Chamish may be referring to as giants are deep boot tracks.
But wait, that is not all since he has decided that based on the boot tracks (about which he was told but apparently never saw), the being, “had to have literally weighed a ton” and, “was walking almost on tip-toes.”
Thus, “The Yatzitz incident confirmed, even to the deepest skeptics, that giants were indeed sighted and they left proof that was nearly impossible to dispute” because it is literally impossible and anyone but a returned giant from a UFO could have left boot marks—go figure.
He also tells us of, “another credible sighting” in Voronezh, Russia, “originally published by the Russian newspaper TASS” in September 27, 1989 and subsequently in the October 11, 1989 St. Louis Dispatch.
It seems that, “eyewitnesses reported stories of as many as three different nine-foot tall, three-eyed aliens emerging from a UFO type craft that had landed on the outskirts of the city. Witnesses even spoke about a robot accompanying one of the aliens…three-eyed alien about 10-feet tall, clad in silvery overalls and bronze-colored boots and wearing a disk on his chest…with eyes shining.”
Thus, these are cases of someone saying that someone said something and with the only boot tracks as, “absolute proof.”
Now, another of Zen Garcia’s trusted sources is, “a South African Zulu sangoma named Credo Mutwa, born July 21, 1920, to a Christian father and Zulu mother. At the age of fourteen, Credo was initiated by one of his grandfather’s daughters, a sangoma herself taught by Credo’s grandfather, an elder in traditional African wisdom.”
He did not get around to mentioning that, by his own admission, Mutwa was initiated by cannibalizing a human head. Subsequently, he claims that he has also consumed the flesh of a gray alien—the temporary byproduct of which was that he gained superpowers.
He also claims that he has had sex with an alien. He claims that be most effective way to ward off an alien is to start having sex with whomever you are with at any given time upon encountering one—I have a feeling that he encounters lots of aliens.
Garcia notes, “Credo says of the old gods that they were frightening in appearance and that they resembled crocodiles that walked upright and erect, much like the reference to the nachash of Genesis” referring to how, “it was necessary for Lucifer to disguise himself in the form of a serpent.”
Yet, one key feature missing from Genesis 3 is any description of a serpentine/snake being. Yes, the Hebrew word nachash is used but it ranges in usage from snake to gleaming to divination (quite the combo, considering). Yet, even if we take the usage of snake/serpent, assuming that this must imply, “the form of a serpent” is uncalled for and is a word-concept fallacy.
In fact, Rev chaps 12 and 20 reference, “the great dragon…that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan” which tells us nothing about the morphology of this being but only various metaphorical representations, symbolic references, titular statements, etc.—for this being’s actual morphology, see Eze chaps 1 and 10.
Yet, Zen Garcia will surely not be stopped by such facts especially when he asserts, “Satan, when cast from the heavens, was transformed into a dragon.”
He also refers to, “he and his seraphim angels are the reptilian class of angels” with which there are various problems:
Again, he is a Cherub, not a Seraph.
He is a Cherub, not an Angel.
There are also no such things as, “seraphim angels”: just like categorizing Satan as a Seraph or Angel, that is a category error that violates the law of identify since Seraphim are one category of being and Angels are another just as Cherubim and yet another.
There is no indication that Angels are reptilian.
There is also no indication that Seraphim are reptilian: I have a feeling that he may have picked up the fallacy of seraphim angels from Gary Wayne, or visa versa.
Wayne argues in the favor of that un-biblical concept by appealing to Num 21 wherein, “the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people” wherein, “fiery serpents” is seraph nachash which, he would tell us, are reptilian Seraphim.
Yet, he is missing a few key facts:
1) The root seraph is just that, a root word and does not directly refer to Seraphim, the beings.
2) It was literally about reptiles, snakes/serpents, since the correlation is that the reaction was to make a nachash upon a pole: a snake/serpent.
Moreover, of the various actions we have recorded that were taken by Angels (or Seraphim), we are never told of them biting anyone.
Furthermore, the description we have of Seraphim includes various features, none of which are reptilian: they have a head, hands, feet, six wings, and they fly. Sure, serpents/snakes have heads but none of the other features.
Zen Garcia also notes, “One can hear, in Credo’s oral traditions and mythology, confirmation of this species of being as having existed as part of the natural world experience. Notice also that Credo suggests their use of magical boats and—like the Bible confirms—shape-shifting abilities.”
Yet, there is no biblical statement of any, “shape-shifting abilities” and thus, no confirmation of such.
Garcia notes, “It’s my opinion that the antichrist also, though a system, will be an inter-dimensional being of supernatural ability possessed directly by the spirit of Lucifer as Abbaddon, Apollyon.”
