I encountered a X post linking to an archive.org saved article by the now dead and gone Beginning And End site that’s titled Bloodlines of the Nephilim – A Biblical Study.
I know not who wrote it but the stie’s author noted, “Although I do not believe denominations are required by the Bible, I attend a Fundamental Baptist Church and so I call myself a Fundamental Baptist” and to the question, “Do you take the Bible literally?” the reply was, “Yes. Except where things are intended as metaphor, analogy, symbolism, etc. (i.e., Jesus saying ‘I am the bread of life’). Otherwise I believe that God says what He means and means what He says.”
Since it begins with reference to, “the half-angelic, half-human hybrid giants” we know the Angel view is accepted and must ask what’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles? What’s your usage? Do those two usages agree?
FYI: the original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christian 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.
It’s noted, “The flood wiped out the giants but shortly after the flood they returned and spread all throughout the Promised Land” with which there are many problems and since, “this article will show, not only did the giants return after the flood” we will tackle the issues as they are raised one by one.
That which I term the Gen 6 affair is quoted thusly:
And it came to pass, 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 of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were giants 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. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. — Genesis 6:1-5.
Reference is made to, “Nephilim giants” which biblically contextually would mean, “Nephilim Nephilim” and we’re then told, “They were also ‘giants’”—whatever that means.
The study includes a section titled, “Nephilim Giant Offspring” which includes this image along with the caption, “By the measurements in Scripture, the original Nephilim offspring were quite larger than the average human:
That’s virtually 100% fallacious—since even the height of an “Average Man” is subjective. In my book Nephilim and Giants: Believe It or Not!: Ancient and Neo-Theo-Sci-Fi Tall Tales I reviewed a chart like this one but that shows skeletons and I go one by one showing the falsehoods in this claim.
We’re told, “The fact that they were giants, is also proof in and of itself that their parentage was superhuman” but what does superhuman (really meaning non-human) have to do with being giants? That was a non-sequitur.
It’s noted, “Nephilim were also corrupting the human bloodline” which I can only is implying that Nephilim mated with humans—we’re not told that they did but they surely did I mean, why not?
We’re told, “The Nephilim giants spread violence and sin that: ‘God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.’ Humanity was on the verge of being wiped out with no hope of being saved from sin if every person born became part fallen angel. Thus God judged the Earth with the flood.”
Moreover, “the Flood was God’s way of saving the last of humanity from complete destruction…The flood served 3 chief purposes: 1) To destroy the Nephilim giants. 2) To punish the angels who committed the illicit relations with women and make an example of them so that no other angels would ever attempt this again and 3) to save humanity from certain destruction…the flood was God’s way of preserving the human race and its bloodline, before it became completely corrupted by the Nephilim giants…God sent the flood to preserve humanity.”
Keep those statements in mind as we pause to deal with, “Noah…was ‘perfect in his generations’ which meant that his genetic bloodline and ancestry was 100% human…The Hebrew word for ‘perfect’ in that verse is tamiym, which means ‘complete, whole’ with reference to health and physical condition. This is the same word used to describe the condition of animal sacrifices to the Lord.”
Yet, since what we’re told about Noah is mirrored in what we’re later told of Abram/Abraham we know it refers to him being particularly righteous.
It can’t mean he was the only 100% human since his whole ancestry would have also been 100% human by definition, and Methuselah died, “on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened” which was part of the flood (Gen 7), and seven others were on the ark. Now, if God flooded the Earth for the reasons elucidated by the author of the article, would He really have allowed non 100% humans on the ark? Is it that God failed, missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
We’re told, “Noah, his three sons and their wives were able to survive the flood and re-start humanity” but how if some of them weren’t 100% human?
Well, that sentence was followed directly with, “But unfortunately, the Nephilim giants returned” so let’s see how they supposedly returned:
Noah and his family survived the flood. But the Nephilim gene came with them.
“ There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that…” — Genesis 6:4
The verse above makes it clear that Nephilim giants returned after the flood. Now nowhere in scripture is it again written that angels ever cohabited and/or had relations with human women after the flood. Genesis 6 was the only instance of this.
So how did the Nephilim return? How could this have happened? The Bible holds the answer:
And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth. And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood. –Genesis 7:6-7.
