Undergoing review is an article by a certain Sarah who is succinctly described by the Chicago Jewish News as that she writes, “articles related to Judaism, culture and traditions.” In this case, the article is titled, Discovering Kabbalah’s Teachings On Giants.
Sarah defines Kabbalah as, “ancient Jewish mystical tradition” about which we must ponder that ancient is a subjective term since the Torah, for example, is ancient but predates Kabbalah (at least in its more formalized sense) by circa thee millennia—give or take.
In any case, she notes that it consists of, “stories and concepts…including the mysterious existence of giants” and she employs the subjective, vague, generic, and multi-usage modern English word giants an additional three times in her opening paragraph without defining it—and never defines it. Thus, we must derive her meaning from her context so let us track that.
Sarah writes, “In the Abrahamic religions, fallen angels are angels who were expelled from heaven. In the Hebrew word nefilim, the word is sometimes translated as “giants” or “the fallen ones.” The literal term “fallen angel” never appears in any Abrahamic religious texts, but it is used to describe angels who have left heaven or who have committed adultery. Fallen angels and demons frequently lure humans into committing sin, according to Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki Fallen_angelFallen angel – Wikipedia; scholars disagree on who was the Nephilim.”
It appears that she is conflating nefilim (Nephilim) and fallen angel which would be an error since those Angels fathered Nephilim.
Technically, nefilim does not translate as giants, that is actually just a rendering, and the fallen ones is the meaning of word: fall/fallen/fellers/to cause to fall, etc.
It is inaccurate to claim that fallen angel committed adultery since one has to be married in order to commit adultery, but Angels did not get married until they came to Earth.
As for, “scholars disagree on who was the Nephilim” I will just assume that’s just a bit of broken English.
Sarah writes, “It is thought that 1 Enoch,” a.k.a. Ethiopic Enoch, “refers to giants as ‘great giants’ with heights of three hundred cubits. To put it another way, the giants stood at least 450 feet (140 meters) tall, making them truly magnificent.”
Yet, that is not the case rather, it has them being 3,000, not 300, and ells, not cubits, which amounts to ??? miles tall. Coming from a Bible contradicting text from millennia after the Torah, that is great folklore but poor reality.
Interestingly she notes, “They were feared in ancient times and remain an icon of dread to this day, even if they didn’t exist.” That is fascinating because 99.999999999999999999% of Nephilology is pure fantasy or neo-theo-sci-fi, as I term it, especially when it comes to the un-, non-, and anti-biblical assertions of the top pop-researchers who literally make their living by selling such tall-tales.
Recall out tracking of the meaning/definition and also usage of the word giants: there is the issue of Sarah’s usage and the issue of the English Bible’s usage.
Thus far, it referred to unusual height yet, she includes a subsection titled, “Exploring The Mysterious Giants: The Nephilim” so we will have to keep tracking.
Sarah writes of, “The origins of the mysterious giants, known as the Nephilim” and writes of, “Watcher Sons of God” without elucidating that she has jumped from identifying the Genesis 6 affair’s, as I term it, sons of God as angles to referring to them as Watchers which is just a Second Temple Era manner whereby to refer to sons of God when the context implies that Angels are being referenced.
Sons of God/Angels/Watchers, “mated with human women and formed a hybrid race of giants, powerful, and might. According to the Bible, the Nephilim are a hybrid race of giants known as mighty warriors and sons of Anak.”
This is rather confused:
Hybrid since they were half-Angel and half-human.
Giants referring to unusual height is something that she is concluding from her usage of the modern English word giants or from Num 13:33—or both.
As for, “powerful, and might…mighty warriors” we must first consider that since she claims that (note the specificity), “According to the Bible, the Nephilim are…known as…sons of Anak.” This means that she is appealing to, accepting as accurate, and incorporating into her Nephilology one sentence from an evil report stated by utterly unreliable guys whom God rebuked.
The only other reference to Nephilim in the Bible is Gen 6:4 and it does not provide a physical description of them thus, she is referring to them in terms of unusual height due to the utterly unreliable evil report which was just a tall-tale since we have no reliable physical description of them.
Back to, “powerful, and might…mighty warriors” well, the reliable Gen 6:4 account has them as having been mighty and well known so that powerful and of might being mighty but not warriors: they may have been warriors but we are not told of that if it was the case.
To assert that they are a.k.a. sons of Anak (when, after all, they were sons of the sons of God) is based on a non-Septuagint/LXX version of the evil report since the LXX version utterly lack any reference to Anakim. Besides, Nephilim were strictly pre-flood hybrids but Anakim were strictly post-flood humans—who did not exist until centuries post-flood and who were named Anak who was Arba’s son.
Interestingly, Sarah has not mentioned nor cited Gen 6—but only paraphrased it—and went on to specify, “Nephilim are mentioned in Numbers and Deuteronomy” yet, the (one single verse in) Numbers is utterly unreliable and no, they are not mentioned whatsoever in Deuteronomy.