I suppose he could be possessed by Lucifer since, after all, he did enter Judas. Yet, what Abbaddon/Apollyon has to do with it is certainly mysterious—and incoherent.
Rev 9 notes that an, “angel blew his trumpet, and” John, “saw a star fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit. He opened the shaft of the bottomless pit, and from the shaft rose smoke like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke from the shaft. Then from the smoke came” they whom I identify as the (Jude and 2 Peter 2) incarcerated Angels and, “They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit. His name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek he is called Apollyon.”
Thus, Abbaddon/Apollyon is an Angel so why would or could the Cherub Lucifer possess someone, “as” an Angel whom he is not?
Zen Garcia noted:
Some people equate Yaldoboath to being Yahweh, citing that the God of the Old Testament was evil because of His instruction to the Israelites to spare no man, woman, or child when sending Joshua and the Hebrew peoples in to conquer the promised land of Canaan.
What most do not realize is that Yahweh did so only because the land had prior been usurped by the children of Ham through the bastard child Canaan and was inhabited by the children of the Anak as a result of the Canaanites inter-breeding again with the children of the fallen Watchers, post flood.
The land of Canaan was filled with giants who were the tribes of Anak or the Annunaki. That is the specific reason why the Lord instructed them to act in such brutal and decisive manner. Joshua and the invading Israelites would be utilized as tools for the eradication of these evil beings much like the flood was in purging the abomination that was the seed of Satan on this planet then.
The summation of scripture is nothing more than the grand mythic tale of the birth, war, and battle for supremacy of earth and creation between these two seed-lines as each struggle against the other.
It is fascinating that he would write, “Some people equate Yaldoboath to being Yahweh” since those some are the very same Gnostics upon whom he utterly relies, the very ones who corrupted the Bible’s teachings within the very texts he so fallaciously asserts contain reliable teachings of Jesus Himself.
In Gnostic mythology, Yaldoboath is the senile and arrogant god who ignorantly created the utterly corrupt realm of physical existence and is so full of itself that it deceived its creation by telling them that it alone is the one true god, etc.
Garcia’s assertion is that, somehow, such conquering narratives are acceptable only if you agree that it all had to do with that all of those people were, “children of the Anak as a result of the Canaanites inter-breeding again with the children of the fallen Watchers, post flood.”
Beyond that Canaan was the result of incest, there is no indication whatsoever that there was anything about he, nor Ham, nor his mother that had any relation to Nephilim/Annunaki/Anakim/Angels/Sons of God/Watchers, etc., etc., etc.
Again, the one and only indication that Anakim had anything to do with Nephilim/Annunaki/Anakim/Angels/Sons of God/Watchers, etc., etc., etc. is one single sentence with a non-LXX unreliable evil report.
Jude and 2 Peter 2 both tell us that the sinful/fallen Angels were incarcerated. Now, they do not specify when but it makes sense that since the flood was when God was cleaning house, as it were, then that would have been the time.
Why remove the sinful/fallen Angel and Nephilim threat only to have it happen again directly post-flood?
God told us many times why He commanded such conquering but never said even one single word about Nephilim nor relation to them nor about sinful/fallen Angel—I reviewed those texts in my book What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim?
Also, I am unsure why it would be a case of, “Canaanites inter-breeding again with the children of the fallen Watchers, post flood” since, by definition, no Canaanites even existed to have done such a thing pre-flood.
We have reviewed how it is that yes, “The land of Canaan was filled with” tall (meaning subjectively taller than the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft.), “who were the tribes of Anak” but Annunaki have utterly nothing to do with it.
Now, if however it was the case that what was done pre-flood was repeated post-flood, with the very same beings and all, then there is no distinguishing between, “the eradication of these evil” post-flood, “beings” from, “the flood…purging…the seed of Satan”: he told us that it all pertains to Nephilim/Annunaki/Anakim/Angels/Sons of God/Watchers, etc., etc., etc.
Thus, it appears that God failed and had to all but hire mercenary humans to complete the job He could not accomplish Himself.
Furthermore, Garcia wrote:
Lucifer and one third of the Angels were cast out of the heavens on the second day, another group of angels descended willingly from their celestial abode to reside here upon the Earth during the age of Jared, Enoch’s father. This group of 200 angels brought additional evil into the world and aligned themselves with those angels that fell during Lucifer’s first rebellion. This second incursion of angels is what leads to the birth of the giants of Genesis 6 or the men of renown…
There is no indication that, “Lucifer and one third of the Angels were cast out” on that day, there are few issues with that assertion (some of which have been touched upon already):
1) There is no indication they were cast out together.
