Dr. Michael Heiser wrote an article titled, Who (or What) Were the Nephilim? (September 28, 2018 AD).
Since I have written a lot on this issue from various vantage points, I wanted to focus on his elucidation of the supposed post-flood Nephilim.
Heiser references the only text, outside of Genesis 6, here Nephilim are mentioned which is Numbers 13:32–33 (which he quotes from the ESV thusly):
“So they brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, ‘The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height. And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.’”
He refers to the connection of “Israel’s survival as the people of Yahweh with the defeat of the Nephilim descendants.” But “Nephilim descendants” begs the next question Heiser asks and answers which is “How did the Nephilim survive the flood?”
He asserts:
“Genesis 6:4 pointedly informs readers that the Nephilim were on earth before the flood ‘and also afterward.’ The phrase looks forward to Numbers 13:33, which says with equal clarity that the oversized descendants of Anak ‘came from the Nephilim.’ The sons of Anak, the Anakim, were one of the giant clans described in the conquest narratives (e.g., Deut. 2:10–11, 21; Josh. 11:21–22; 14:12, 15).”
An example of far too many ridiculous
and less than helpful illustrations
Before getting to the last sentence in his though, which is “The text clearly links them to the Nephilim, but how is this possible given the account of the flood?” let us pause and review.
I take “and also afterward” as looking forward to Numbers 13:33 as an assertion—not an imperative one, a myopic one, and one that causes problems.
We are told “There were giants [an unfortunate pseudo-translation of “Nephilim”] in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men…” When were those days and when was after that? Heiser looks forwards from this point, I look backwards—in a manner of speaking.
The text tells us when those days were twice. Verses 1-2 tells us “when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives…” and the verse at which we just looked notes “when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men.” Thus, “after that” is just that: after those days—this much is crystal clear.
But when were those days? I know not exactly however, it could have been as early as when Adam and Eve’s children started having children. This means that after that is after those days yet, still pre-flood.
Now, Michael Heiser emphasizes the “equal clarity” of (three issues here): 1) “the oversized,” 2) “descendants of Anak” which “came from the Nephilim,” and 3) “the Anakim, were one of the giant clans described in the conquest narratives.”
This can get very verbose very quickly so I will make succinct statements and leave interested readers to peruse my section on Nephilim (I am publishing a book on Nephilim and giants but as of October 2018 AD it has not been published: depending on when you read this, it might have been, see my list of books to check).
To review:
It is difficult to accept the term “equal clarity” regarding Numbers 13: 33’s correlation to Genesis 6 when the latter has been misunderstood. Of course, that does not mean that it is not clear but that it have been misunderstood.
Yes, Numbers 13 is clear but it is key to understand that the claim in v. 33 was made by unfaithful/disloyal spies who presented a bad/evil report and were rebuked for it: for details, see Did Caleb and the spies see Nephilim giants in the land?—in short, the presented a “don’t go in the woods” style fear mongering tall tale.
Thus, “oversized” is overstated by the spies, the Anakim where in the land but that they “came from the Nephilim” is made up (not back by any other statement in the Bible), the Anakim can only be said to be “one of the giant clans” if we understand that “giant” is being translated from “Repha” or “Rephaim” (unlike some who translate Nephilim as “giants” in Genesis 6)—also, note that “giants” is a generic term that only means taller than average (and Hebrew males of those days averaged 5.5 ft.). Thus, v. 33 truly is a standalone statement with virtually no relation to reality.
Heiser informs us that “There are two alternatives for explaining the presence of giants after the flood who descended from the giant Nephilim” about which I will say that adding mine makes three. Before getting to that, note the qualified statement, “giants after the flood who descended from the giant Nephilim”: 1) by now you should reject statements such as “giant Nephilim,” you should note that his statement “giants after the flood” really means “Rephaim after the flood,” and that there is no reason to think that taller than 5.5 ft. people post-flood have anything to do with Nephilim, sons of God or any such thing—if they were tall or very tall they were just tall or very tall (FYI: “tall” and “very tall” are also generic terms).
Heiser’s options are:
“The flood of Genesis 6–8 was a regional, not global, catastrophe.
The same kind of behavior described in Genesis 6:1–4 happened again (or continued to happen) after the flood, producing other Nephilim, from whom the giant clans descended.”
My elucidation, my third way, is based on the clarity of Genesis 6 and the facts about Numbers 13. Moreover, I am not forced to change the scope of the flood simply in order to get Nephilim past the flood and I do not have to claim that it happened again (or continued to happen) since the Bible knows absolutely nothing about any such thing—nor about any concept of a return of the Nephilim for that matter.
As for option one, Heiser notes that “Many biblical scholars, scientists, and other researchers have marshaled the evidence in favor of” a “localized flood.” I will merely state that God sure did make it difficult for Noah (and the animals). Rather than having the poor chap build an entire ark for over a century, He could have just said, “Get to stepp’n, just move a few miles over yonder.” Also, rather than brining the various animal kinds to the localize flood’s epicenter, He could have kept the animals away.
As for option two, Heiser notes that “Did the Nephilim’s origin re-occur?” is answerable by “a possibility deriving from Hebrew grammar.” At this point, we go back to those days and after that about which Heiser tells us “The ‘when’” the sons of God married the daughters of men “in the verse could be translated ‘whenever,’ thereby suggesting a repetition of these pre-flood events after the flood.”
Heiser concludes, “since Genesis 6:4 points forward to the later giant clans, the phrasing could suggest that other sons of God fathered more Nephilim after the flood.”
One problem is that he is basing this not only on Hebrew grammar but an employment of Hebrew grammar towards the desired end of having Numbers 13:33 be a face value statement—which is most certainly is not.
Another problem is that he is linking the word “when” and Nephilim with “later giant clans” which is a connecting something that the Bible never does. We are told the titles/terms used of various clans by various peoples but one term that is never once included in those is Nephilim.
And, of course, note that he states that “the phrasing could” and not does “suggest…”
Michael Heiser concludes that “A later appearance of other Nephilim occurred by the same means as before the flood” about which I will again say that this is something of which the Bible knows nothing—period.
The last statement by Heiser I will quote is “Fear of the giant clans results in a spiritual failure that means wandering in the desert…” and by now you know that 1) correlating Nephilim with “giant clans” is fallacious and that which, in part, led to “Fear of the” non-Nephilim “giant clans results in” statements such as Numbers 13:33 which was “a spiritual failure that means wandering in the desert…”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.