While Noah and his sons were 100% human, we are not told the same about the wives of his 3 sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. What is clear is that one or more of these women were carrying the Nephilim gene. This is the source of the post-flood Nephilim. Nowhere in the Bible is it ever stated that angels once again cohabited with human women.
One would think that if God flooded the Earth due to what the author noted then it’d be logically, bio-logically, and theo-logically impossible for Nephilim to return in any way, shape or form. Yet, it’s worse than a return since the author actually has them surviving the flood which contradicts the Bible five times (Gen 7:7, 23; Heb 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20 & 2 Peter 2:5) since that’s how many times God told us who survived the flood but Nephilim aren’t mentioned.
But note the, purposeful or not, manipulations:
If, “the Nephilim gene came with them” then Nephilim came with them since we, for example, have human genes which is what makes us human so someone with Nephilim genes is a Nephil by definition.
That mere and un-biblical assertion was premised on cutting a complete verse, a complete sentence, a complete thought in half since the quote conveniently stopped at, “also after that” and the, “…” is an artificial gap that allowed the author to merely assert, “The” half, “verse above makes it clear that Nephilim giants returned after the flood” as long as you leave off the key portion that actually tells you to what days it’s referring.
The verse (as if that matters since “verses” are an arbitrary human invention of the 1500s AD) reads, “There were giants 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” as the author initially quoted it.
Well, it can’t mean anything about the flood since:
1) the flood’s not even mentioned for the very first time until a full 13 verses later.
2) the ONLY post-flood reference to Nephilim is from an “evil report” by 10 unreliable guys whom God rebuked.
3) God didn’t fail, He didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste, etc.
Gen 6:4 states, “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.”
The question becomes: when were those days?
Well, Gen 6:1 told us, “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose.”
The next question becomes: when was afterward?
Since it was after those days then it was simply after, “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them…”
Thus, they began doing it then and they continued to do it but that’s all pre-flood.
Indeed, “nowhere in scripture is it again written that angels ever cohabited and/or had relations with human women after the flood” and, “nowhere in scripture is it again written that the Nephilim gene came with them—a loophole that God must have missed which made the flood much of a waste since God failed: and this is being taught as a, “Biblical Study,” God help us.
Furthermore:
So how did the Nephilim return? How could this have happened? The Bible holds the answer:
And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth. And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood. –Genesis 7:6-7.
While Noah and his sons were 100% human, we are not told the same about the wives of his 3 sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. What is clear is that one or more of these women were carrying the Nephilim gene. This is the source of the post-flood Nephilim. Nowhere in the Bible is it ever stated that angels once again cohabited with human women.
The first time Nephilim giants are mentioned by name after the flood is in Numbers 13 after the Exodus in which Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt to go to God’s designated Promised Land. Moses sent 12 spies to scout out the land in advance. 2 of the spies, Caleb and Joshua spoke of the land in glowing terms and urged the Israelites to enter and rightfully claim the land God had promised them. But the other 10 spies had a different opinion:
And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it. But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we. 32 And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature. And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight. – Numbers 13:31-33.
We will discuss this extremely important passage in much more detail below but a few things should be noted. First off the giants living there were descendants of specific person named Anak. This description, where a Nephilim is referred to as “[name] who was born of the giant..” shows that the Nephilim hybrids after the flood were the offspring of other giants and not angels…And in Numbers 13, the giants the spies saw were the sons of the Nephilim giant Anak.
And they were so large that the Israelites spies were like insects to them. Additionally, these giants had special agricultural knowledge that they knew how to grow grapes so large that it took two Israelite men using poles to carry a cluster!
That was a series of incoherent mere assertions, let’s review:
Actually, “we are not told the same,” regarding, “were 100% human,” “about the wives of his 3 sons” nor about Noah: recall that the author just made that up.
But did God have to tell us: BTW: Noah was 100% human and, oh yeah, so were the other 7 on the ark since, you know, I didn’t fail, didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste—do you have any regard for me or not?!?!
Indeed, “Nowhere in the Bible is it ever stated that angels once again cohabited with human women” and nowhere in the Bible is it ever stated that, “one or more of these women were carrying the Nephilim gene.”
