Carl is described as, “a biblical scholar, minister…,” he posted an article titled Tower of Babel: Gateway to the gods which, “was recently featured in the April Edition of the Prophecy Watchers magazine” which is no surprise given it’s neo-theo-sci-fi-tall-tales flavor.
Joseph notes, “The Historian Josephus claims, that Nimrod, persuaded the people to ascribe their happiness to him rather than God, seeking worship for himself” and, “Nimrod desired self-preservation, whilst simultaneously distancing himself from God’s authority. The Midrash (Rabbinical writings) also describes the tower of Babel, built on tall columns designed to protect it from another divine flood.”
But I’m not terribly interested in such since there’s no indication that Josephus had any access to anything but folklore from millennia after the Torah and the Midrashim are from even later and are sermonizing homilies more than any sort of history or even strict Bible commentaries.
Thus, I will focus on my interest which is when Carl Joseph gets to discussing, “Who was Nimrod and what did he become?”
He quotes what we’re told about him, “Genesis 10:8–9 states, ‘And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord.’”
For now, note something that post-flood Nephilologists don’t like, which is that this was, “before the Lord” and proverbially, “before the Lord.”
Joseph appeals to Dr. Michael Lake who, “presents a word study of the term, ‘he began to be.’ The Hebrew word is chalal, which means to, ‘profane, defile or pollute, either sexually or genetically.’”
I’m quite unsure that Moses was employing a word to refer to genetically profane. In any case, that was a myopic statement since, for example, when Noah planted a vineyard, Joseph and Lake would have, “Noah began to be a man of the soil, and he planted a vineyard” (Gen 9:20) to read as, “Noah profane, defile or pollute, either sexually or genetically to be a man of the soil, and he planted a vineyard”—actually, neo-theo-sci-fi-tall-tales-Nephilologists would love that reading.
Carl Joseph tells us, “He did so in order to become a ‘mighty one’ which is the Hebrew term gibborim. This term can mean ‘mighty, champion, chief or even giant’ in some lexicons. Could it be that Nimrod became a giant by profaning himself either sexually or genetically, in order to replicate the stature of his antediluvian forefathers?”
At this point, we must ask these hugely important questions:
What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles?
What’s Joseph’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
Do those usages agree?
Typically, Nephilologists of the giants=Nephilim sort never bother with such key issues but leave it to their readers to attempt to guess to what they’re referring with any given usage and will use that word to mean various things.
So, we have a record of a regular guy, at hunter (before the Lord), who became mighty. That is somehow turned into a Gigorexia Nervosa focus on, “…giant…giant…” Gigorexia Nervosa is my term for people who are obsessed with seeing giants and just making them up where they’re nowhere to be seen.
Note the reference to, “the stature of his antediluvian forefathers” which merely asserts two things: 1) we know the stature (physical, I suppose) of antediluvians and 2) they were his apparently subjectively of unusual stature forefathers.
Carl Joseph goes on to tell us, “Dr. Lake goes on to cite, Annette Yoshiko…stating ‘the Nephilim of Genesis 6:4, are always grouped together with the gibborim which are the progeny of the Watchers and human women.’ The Septuagint translation (LXX) also states that Nimrod began to become a giant, ‘Cush begat Nimrod. He was the first to be a giant on the earth’ (Gen 10:8).”
If by, “always,” Yoshiko meat one single time then, very well then.
But to what was she referring? They are not “grouped” as much as we are told that Nephilim became gibborim which is merely a descriptive term for might/mighty.
Thus, it is only is that one single case that “gibborim…are the progeny of the Watchers and human women”: others referred to as being gibbor/im are Angels, some of David’s soldiers, Boaz, God, etc.
Note that it’s actually impossible that, “The Septuagint translation…states” that since that translation is into Greek but we were quoted English: and I checked 55 English versions and none of them have, “the first to be a giant on the earth.”
What we’re told in the text is that he became a gibbor: again, became mighty.
Now, if the LXX did tell us he, “was the first to be a giant on the earth” then how could that be since, as Joseph put it, he was like unto, “the stature of his antediluvian forefathers” so he couldn’t be the first.
Also, if he, “was the first to be a giant” that only begs the key questions about what giant means.
Part of the issue is that the LXX translators/renderers, for some unknown reason, decided to render Nephilim and also gibborim and also Rephaim all as gignates which means earth-born. Rendering three very different words with very different meanings and very different morphologies all with one word was a terrible idea and leads to the sort of confusion into which Joseph and Lake and Yoshiko have fallen.
At least Carl Joseph is more specific when he asserts, “Nimrod became the first post-flood giant” but then again, he has yet to tell us what makes him think there were pre-flood giants—and yes, this is all problematic since we know not to what he’s referring since he hasn’t told us.
But he does assert, “His nefarious act, fulfilled Moses’ prophecy of giants, ‘and also after that’ (i.e., the flood-Gen 6:4).” Note that he had to artificially insert “the flood” into a text that doesn’t refer to it: in fact, the flood’s not even mentioned for the very first time until 13 vss. later, v. 17.
Carl Joseph tells us, “Adam Clarke the famous commentator, also cites within the Syriac Targum that, ‘Nimrod was called a giant’” which, as you well know, merely begs the questions:
What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles?
What’s Joseph’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
What’s Yoshiko’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
What’s Clarke’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
What’s the Targum’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
What’s the English translation of the LXX’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
Do those usages agree?
But who wants to let such fundamental issues get in the way of a good ol’ tall-tale?
Yet, or so the tale goes, “Dr. Lake then goes on to mention that, ‘Clarke claims the city of Babel and its tower, were ‘built by giants.’ This begs the question, ‘was Nimrod a mighty hunter of animals or man, seeing that he was part human and fallen angel?’”
