To this Quora site question, John Smith (who describes himself as “A Bible guy”) replied:
Q2A: What happened to the children of the Nephilim?
They are alive today. Here is proof that they survived the flood:
Genesis_6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.
Numbers_13:33 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.” (ESV)
Numbers 13:33 was well after the flood. These Nephilim lived in Canaan, and the Canaanites were dispersed along with the Israelites throughout the world. They are everywhere.
It is a myth that the Nephilim were the offspring of angels and human women. The scriptures are clear; the Nephilim were on earth before and after the sons of God married the daughters of men (see Genesis 6:4 above).
Here is a reference: Sons of God saw the daughters of men
I, Ken Ammi, replied:
Friend, one thing you did not do is to quote the texts that affirm that 8 people and some animals survived (Genesis 7:7, 23; Hebrews 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5) thus, it cannot be that “the children of the Nephilim…survived the flood.”
Genesis 6:4 states nothing of it.
Yes, “Numbers 13:33 was well after the flood” but when you say “These Nephilim lived in Canaan,” etc. you are basing that on one single verse and are building an entire, all-encompassing, theory “today…They are everywhere” upon one single verse.
The narrative of that chapter is clear in that you are relying exclusively on 10 unfaithful, disloyal, contradictory, embellishers, who were said to present an “evil report” wherein they many five assertions about which the whole entire rest of the Bible knows nothing, whom God rebuked (to name some of the problems with just picking up one verse and running with it).
As for that “Nephilim were on earth before and after the sons of God married the daughters of men” well, the text is about the relationships of the sons of God and daughters of men so it would be quite odd, in terms of narrative, to artificially insert a mention of Nephilim that is 1) unrelated to the narrative and 2) about whom the author says nothing more.
Also, the texts reads that “Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward when” as in as a result of when “the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them.”
Now, if “They are alive today” where are they?
John Smith:
They are in our DNA. Let’s say that the Nephilim had 10 genes that made them very tall. These genes would be in many of those who lived before the flood. Some maybe had one gene, some perhaps 5 genes, and some perhaps had all 10 genes. So the key is how many of the genes resided in the 8 people who survived the flood. It is simple genealogy.
Ken Ammi:
Friend, I’m shocked that “A Bible guy” would ignore all of the various problems with his assertions and simply jump to that “They are in our DNA.”
But why “Let’s say that the Nephilim had 10 genes that made them very tall” when we have no reliable indication that thy were very tall, or even tall, or even any reliable physical description of them at all?
“So the key is” that zero Nephilim “genes resided in the 8 people who survived the flood.”
Thus, this is not “simple genealogy” since you have no genealogy of anyone post-flood going back to pre-flood Nephilim.
Did the flood have anything to do with Nephilim?
John Smith:
No, the flood had nothing to do with the Nephilim. They were here before the flood and after the flood. Their genes were in Noah’s family.
Study gigantism, and you will see that there are 10 genes associated with it.
After Adam and Eve sinned, the genetic mutations began. This was one of the first as documented in Genesis.
This is my opinion after studying it for many years. Maybe I am wrong, but I always take my best shot. Perhaps soon, I will find out the absolute truth, but now we all enjoy the discoveries.
Ken Ammi
Nephilim were here before the flood and but there is no reliable indication that they were here after the flood.
There is no indication whatsoever that “Their genes were in Noah’s family” someone just made up that anti-biblical tall tale when they wanted to demand that there were post-flood Nephilim but realized that the Bible said nothing about it.
Why “Study gigantism” when we have no reliable physical description of Nephilim and so no reason to assert that they were even one inch taller than average?
Appreciate the discussion since I love dealing with these issues.
John Smith:
I do think there is reliable information concerning Nephilim after the flood.
Genesis_6:4 There were giants (H5303) in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
Numbers_13:33 And there we saw the giants (H5303), the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: (H5303) and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.
**********************************************************
Here is Strong’s dictionary input:
H5303
נְפִל נְפִיל
nephı̂yl nephil
nef-eel’, nef-eel’
From H5307; properly, a feller, that is, a bully or tyrant: – giant.
*************************************************
The Bible uses the same word for both the Genesis and Numbers entries. It can mean giant or bully, but the Numbers verse strongly implies that they were very big making the Israelites look like grasshoppers.
I will have to stick with my original statements, but whatever you believe is fine with me. We are all doing our best and enjoying the journey.
E-sword is a Bible study tool that is great and available on the internet for free. Rick Warren produced it.
Ken Ammi:
Genesis 6:4 is pre-flood, not from “after the flood.”
As for Numbers 13:33, I already noted, “you are basing that on one single verse and are building an entire, all-encompassing, theory ‘today…They are everywhere’ upon one single verse.”
You need to interact with that text and not just pull one single verse out of it, run with it, and apply it.
There are so many problems with that verse that during an opening statement to a debate, it took me about 10 minutes to review them.
So, when you say “The Bible uses the same word for both the Genesis and Numbers entries” you are not asking the key questions: who said, it why did the say it, what was the reaction to it, etc., etc.
You are basing your views on one single verse that merely records an “evil report” by unfaithful, disloyal, contradictory, embellishers who made five statements that can’t be backed by anything else in the whole Bible and whom God rebuked: why do you believe them?
John Smith:
You may be right, but I don’t think so. Sorry, but we have a friendly disagreement. Some day we will know for sure. If you are right, I will rejoice with you.
Ken Ammi:
Friend, I’ve written 7-9 books (depends on how you count them) on these issues alone and have discussed them with hundreds of people and it’s sad when God’s word is very clear but people opt for neo-theo-sci-fi.
I’ll leave you with this: the 10 spies on whom you rely utterly and exclusively for your Nephilology contradict Moses, Caleb, Joshua, God, and the rest of the whole entire Bible.
I will side with Moses, Caleb, Joshua, God, and the rest of the whole entire Bible and urge you to do likewise.
John Smith:
Sorry, but I am firm. You are also firm; that’s good. Some day we will know the truth, and we can have a heavenly cup of coffee together.
Ken Ammi:
So, just so that I understand: are you really parting on a note that you side with a guys whom God rebuked and who contradict Moses, Caleb, Joshua, God, and the rest of the whole entire Bible?
Well, that was the end of that.