Someone going by the pseudonym The Wise Wolf posted an article titled Pennywise Isn’t Fiction: Stephen King’s IT Proves What the Bible Says About Fallen Angels and Nephilim.
This was of interest to me since I wrote the relevant books A Worldview Review of Stephen King’s “It”: The Mystical, Mysterious, and Metaphysical in the Novel, Miniseries, and Movies and Did the Nephilim Look Like Clowns?: A Review of Paul Stobbs’ Theory.
The latter pertains to how the article begins (which will not mean much to those who are not stuck in very tight cyber rabbit holes so, stand by for elucidation), “Why your childhood terror of painted faces and red noses wasn’t irrational fear—it was genetic memory recognizing the predators who once ruled us as gods.”
Note the reference to, “childhood terror,” which is followed by referring to a circus scene about which it is noted, “Maybe you laughed. Maybe you screamed. Probably both” and how seeing Ronald McDonald, “I cried until I couldn’t breathe. The nightmares lasted years…clowns terrified me.” So, that is the option with which proponents of the view yet to be elucidated focus upon: myopically, they are emotively subject coulrophobic—fear clowns—which, as we have seen, is not depicted as myopically, emotively subjective personal reactions but rather, styled gnosticism in terms of having an innate special insight into the nature of realities of old, “But what if that visceral, unreasonable fear isn’t unreasonable at all? What if it’s genetic memory, coded into our DNA from the distant past when those painted faces and elongated features didn’t belong to entertainers but to something that hunted us?” and on it goes.
This, or so we are told, has to do with clowns (which is a generic term covering a very vast range of appearances), “portraits of entities that ruled as false gods, practiced blood magic, and devoured humans for sport…a predator wearing entertainment as camouflage.”
This, or so we are told, is that, “the occult origin of clowns and their direct connection to the Nephilim, the giant demon-human hybrids described in Genesis 6.”
The reference to, “giant” begs these key questions—especially since biblically contextually, “Nephilim, the giant” means, “Nephilim, the Nephilim”—what is the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English giants in English Bibles? What is The Wise Wolf’s usage? Do those two usages agree?
As for, “demon-human,” the original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christians commentators, starting in BC days, was the Angel view as I proved in 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. Thus, it is Angel-humans: demon’s did not even exist during that which I term the Gen 6 affair—see my article Demons Ex Machina: What are Demons?
Thus far, we have been told that Nephilim are to be correlated to, “red noses…grins stretching wider than mouths should go…dead eyes…white face…blood-red smile…elongated features,” etc.
Yet, cutting to the chase and a main point I made in the contra-Stobbs pro-biblical data book: the dirty little secret is that since we have no reliable physical description of Nephilim then their look (and their height) is a non-issue and that alone debunks 99% of un-biblical Nephilology—the modern branch of which is just un-biblical neo-theo sci-fi tall-tales.
Then there are these descriptors, “once ruled us as gods…that hunted us…entities that ruled as false gods, practiced blood magic, and devoured humans for sport…predator,” recall that we were told that their look and these descriptors are, “described in Genesis 6.”
Yet, as for, “giant demon-human hybrids described in Genesis 6” we cannot really know the former until Wolf defines the subjective usage and the latter has to do with confusing Angels with demons.
As for ruled, hunted, etc. that is being read into, “mighty men who were of old, the men of renown” (Gen 6:4b). I am unsure whence comes the, “practiced blood magic” assertion. I can only imagine that, “devoured humans” is based on 1 Enoch which is Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah, see my book In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch.
When it comes to, “secret society rituals”: that would be a case of what people did with the historical record in Gen 6, and the folkloric tall-tales which followed (see my article How Nephilim Absconded from the Tanakh and Invaded Folkloric Territory) in terms of those who formed such societies chasing after that which 1 Enoch has as secrets which fallen Angels/Watchers taught to humanity.
One of the funniest lines in all pseudepigrapha—perhaps the only funny line in all pseudepigrapha—when 1 Enoch’s version of God has Him telling the fallen Angels/Watchers, “You have been in heaven, and though the hidden things had not yet been revealed to you, you know worthless mysteries.”
And it is the same sort of issue with, “modern entertainment” of various media.