2) Lucifer’s casting out is set around the Gen 3 timeline.
3) The Angels’ casting out is set around the Gen 6:1, specifically, timeline.
4) There may be a linguistics issue since they fell during those timelines: Lucifer was fired from his job, as it were, but still had access before God and the Angels were incarcerated. Yet, they get cast out at a post-Jesus’ resurrection timeline (Rev 12).
Garcia specifies, “the age of Jared” based on 1 Enoch/Ethiopic Enoch which is also whence he gets the specific, “200 angels” number.
Yet, note that he has this being a second (pre-second-flood, by his theory) incursion additional to the utterly unbiblical concept of, “those angels that fell during Lucifer’s first rebellion.”
As for, “two seed-lines as each struggle against the other” again, as I demonstrated in my Cain As Serpent Seed of Satan book series, the lines are based on actions, not based on genetics, and so the good news, the literal gospel, is that those of the seed of Satan—being those who commit ungodly actions—can just repent.
Garcia assures us, “there are myriad bone fragments, skeletons, skulls, and artifacts discovered from all parts of the world testifying to the existence and presence of these semi-divine beings and the primitive workers they manipulated into existence upon the world stage.”
He follows directly with, “For example, in 2011 Peruvian anthropologists unearthed a cone shaped skull of two hybrid, red-haired giants, which other anthropologists classified as ‘not being human.’”
Perhaps it is a case of, “not being human” since no citation was provided (beyond a year and a country: which are no citations at all) so that we know not of what the skulls were, if the cone shape is due to head binding or a mutation, if it is red-hair or fur, what is meant by giants, etc.
It is Garcia telling us that unnamed anthropologists unearthed and that other unnamed anthropologists classified as.
One of the bottom-line issues is that, again, we have no reliable physical description of Nephilim—yet, Garcia would surely claim that we do by appealing to folklore from millennia after the Torah or just swapping out Nephilim for Annunaki or Anakim or Angels/Sons of God or, or, or whatever from whenever will give the appearance of fitting the semi-divine beings category.
Similarly, when he claims, “These megalithic structures were not made by the ancestors of humanity, but by the hybrid children of the fallen angels—the giants of old— which is further confirmation of the gospel” it must be based on some concept of the giants being physically capable of such and, by the way, would mean that, by definition, “These megalithic structures” date from pre-flood.
I am flummoxed as to how megalithic structures made by the hybrid children of the fallen Angels has anything with confirming the gospel.
Zen Garcia asserted:
We are told in the book of Enoch that after their deaths in the flood, the children of Anak, the hybrid giant seedlines—because they were not a natural creation and had no part in salvation— would be condemned by the Lord to wander the post-deluge Earth as demonic entities, seeking bodies to possess for indwelling.
There is no statement in Enoch that Anakim were condemned as demonic entities.
It does claim that Nephilim, “the hybrid giant seedlines” (plural?) became unclean spirits yet, again, that is merely folklore from millennia after the Torah—for a Bible-based view of what demons are, see my article Demons Ex-Machina: What Are Demons? Appealing to the Kitāb Al-Magāll text, Garcia noted, “It was in paradise and not on the Earth that male and female genders came into being.” Yet, I provided quotations from Gen chaps 1 and 2 already which affirm the exact opposite.
Now, the text is known as Kitāb Al-Magāll or the Book of the Rolls, One of the Books of Clement.
It begins with, “This book is one of the hidden books of Saint Clement the Apostle, disciple of Simon Cepha, which Saint Clement commanded to be kept secret from the laity…This is the sixth of Clement’s books, treasured up in the city of Rome since the time of the Apostles.”
This is typical of apocrypha and pseudepigrapha: appeal is made to one or another, or more than one, authoritative person in hopes of gaining the text some importance.
Margaret Dunlop Gibson’s 1901 version, Apocrypha Arabica, has her elucidating the following of the manuscripts, “the date of whose original is A.D. 885. I may therefore claim that this Sinai MS. is at least older than the four Paris MSS. 76, 77, 78 and 79, of which No. 76 is dated A.D. 1336-7, and copied from a MS. of A.D. 1176-7.”
Moreover, “It is evidently written by a Christian, who has been hurt by the conduct of certain Jews in reviling the Mother of our Lord, and its object is to prove her descent from David, which these Jews were impudently calling in question” and of the Aphiḳia section, “This tale is purely apocryphal, and its very plan is an anachronism.”
Thus, we again have an instance of Zen Garcia appealing to anything from anyone from anytime and any context—in this case, a text from almost a millennia after the time of Jesus.