It’s odd to refer to, “The first time Nephilim giants are mentioned by name after the flood” since there’s only one time so the first is the last and only.
Note that the author got very close to understanding the narrative in specifying, “sent 12…2 of the spies, Caleb and Joshua spoke of the land in glowing terms…10 spies had a different opinion” which was to dissuade the Israelites from obeying God.
When stating, “We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we” wasn’t enough, they took it up a notch—a lot of notches, presented an, “an evil report” which consisted of five mere assertions for which there’s not even one single other verse in the whole Bible for support—no other witnesses:
1) “The land, through which we have gone to search it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof” which also flatly contradicts the original report.
2) “and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature.”
3) “And there we saw the giants” referring to Nephilim.
4) “the sons of Anak, which come of the” Nephilim.
5) “we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.”
Thus far, the author used giants as a mere aka for Nephilim but now changes the usage without telling us readers, “giants living there were descendants of specific person named Anak” refers to Anaim. So, I can only guess that my giants the author now means well, 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).
That would mean that the author’s usage now doesn’t agree with the English Bibles’ usage since therein it merely renders (doesn’t 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.
Anyone appealing to Num 13:33 needs to mention that they’re relying on:
1. One single unreliable sentence
2. From strictly non-LXX versions (since that version’s version of that verse doesn’t even mention Anakim)
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
8. Then post-flood Nephilologists have to invent un-biblical fantasy tall-tales about how Nephilim got past the flood, past God.
I could go on but see my post Chapter sample: On the Post Flood Nephilim Proposal—which I’m currently updating.
For some reason, the author abruptly and artificially inserts a category error in the form of, “This description, where a Nephilim is referred to as ‘[name] who was born of the giant..’ shows that the Nephilim hybrids after the flood were the offspring of other giants and not angels” that is not the case in the least bit: since the author is merely chasing the generic modern English word giants around a specific ancient Hebrew Bible regardless of context, correlations are being made and word-swaps are being done without informing the readers.
That text, which isn’t in Gen 6 nor Num 13 (it’s 2 Samuel 21), reads, “who was born of the” Repha—not Nephil.
Writing, “the giants the spies saw were the sons of the Nephilim giant Anak” is incoherent: it’s a multi-usage term the author misuses followed by a generic reference to, “spies” (at least we were previously told it’s the 10), followed by a fantasy tall-tale reference to Nephilim, followed by the multi-usage term, followed by a reference to one man.
As for, “they were so large” and that the author went on to ask, “Is it possible that Canaan was already showing the appearance of being part Nephilim?”: the dirty little secret is that since we’ve no reliable physical description of Nephilim then 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.
It’s also incoherent to merely assert, “grapes so large that it took two Israelite men using poles to carry a cluster!” the text notes that the cluster was large, not the individual grapes.
But the author isn’t done weaving a tall-tale:
So how did the giants return and how was it that they knew to be in the exact place that God was going to send His chosen people to, namely the land of Canaan? The answer starts with the lineage after the flood.
The Bloodlines of the Nephilim
The Bible provides a specific geneology and bloodline of the Nephilim giants after the flood that can be traced back to Noah’s own sons. What seems to be consistent with the presence of the Nephilim gene was an affinity for evil, due to their fallen angelic parentage. And among Noah’s sons, Ham was by far the most wicked.
Ham
“And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.” – Genesis 9:18.
From the first time Ham is introduced, he is described as “the father of Canaan.” Notice none of his brothers get any similar distinction…the student of the Bible should search the Scriptures to find out what that event could be. In this case, it is clear that Canaan carried the Nephilim gene.
Of course it’s not even close to being accurate that, “The Bible provides a specific geneology and bloodline of the Nephilim giants after the flood.” Interestingly, the author denied post-flood Nephilim produced by Angels mating but now said, “consistent with the presence of the Nephilim gene was an affinity for evil, due to their fallen angelic parentage.”
The reason, “none of his brothers get any similar distinction” of being, “described as ‘the father of Canaan’” is that they didn’t father Canaan.
Well, “the student of the Bible should search the Scriptures and not find a single hint, “that Canaan carried the Nephilim gene.”