Reference is then made to, “White face thick as plaster. Crimson hair. A red nose like a tumor. And that grin, stretching wider than any human mouth should open” in terms of, “[Joseph] Grimaldi in his clown costume” in 1806, “a Freemason named Charles Dibdin designed that getup fresh off the boat from India, where he’d spent months studying rakshasa demon masks in Hindu temples.”
For all of my criticism of Stobbs (self-proclaimed inventor of the, supposedly alleged, Nephilim correlation to clows), and there is a lot of critique—a lot—I have, from the start (which was in my article Is Paul Stobbs right? Did Nephilim Look Like Clowns?) noted that Stobbs should stick to occult cultural anthropology, as it were, pertaining to the correlation of the trickster spirit occultism, secret societies, and entertainment since he seems to do a good enough job with that data. Yet, he needs to drop the Nephilim angle—since there is no such angle—since when it comes to Nephilology he discredits himself (I followed up that article with Anatomy of the making of a modern-day myth: Nephilim looked like clowns).
The article goes on to provide more history of various key moments in what we may term modern clownery and then notes:
The Bible tells it straight in Genesis 6. The “sons of God” saw human women and took them as wives. The offspring were Nephilim, which translates to “the fallen ones.” Scripture calls them giants, mighty men of renown. God sent the Flood to wipe them out.
Except here’s Numbers 13:33, written after the waters receded: “We saw the Nephilim there.”
They survived. Joshua spent decades fighting giant clans in Canaan. David killed Goliath and his oversized brothers. The Old Testament reads like an extermination campaign that never quite finished the job.
The Book of Enoch fills in what Genesis leaves out. Two hundred fallen angels called Watchers descended to earth. They taught forbidden knowledge: sorcery, warfare, cosmetics, enchantments. The women who mated with them became “sirens,” half-human hybrids. Their children were something else entirely.
The Nephilim weren’t just tall. Their fathers were nachash saraph, “fiery flying serpents,” the term used in Numbers 21:6 and Isaiah 14:29. Not holy angels like Michael. Serpentine fallen beings. Their offspring inherited those traits: serpent-patterned skin, jaws that could unhinge, necks with reptilian frills. Dragon-human hybrids who ruled as kings and built civilizations.
When the Flood destroyed their bodies, their spirits got trapped in what Scripture calls “dry places.” Former rulers reduced to disembodied demons, hungering and thirsting with no way to satisfy those needs. That’s where we are now. The physical bodies mostly gone, destroyed by judgment. But the spirits remain, desperate for the worship and sensation they once enjoyed.
And some of them, the ones who inherited shapeshifting from their angel fathers, might still walk among us looking human.
This is the impressive sounding stuff of which Stobb’s un-biblical fantasy tall-tale folkloric stories are made—yes, even if biblical citations are included—so let us review.
Note the oddity of writing, “translates to ‘the fallen ones.’ Scripture calls them giants”: the root naphal translates to the fallen ones or fall/fallen/feller/to cause to fall, etc. and “Scripture calls them giants” should have read, “Only some modern English versions of scripture calls them giants” and that still begs my key question: what is the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word giants in English Bibles?
Note the contradiction in that, “God sent the Flood to wipe them out” yet, or so we are told, “here’s Numbers 13:33, written after the waters receded: ‘We saw the Nephilim there.’”
This implies that God failed, He must have missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc.
Now, “here’s Numbers 13:33” is mere a citation, it is pointing us to a location in a text and so it does not tell us who were the, “We” who, “saw.” Merely telling us where to find a statement and only quoting five modern English words fails to interact with narrative and key hermeneutical questions such as: who said it, why was it said, was it accurate, what was the reaction to it, etc.
To be blunt: anyone who ever appeals to Num 13:33 but does not mention the following facts needs to have it pointed out to them that they must mention the following facts.
They need to mention that they are relying on:
1. One single unreliable sentence
2. From strictly non-LXX versions (since that version’s version of that verse does not even mention Anakim: which is an issue in pop-Nephilology)
3. Of an unreliable, “evil report”
4. By 10 unreliable guys
5. Whom God rebuked—to death
6. Who made five mere assertions unbacked by even one single other verse in the whole Bible
7. Who contradicted Moses, Cable, Joshua, God, and the rest of the whole entire Bible
I could go on but see my post Chapter sample: On the Post Flood Nephilim Proposal.