Note that the text has it that:
…the right hand of the Lord…took from all the earth a little handful of dust, and from all the waters a drop of water, and from the air a soul and a spirit, and from fire the force of heat, and it became in the grasp of the Lord portions of the four elements, heat and cold, moisture and drought.
Verily God, the glorious and strong, created Adam from these four weak elements, which have no power, that all creatures created from them might hear and obey him: dust, that man might obey him; water, that all that is born of it and in it might obey him; air, that it might be possible for him to breathe it and to feel its breezes, and that its birds might obey him; and fire, that the heat of forces created from it should be a powerful helper to his sense.
Imaginative folklore is all that it is.
More folklore is that, “Eve…bare Seth, the handsome man, the complete and perfect giant. In his perfection he was like his father Adam, and God protected him when he grew up, making him the father of the other giants of the earth…The daughters of Cain conceived by the sons of Seth, and brought forth giant-sons” and refers to, “Nimrod the giant” and, “the giant Goliath.”
Interestingly, the text follows directly from, “The daughters of Cain conceived by the sons of Seth, and brought forth giant-sons” with, “It was certainly supposed by some that the Book relates and says that the Angels came down to earth and mingled with the children of men, that those who came down and mingled with the children of men were really angels. This was only said on account of the sons of Seth and their union with the daughters of Cain.
Thus, that devastates Garcia’s Angel view.
Also, the text states, “Adam knew Eve, and she conceived, and her time was fulfilled, and she bare Cain.”
Thus, that devastates Garcia’s Lucifer: Father of Cain view.
You see, he cannot consistently appeal to anything which is why he ignored this text until such a time as he could subjectively selectively quote bits and pieces for support and simply ignores those parts that are devastating to his grand theory.
He follows that (derailed) train of thought with, “The text from the Nag Hammadi codices, as well as the story of Maeva and Dadam from the Kolbrin Bible, does allude to the visionary capacity of the second fruit eaten by Adam and Eve after their fall and transformation to flesh.”
The Kolbrin Bible has a sorted history which the 21st Century Master Edition by Janice Manning (editor) and Marshall Masters (contributor) put as that it, “contains…historical and prophetic anthology…an ancient secular academic work; it offers alternate accounts of several stories from the Holy Bible and other wisdom texts” which is why it is right up Garcia’s tall-tale alley.
They further note:
…the earliest known variant of The Kolbrin Bible, called The Great Book…was originally penned in Hieratic by Egyptian academicians after the Exodus of the Jews (ca 1500 BCE)…were later translated using the 22-letter Phoenician alphabet…
The only known copy of The Great Book to survive the millennia was the one exported to Britain by the Phoenicians in the 1st century BCE. Regrettably, much of it was destroyed when the Glastonbury Abbey was set ablaze in 1184 CE.
FYI: BCE and CE are anti-Christian manners whereby to refer to BC and AD.
Let us leave off with a final word from Zen Garcia as indicative of why some may reject the Angel view, which is due to the neo-theo-sci-fi-tall-tale baggage that personages such as Garcia have appended to it:
Whether this invasion is of the Nordic giant-humanoid type, dragon-reptoid- alien-fish type, or predator-insect-locust-breathe-fire-sting-in- their-tails type of alien, we won’t know until the event horizon, yet I pray daily that the Lord count all of us worthy enough to not be here for the return of the Nephilim and Niburu.
Addendum: a little note for Zen Garcia and/or Tate Publishing and Enterprises, LLC: before you put an e-book/PDF for sale, remove the editing notes, here is one such example:
For more information on this and related issues, see my following books:
What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim?: A Styled Giantology and Nephilology
The Apocryphal Nephilim and Giants: Encountering Nephilim and Giants in Extra-Biblical Texts
Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010
Nephilim and Giants in Bible Commentaries: From the 1500s to the 2000s
The Scholarly Academic Nephilim and Giants: What do Scholarly Academics Say About Nephilim Giants?
The Pastoral Nephilim And Giants: What Do Pastors Teach and Preach?
Nephilim and Giants as per Pop-Researchers: A Comprehensive Consideration of the claims of I.D.E. Thomas, Chuck Missler, Dante Fortson, Derek Gilbert, Brian Godawa, Patrick Heron, Thomas Horn, Ken Johnson, L.A. Marzulli, Josh Peck, CK Quarterman, Steve Quayle, Rob Skiba, Gary Wayne, Jim Wilhelmsen, et al.
Nephilim and Giants: Believe It or Not!: Ancient and Neo-Theo-Sci-Fi Tall Tales
On the Genesis 6 Affair’s Sons of God: Angels or Not?: A Survey of Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries Including Notes on Giants and the Nephilim
In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch
The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.