She wrote that they were mentioned therein, “as powerful people who eventually became the Israelites, in addition to being the offspring of God and human women in Genesis.” I have read and have written about circa two millennia worth of Jewish and Christian folklore, commentary, etc. about Nephilim and can say that I have never encountered anyone who even ever merely implied that, “eventually became the Israelites.”
Since they supposedly, “became the Israelites” but were, “offspring of God and human women in Genesis” we will have to see how she manages to get them through the flood.
Sarah writes, “The Nephilim were described as evil by God” which is not the case, “due to their power and might, and they were thought to have been wiped out by the god” which is accurate even though she does not tell us who, “thought” that but it is crystal clear: the lived pre-flood, and there is no indication that Noah, his wife, their sons and their sons’ wives were Nephilim thus, they did not make it past the flood and there is no indication at all that they returned—both of which would actually imply that God failed.
She goes on to assert, “their lands were located from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River” which, of course, is a data-free statement or rather, one which plays off of a false assertion in an evil repot. She also tells us that they were, “ultimately eradicated by God” which was the case at the flood but, again, she has God getting rid of them in some unknown manner at some unknown time—apparently.
Sarah notes, “In Judaism, fallen angels are referred to as ‘shedim’ or ‘se’irim’. They are believed to be spiritual entities that have been corrupted by their own pride and have since been removed from Heaven” which is fair enough since she is just telling us that demons are fallen Angels—by any other name in both cases: see my article Demons Ex Machina: What Are Demons?
Now, she does note, “The belief in these spiritual beings is largely based on the Book of Enoch” and notes that therein, “fallen angels are mentioned as being responsible for many of the catastrophes that have befallen humanity throughout history.” Yet, she does not tell us that, that folkloric text has unclean spirits being the spirits of dead Nephilim—yet, since she seems to have conflated Nephilim and fallen Angels (like she conflated Nephilim and Anakin) then perhaps she did stumble into telling us that.
Sarah’s subsection, “Biblical Giants” elucidates, “In the Bible, giants are mentioned many times…Giants were seen as a race of people who were larger and more powerful than humans. They were often associated with supernatural forces, and were seen as a source of fear and awe.”
A good example of the useless nature of the unqualified, undefined, uncontextualized employment of the word giants is when she writes, “The Bible mentions the giants of Philistia, the Anakim, the Rephaim, and others. These giants were said to have been the descendants of fallen angels…Many famous battles in the Bible revolve around these giants, and it is said that God even sent a giant to fight against the Israelites at one point. The Bible also talks about giants being part of the end-times judgment, which is a reminder that no matter how powerful a giant is, no one is greater than God.”
Anakim were a clan of the Rephaim tribe who, in part, live in Philistia so, “giants of Philistia, the Anakim, the Rephaim” are essentially referring to only one thing, one people groups and biblically, “giants of Philistia” would read as, “Rephaim of Philistia” or, “Anakim of Philistia.”
As for, “others” well, we shall have to see who they are.
Since by, “These giants,” she is referring to Rephaim then there is no indication whatsoever that they were anywhere, “said to have been the descendants of fallen angels.” Yet, she may, possibly, perhaps, be able to assert Anakim were, “descendants of fallen angels” but only by exclusively appealing to Num 13:33 which, as we know by now, is utterly folly. As for the, “others” being, “descendants of fallen angels” well, since we do not know to whom she is referring then all we can say with certainty is that any descendants of fallen Angels only lived as far as the flood—period, full stop, end of story.
If by, “Many famous battles in the Bible revolve around these giants” she means, “Many famous battles in the Bible revolve around Anakim” or, “Many famous battles in the Bible revolve around Rephaim” then very well then but, what of it?
I am unaware that, “God even sent a giant to fight against the Israelites” (and Sarah asserts a lot but quotes and cites virtually nothing).
I am also unaware of, “giants being part of the end-times judgment.”
She adds, “In the Bible, the Last Rephaim, Og, is regarded as one of the most powerful figures” and refers to, “the story of Og and the Rephaim” specifically, “Og, as a massive figure…massive size, strength, and power.”
Since Og was a king then the terms, “powerful…massive…strength, and power” could apply to him, even if non-physically. But as for him having been a, “massive figure” of, “massive size” note that the Bible does not provide any physical description of him whatsoever. And to write in terms of, “the story of Og and the Rephaim” is somewhat misguided since he, himself, was a Repha.
Well, she did not tell us who the cryptic, “others” are nor how nor where abouts, “In the Bible, giants are…often associated with supernatural forces.”
Also, besides some sermonizing homily about metaphorically defeating giants in our lives, she also did not tell us much about Kabbalah’s Teachings On Giants.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.