Stating, “They survived” contradicts the Bible five times (Genesis 7:7, 23; Hebrews 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20; and 2 Peter 2:5) and post-flood-Nephilologists must then invent un-biblical fantasy tall-tales about just how Nephilim made it past the flood, past God.
As for, “Joshua spent decades fighting giant clans in Canaan” there is literally zero indication of that: this is where the issue of Anakim comes into play—they were like a clan of the Rephaim tribe and Nephilim were strictly pre-flood hybrids, Rephaim were strictly post-flood humans, and there is zero correlation between them.
As for, “David killed Goliath” well, he is referred to as a Repha, not a Nephil, virtually every single time he is mentioned.
As for, “his oversized brothers,” only one of them is referred to as having been, “of great stature” which is just as vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage as giants.
Now, we are told in Deut 2 that, on average, Rephaim, to include Anakim, were, “tall” and that is just as vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage as giants and of great stature. Moreover, we know that is subjective to the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft. in those days.
As for, “The Book of Enoch fills in what Genesis leaves out”: it fills in with what?With contradictions of the Bible, based on folklore, without indication that it contains any actually real history from pre-flood days.
Wolf tells us of, “fallen angels called Watchers” but it is actually just a case of that Watchers was just the Second Temple Era (516 BC-70 AD) aka for Angels/Malakim. So, the wild folklore goes, “The women who mated with them became ‘sirens,’ half-human hybrids.”
We are told, “The Nephilim weren’t just tall” so that seems to answer the question of Wolf’s usage: something vaguely generic about subjectively unusual height of some unknown level above the parochial average (and yes, that is how useless the common parlance usage of that modern English word is).
Thus, Wolf’s usage does not agree with the English Bibles’ usage since the usage of giants in English Bibles is that it merely renders (does not even translate) Nephilim in 2 verses or Repha/im in 98% of all others and so never even hints at anything to do with any sort of height whatsoever.
Wolf claims, “Their fathers were nachash saraph, ‘fiery flying serpents,’ the term used in Numbers 21:6 and Isaiah 14:29. Not holy angels like Michael. Serpentine fallen beings.”
I can 99.99999999% guarantee that the pedigree of this assertion is that pop-Nephilologist Gary Wayne (who debated me) teaches this fallacy, Paul Stobbs uncritically picked it up from him (he quotes and otherwise references Wayne many times in his book), and now the Wolf picked it up from Stobbs.
There is no indication that, “Their fathers were nachash saraph” rather, they are described as bene ha Elohim/sons of God. The issue is that Wayne/Stobbs teach that, “Seraphim Angels” fathered Nephilim but there is no indication of that and there is no indication of that since there is no such thing as Seraphim Angels: that is a category error that violates the law of identify since Seraphim are Seraphim and Angels are Angels. They differ from one another (as well as from Cherubim) at least in that they have different job titles, different job functions, and look different from one another.
Neither of those verses is about the Gen 6 affair nor about Angels nor about Seraphim.
Isaiah 14:29 reads, “Rejoice not, O Philistia, all of you, that the rod that struck you is broken, for from the serpent’s root will come forth an adder, and its fruit will be a flying fiery serpent.”
Num 21:6 reads, “Then the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died.”
These are not referring to some sort of mashed up Seraphim-Angel beings but are telling us about serpents that are venomous: the fiery part referring to the burning sensation of their venomous bite and/or how their motion looks like a flame. As for flying, that seems to refer to how some serpents flatten their bodies so as to glide from tree to tree, etc.
There is no indication of, “Serpentine fallen beings”: the only description we have of actual Seraphim do not include any serpentine features but refers to, “six wings…face…feet…flew…one called to another…hand” (Isa 6).
What Wayne/Stobbs/Wolf have done, purposefully or not, is to take the root saraph for fiery/venomous/flame and un-contextually apply it to a pseudo version of Seraphim (see a whole chapter about Seraphim in my book What Does the Bible Say About Various Paranormal Entities? A Styled Paranormology).