Moreover:
This could only happen through his mother, Ham’s wife, having the Nephilim gene herself, since we know Noah in all his generations was 100% human. If Ham were wicked and not a follower of God, the odds of him taking a wife who was a part of the Nephilim hybrid pagan culture was much higher (B&E: also note that throughout Scripture, men who fell into sin often ended up marrying wives who worshiped false gods; for example, Solomon or King Ahab). And from what the Bible details, Ham was no follower of God. In fact, he was involved in an inappropriate incident with Noah that led to a curse:
And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father’s nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. — Genesis 9:20-26.
The details of this incident are somewhat vague but going by Scripture alone, it can be concluded that Ham, out of evil intent, looked at his father’s nakedness and then made it public. The Hebrew term for “without”, chwuts, means “outside, in the street.” But the evil of this sexually immoral act is again repeated by the Lord as a general principle for all to follow:
Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour drink, that puttest thy bottle to him, and makest him drunken also, that thou mayest look on their nakedness! Thou art filled with shame for glory: drink thou also, and let thy foreskin be uncovered: the cup of the LORD’s right hand shall be turned unto thee, and shameful spewing shall be on thy glory. –Habukkuk 2:15-16.
Shem and Japeth, righteous children of Noah, show a contrast as they seek to respect their father’s dignity by not looking upon, him and carefully covering him. Ham’s sin was so severe that it resulted in his youngest son Canaan becoming the second person in the Bible record to be cursed (the first being Cain, the wicked son of Adam and Eve).
That Ham was wicked (there is no record of him ever repenting for this sin) would make it more likely that he would marry a woman from a pagan family who would be carrying the Nephilim gene.
I’ve no idea why the author merely asserted, “Canaan carried the Nephilim gene. This could only happen through his mother, Ham’s wife, having the Nephilim gene herself, since we know Noah in all his generations was 100% human” but what does that have to do with it? As long as we’re inventing un-biblical fantasy tall-tales, why not mere assert: Noah in all his generations was 100% human so his wife was a Nephil and so all three sons were Nephilim and so all their wives gave birth to Nephilim?
Actually, “looked at his father’s nakedness” implies Ham had sex with Noah’s wife due to that Lev 18 notes, “You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, which is the nakedness of your mother.”
He’d be the third person in the Bible record to be cursed since Satan/serpent was also cursed.
The next question answered by the author is:
Why Would God Allow Nephilim DNA to Make It Through the Flood?
(B&E: Special thanks to reader Rick for raising this question). If it were not already clear, the reason why God permitted the Nephilim gene to make it on to the ark is because of human sin. We can never forget the role we play in human affairs. If humans sin, they will be judged. If they do not follow God’s ways, they invite sin and its inevitable destructive force. Ham was not a follower of God and he was judged for his sinful rebellion via his wife…the Nephilim nations after the flood are at various times used by God as judgment against the Israelites for their disobedience. We are all responsible before God…
There were giants walking around the Earth warring with nations, angels openly being revealed and being worshiped as gods and all sorts of supernatural activity taking place. The pre-flood world was a very unique place. Noah’s family was well aware of this and that it’s root was satanic, hence Noah being a “preacher of righteousness.” Ham rejected God’s righteousness and God’s ways to forge his own. This was solely Ham’s fault…
Ham was drawn by his own lusts to the pagan, sinful world. He knew the right way to live because the Bible states that Noah was a “preacher of righteousness.” Noah and his family were completely aware of the Nephilim hybridization taking place and Noah clearly made efforts to live separate from this. Despite having the most Holy man on the planet (literally) as is his father, Ham had no faith in God. This always brings in sin to a person’s life. We can never forget that when looking at any Biblical account. God could have certainly killed Ham’s wife or told Ham “she’s corrupted” but it is this author’s thinking that Ham did not care about what God had to say because Ham was not a follower of God. Ham had a choice. And he chose to reject God.
This was supposed to be a Biblical Study but very quickly became the weaving of a tall-tale.
No, there was no, “reason” offered at all as to, “why God permitted the Nephilim gene to make it on to the ark” especially since there can’t be one since no such thing happened.
But we’re told it was, “because of human sin” which apparently defeated every purpose the author told us were the reasons for the flood in the first place: this is utter inconsistency.