Merely chasing references to giants still gets us nowhere—not when we’re thinking critically.
The question, “was Nimrod a mighty hunter of animals or man” is a non-issue since there’s literally zero indication that, “he was part human and fallen angel.”
Any concept of post-flood Nephilim implies that God failed: He meant to be rid of them via the flood but couldn’t get the job done, He must have missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc.
That’s why Joseph, Lake, Yoshiko, Clarke, and all post-flood Nephilologists are forced to invent un-biblical tall-tales about how they made it past the flood.
Carl Joseph informs us that in a sculpture Nimrod, “holds a 375-pound African lion as a mere ‘kitty cat.’ From this depiction, one could estimate Nimrod’s stature to be anywhere between 10-15 ft, not too dissimilar from other giants in the Old Testament, namely Og of Bashan (Dt 3:11), Goliath (2 Sam 21:19) and the Anakites (Dt 9:1-2).”
He’s referring to this sculpture of Gilgamesh—but, no worries, post-flood Nephilologists merely assert that Nimrod was aka Gilgamesh. But wait, that’s not all, as Joseph asserts, “Nimrod goes by many names in history, including: Ninurta, the Assyrian god of hunting, Gilgamesh…Amenhotep III…Tukulti-Ninurta…Sargon…Naram-Sin.”
Joseph does not tell us why we should take ancient sculptures literally.
He also doesn’t tell us how he knows that’s not actually a kitty cat, a cub.
He does not tell us how he knows the extremely specific weight of 375 lbs.
He tells us that, “10-15 ft” is, “not too dissimilar from other giants in the Old Testament” among whom he mentioned a man for whom we’ve no physical description, namely Og (the only physical description we get of him is from folklore from millennia after the Torah—see my book The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?
He tells us that, “10-15 ft” is, “not too dissimilar from…Goliath” who most reliably, as per the preponderance of the earliest data (the LXX, Dead Sea Scrolls, and Flavius Josephus) was just shy of 7 ft./four cubits and a span (as opposed to the latter Masoretic text which has him at just shy of 10 ft./six cubits and a span.
He tells us that, “10-15 ft” is, “not too dissimilar from…Anakites” aka Anakim, about whom the only relevant data we have is that they were “tall” subjective to the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft. at the time.
Carl Joseph then goes back to going from Nimrod becoming might to, “How did Nimrod become a Giant?” (for some reason capitalized, this time).
He notes, “The Bible does not explicitly mention how Nimrod became a giant” and it also, “does not explicitly,” nor implicitly, “mention that Nimrod became a giant” (since Joseph let the 375-pound cat of the bag and revealed that by giant he means 10-15 ft. and half-Angel, half-human).
Joseph then refers to, “Historical Jewish writings” and appeals to the Book of Jubilees: there’s no indication it’s a Historical writing, the genre appears to be folklore, and it’s from millennia after the Torah.
In chap 8, it states, “Canaan…found a writing which former (generations) had carved on the rock…it contained the teaching of the Watchers”: the term Watchers gives away it’s age since it’s a Second Temple Era aka for Malakim/Angels.
In any case, that text has God missing the writings on rock loophole. It has Nephilim being created post-flood unlike they were created pre-flood, via some sort of ritual recipe.
As Carl Joseph put it, “Did it reveal vital clues for DNA modification, and the conjuring of giants?” and he artificially inserts this folklore he spiked with sci-fi into the text of the Bible, “Could it be that Noah cursed his grandson Canaan (instead of Ham) because he eventually became aware of his discovery”? Nope.
He refers to that, “the first Watcher incursion” was, “in the days of Jared” which means he’s relying on 1 Enoch, which is Bible contradicting folklore from millennia after the Torah, see the book, In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch.
Based on an unreliable and anachronistic manner of weaving a tall-tale, Joseph then speculates that perhaps his speculation results in this speculation, “Did he [Canaan] eventually share this forbidden knowledge with Nimrod, aiding him to ‘become’ a gibborim?”—FYI: it wouldn’t be, “a,” English singular, “gibborim,” Hebrew male plural rather, it should be, “a gibbor.”
Carl Joseph then appeal to the Book of Jasher which is just a modern day hoaxed fraud—see my book The Apocryphal Nephilim and Giants.
Joseph then gets into issues that are of no current interest to me such as, “How tall was the Tower of Babel?…Could the Tower of Babel have been five times the height of the Empire State Building in New York City? (According to the Book of Jubilees it might)…How was the Tower of Babel destroyed?” which features another appeal to Jubilees, to Josephus who appeals to, “The Sibyl (Greek prophetess),” then to, “Jewish tradition” and the obligatory list of, “Giants, Giants, everywhere!” about anyone and everyone who ever claimed giants—as if that has anything whatsoever to do with the issue.
Carl Joseph then asks, “Did Nimrod command Giants to build other structures?” with the qualifying term other denoting that he bought the folklore.
His answer is yes, in that, “an ancient Arabic manuscript” of some sort by someone at some time about something in some genre, “describing Nimrod’s involvement in the construction of the Temple at Baalbek” but we know how it was built and I wrote of it in my book ???
Joseph reasons that, “The fact that giants are mentioned in this manuscript,” of some sort by someone at some time about something in some genre, “only fuels the speculation that Nimrod was in fact, a giant” even though he didn’t say that it refers to Nimrod as a giant.
And we will leave the tall-tale there since it has been elucidated that he gets the linguistics wrong, appeals to anything written by anyone at any time for any reason and in any genre, he inserts things in the Bible, etc., etc., etc., and the post-flood Nephilologists at Prophecy Watchers love it so.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.