Thus, there is below zero indication that Nephilim, “inherited those traits” especially since Seraphim and Angels have no traits such as, “serpent-patterned skin, jaws that could unhinge, necks with reptilian frills” whom Wolf also calls, “Dragon-human hybrids.”
This is the stuff of which un-biblical neo-theo sci-fi pop-Nephilology tall-tales are made.
As for, “the Flood destroyed their bodies, their spirits…reduced to disembodied demons,” that is just folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah.
As per my Demons Ex Machina article, yes, “spirits…disembodied demons” are, “hungering and thirsting…desperate for the worship and sensation they once enjoyed” but it is not that, “The physical bodies mostly gone, destroyed by judgment” since those demons are the disembodied spirits of Angels who are physically incarcerated in what 2 Peter 2 has as, “Tartarus.”
Angels are always described as looking like human males, performing physical actions, and without indication that such is not their ontology (see my book What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology) that is how and why Angels and demons are the same beings yet, also differ.
As for, “shapeshifting from their angel fathers” well, there is literally zero indication that Angels, or Seraphim shapeshift so that is a non-issue.
The, “might still walk among us looking human” assertion is very, very dangerous since historically, many people have been serial and mass murdered due to claims that they were not fully human—or, not human at all. Such dangerously irresponsible fantasy tall-tales are so common amongst pop-Nephilologists that I filled a chapter titled, “Nephil Kampf” with examples in my book 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.
Wolf then notes, “Pennywise was a shapeshifting, demonic clown from outer space that came to Earth to eat children.” Well, it is more complicated than that since the novel It is quite Gnostic. It has it that what is termed Another or Other is a styled unknown god, a deus absconditus, a theos agnosticos, the Gnostic god who is unknown and created what is described as a turtle and a spider but those are just term that humans can understand (hence, “It”), that is not what they are ontologically.
The spider entity eventually comes to Earth, eventually realizes that human blood is oh so much tastier when it is infused with the chemical byproducts of utter fear, and so takes whatever form it discerns will scare a person most: one of those forms is Pennywise, the Dancing Clown—this is touched upon when Wolf circles back to It.
That statement is followed up by Wolf directly with, “Fallen angels could shapeshift and came to Earth to rule and eat children” but those two mere assertions are just that: there is literally zero (reliable) indication of it.
Wolf then circles back to, “What They Actually Looked Like”:
Every culture that met the Nephilim described identical features. Deathly pale skin. Wild red hair. Glowing eyes that bulged from skulls. Six fingers, six toes. Elongated heads. And jaws that opened too wide.
That serpent jaw came from daddy. The nachash saraph passed down skin covered in psychedelic patterns like scales. Mouths that could dislocate to devour prey. Neck frills like certain lizards wear, which became the ruffled collars on Elizabethan nobles and clowns.
The red nose deserves attention. Rosacea is a genetic condition hitting pale-skinned people hardest. The Irish call it “the curse of the Celts.” Advanced rosacea causes rhinophyma: a large, bulbous, bright red nose. It’s not from drinking. It’s genetic.
The Nephilim, pale as death, would’ve developed this in extreme forms. That clown nose isn’t whimsy. It’s a birth defect preserved in costume.
Note that the statement, “Every culture that met the Nephilim described identical features” is premised on the mere hidden assumption that we can discern who is describing Nephilim and then building an argument on that mere assumption.
Yet, myopically subjectively picking out certain features make it easy to seek such descriptions and eisegetically conclude a non-sequitur that, “Every culture that met the Nephilim described identical” cherry-picked, “features.” Again, we have no reliable physical description of them and Wayne/Stobbs/Wolf get, “Six fingers, six toes” from one single description of one single man who was a Repha, not a Nephil (2 Sam 21:20).
Wolf clearly paraphrased this segment from Stobbs and two wrongs do not make a right (nor do three, if we include Gary Wayne whence Stobbs got it).
Having in place an utter fantasy assertion about how Nephilim looked, such pop-researchers myopically subjectively seek anything they can force-fit into their theory such as, “Medusa…wild red hair, pale skin, massive grin with tongue out, bulging eyes…Medusa was textbook Nephilim hybrid.”