Needless to say, there’s literally zero reliable indication that, “Nephilim nations after the flood” even ever existed much less, “at various times used by God as judgment against the Israelites—literally zero reliable indication and only on one single unreliable non-LXX sentence from one single unreliable evil report spoken by 10 unreliable guys whom God rebuked worth of indication.
Note that, “Noah’s family was well aware of this and that it’s root was satanic” even though there were Nephilim within Noah’s family according to the author’s fantasy tall-tale. Thus, “Noah and his family were completely aware of the Nephilim hybridization taking place and Noah clearly made efforts to live separate from this” but clearly failed.
The author keeps on merely asserting, “we can know with certainty that it is from the line of Ham that we find the resurgence of the Nephilim giants” and also, “By comparing Scripture with Scripture, the lineage of the post-flood giants can be traced specifically to three of Ham’s sons, Cush, Mizraim and Canaan” but since that’s clearly fallacious, the author punts to Nimrod:
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. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar…Genesis 10…
Just as Canaan received a special distinction in his genealogy, Nimrod gets several extra verses! Clearly this is someone of special significance. Nimrod was the first murderer and conqueror in the post-flood world. He was the founder of the city of Babylon which became a center of pagan, satanic idolatry, much of it with various versions of Nimrod himself being worshiped as a god. His name, which means “to rebel” or “let us rebel” indicates his disposition. He was an enemy of God and at the time was Satan’s main servant on Earth. He is credited for leading the effort to build the tower of Babel, a religious temple used to access the angelic realm through pagan ritual. The Tower of Babel was also the first attempt at a global government, led by Nimrod and an attempt for man to reach the spiritual realm and “godhood” without The Lord (to which God swiftly responded by destroying the tower, confusing the languages of all the people of the world and scattering them all over the Earth).
Did you read anything in that scripture about, “Nimrod was the first murderer” no, because it’s not there—nor anywhere.
Ok, “Babylon…became a center of pagan, satanic idolatry” but just because, “much of it with various versions of Nimrod himself being worshiped as a god” doesn’t mean that Nimrod had anything to do with any of that, he just founded the city.
Did you notice that, “a mighty hunter before the LORD” was taken to mean, “was an enemy of God”?
Did you notice the qualifying term, “is credited for leading the effort to build the tower of Babel” credited by whom and when? Certainly not in the Bible.
Now, perhaps Nimrod was responsible for all of that but my point is that we’re told no such things.
Continuing:
Was this grandson of Ham possibly a Nephilim?
It is interesting to note is that the verse 9 states that Nimrod “began to be a mighty one in the earth.” The term for “mighty one”, gibborim, is the same Hebrew phrase used to describe the Nephilim giants in Chapter 6 of Genesis who were “mighty men”. It is also the same term used to describe the giant Goliath in 1 Samuel 17:51. Was Nimrod a Nephilim? In mythology, Nimrod is known by many names, among them Gilgamesh and Osiris, who were worshiped as gods. In Sumerian texts he is described as “2/3 god, 1/3 man.” The Hebrew word for “began” in the verse is chalal, which means, “to profane, desecrate or pollute oneself, begin, ritually or sexually”.
Matthew Henry’s Bible commentary on this passage states:…The same spirit that actuated the giants before the flood (who became mighty men, and men of renown, ch. 6:4)…
Being purposefully manipulative or not, the author myopically asserted, “The term for ‘mighty one’, gibborim, is the same Hebrew phrase used to describe the Nephilim giants…the same term used to describe the giant Goliath” but what would that have to do with, “Was Nimrod a Nephilim?” anymore than that Nephilim are called men and so as many, many humans so should we ask if all of those men were really Nephilim?
Sure, Nephilim were called gibborim but so were Angels (Psa 103:20), Gideon (Jdg 6:12), Boaz (Ruth 2:1), some of King David’s soldiers (1 Chron 11:11), even God Himself (Isa 9:6).
So, we’re told that, Nimrod profane, desecrate or pollute oneself, begin, ritually or sexually a mighty one—whatever that means.
A for Henry, “The same spirit that actuated the giants before the flood” and is generically applicable to anyone in all of human history, “who became mighty men, and men of renown” so that’s virtually meaningless.