Wolf adds, “Anak, Og of Bashan, Goliath’s brothers…They’re the ancient Nephilim” yet, they were Rephaim in general or Anakim of the Rephaim in particular.
Premised on assertions, fallacies, watering down categories, using vague terminology, and myopia, Wolf can only then conclude, “Same entities. Different names. Identical descriptions.”
And based on that (faulty) premise, Wolf goes on to write of, “The Aztec calendar shows a god with tongue sticking out, identical to Greek Gorgons and Chinese demons.” See how it works? One myopically chosen depiction of Medusa features, “tongue out” and, “tongue out” has something to do with, “textbook Nephilim” ergo, “Aztec calendar…god with tongue sticking out” equals Nephilim hybrid and yes, that is how flimsy such tall-tales are: they take solid data points but connect them via subjective worldview-philosophies such as pop-Nephilology.
Wolf goes on to write of, “giant legends. Nevada’s Lovelock Cave held red-haired giant remains.” Native American tales of White, red-haired, giants seem to be cultural memories of interacting with Viking—told via oral tradition for centuries: see my article Lovelock Cave Giants: lost or found?
Wolf then notes, “There’s one explanation: global pre-Flood civilization. The Nephilim ruled everywhere.” Indeed, but it is exclusively, “pre-Flood.” Wolf goes on to write, “Post-Flood survivors on every continent remembered” and surely they did: similarities amongst the most ancient cultures seem to be due to that pre-Tower of Babel, humanity lived in relative proximity and had a commonly held basic history which post-Tower of Babel, with time and telling (and re-re-re-re-telling), came to change in this or that point and came to be called myth and legend.
Wolf goes on to claim, “David Bowie spent his career looking like a Nephilim. Ziggy Stardust, androgynous alien, psychedelic patterns” but, again, there is no indication that Nephilim looked like androgynous alien with psychedelic patterns.
Wolf then circles back to: actually, pause to note that such a style of writing is very common to pop-Nephilologists, they will touch upon a subject, move away from it, come to back it, move away, come back, etc., etc., etc.
Wolf tells us:
They Never Left
Numbers 13:33 places Nephilim after the Flood. Joshua and David fought them for generations. Scripture never says they were eliminated. Just driven underground.
Fallacious Nephilology damages theology proper and Wolf concludes, “Numbers 13:33 places Nephilim after the Flood” ergo, “They Never Left” so what does that say about God and His Word?
As for, “Scripture never says they were eliminated” it is simple: they lived pre-flood, we are told five times who survived the flood but Nephilim are not on any of those lists, and there is literally zero indication of any sort of return of the Nephilim (which is just a pop-Nephilology fantasy) ergo, scripture has many ways of telling us they were eliminated.
Wolf circles back to, “Most exist as disembodied demons” circles back to, “Watchers could shapeshift. Their offspring inherited it” along with circling back to the dangerous mere assertion, “A shapeshifting Nephilim could pass as human while staying true underneath.”
Wolf even gives us a supposed clue as to how to track down these demonic atrocities mascaraing as human, “Elite bloodlines obsessively intermarry. ‘Blue bloods,’ RH negative types concentrated in ruling families. They’re not just maintaining wealth. They’re maintaining genetics” as if God flooded the Earth, in part, to be rid of Nephilim but missed the genetic loophole that Wolf was clever enough to figure out.
Wolf notes:
Most physical remnant…rule through secret societies maintaining rituals, through possession in entertainment and politics, through symbolism marking territory, through blood preserving genetic markers.
The goal?
Restore pre-Flood conditions. Matthew 24:37 warns: “As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be at the coming of the Son of Man.”
New World Order is Old World Order. Nephilim kingdom restored. Open possession normalized. Transhumanism attempting forbidden mixing again.
Jesus’ words, His emphasis, His points, His context, were:
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.
But He kept speaking directly with:
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, this was about examples of being unaware/unconcerned about coming judgment.
The article ends with a heartfelt but ill-conceived gospel presentation to non-existent personages, “if you’re reading this and you know what you are, born into hybrid bloodlines you didn’t choose, you’re part human which means you have a soul…Renounce the false gods, accept Jesus Christ,” etc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
You can comment here and/or on my Twitter/X page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.
Leave a Reply