Continuing:
The final piece of evidence to consider is that in the Septuagint, the oldest version of the Old Testament, the same verse from Genesis reads:
And [Cush] begot [Nimrod]: he began to be a giant upon the earth. He was a giant hunter before the Lord God; therefore they say, As [Nimrod] the giant hunter before the Lord. – Genesis 10:8,9 (LXX)
So from just the text of scripture it appears that through some form of defilement and/or occult ritual, Nimrod. the grandson of Ham, was transformed into a giant. This would not be the only time a human king was transformed into a different creature.
Please note that in Daniel 4, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, was literally transformed into a “beast” and lived as an animal for seven years. And this was at the pronouncement of “watchers” and “holy ones” (the same type of angels that are named as being involved in the Genesis 6 illicit relations in extra-biblical texts like the Book of Enoch).
Note the oddity of appealing to, “the Septuagint” which is a Greek version but quoting English.
The reason why the English version being quoted reads, “a giant hunter” is because the Septuagint/LXX rendered gibbor as gigantes (meaning earth-born) which is whence (likely via Latin) we get the English word giant.
Yet, the author has made so very many missteps along the way that it seems everything is being read into rather than just being read.
Also, there’s literally zero indication that, “some form of defilement and/or occult ritual” results in Nephilim—and/or whatever the author means by, “transformed into a giant” in this case.
The author is in such a neo-theo-sci-fi-fantasy-tall-tales streak that it’s even merely asserted, “Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, was literally transformed into a ‘beast’” even though the text actually states:
…there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you, and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. And you shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.”
Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws.
Nothing about, “literally transformed into a ‘beast’” about it.
It’s also myopic to assert, “pronouncement of ‘watchers’ and ‘holy ones’ (the same type of angels that are named as being involved in the Genesis 6 illicit relations in extra-biblical texts like the Book of Enoch)” since Watchers was merely a Second Temple Era aka for Angels/Malakim—which is why it appears in 1 Enoch since that’ just Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah.
Moreover:
Ham’s son Mizaraim also contributed to the Nephilim lineage. In verse 14 we have the first mention of the Phillistines…the nation of the giant Goliath…the direct origins of the Philistines, one of the most heated enemies of the Israelites, who also carried the Nephilim gene.
In fact, as will be shown, the Philistine nation was the final “hideout” for the remnant of the Nephilim giants. And they can be traced back to Casluhim, the son of Mizraim and grandson of the evil Ham.
Canaan..the Nephilim giants among them were working to attack God’s chosen people…usurpers in the Promised Land and carried lots of the Nephilim gene…
This is once again why God had to deal mercilessly with these nations. It cannot be stressed enough that the Nephilim threatened not only the existence of the human race…the nations that were home to the Nephilim giants…
This point is not discussed enough: God fought against and defeated the early post-flood Nephilim…God was bringing the spread of the Nephilim genes to an end.
Lord willing, at this point it is clear that giants did indeed exist in the Bible and in large number…God sent the global flood judgment to punish those angels who committed folly, destroy the Nephilim…The flood ensured the Messianic bloodline was preserved…righteous men of God who fought against them throughout the Old Testament in the continuing chess match between God and Satan and the Sons of God against the seed of the Serpent.
That, along with the rest of the article, is typical of the utter incoherent to which pop-post-flood-Nephilolgy leads, let’s review:
Only after inventing tall-tales about post-flood Nephilim can one play the word/name-swap game and just slap the term Nephilim on anyone that’s not liked.
Ham’s sons were Nephilim, Philistines were Nephilim, Goliath was a Nephil, Casluhim was a Nephil, etc., etc., etc.
Now, post-flood they, “carried the Nephilim gene” and actually it wasn’t that, “God had to deal mercilessly with these nations” but that He had to get mere humans to do what He failed to do, to finish the job He couldn’t get done.
Indeed, “Nephilim threatened not only the existence of the human race” pre-flood which is why God ended them then and there.
After all, “God sent the global flood judgment to…destroy the Nephilim” and, “The flood ensured the Messianic bloodline was preserved” but the flood didn’t do that so it didn’t ensure that—mere humans had to do that and only eventually, centuries post-flood.
We were also told, “as the number of Nephilim giants on the Earth decreased, they soon became smaller in size” based zero reliable data points so that’s meaningless.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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