Janet Morrison answers What is the difference in the mention of demons and fallen angels between the New Testament and the Old T

A certain Janet Morrison has been a long time interlocutor of mine and so I’ll be featuring some of our discussions: see here for them all.

She answered the question Is the book of Enoch the key to understanding the Torah and the Bible?thusly

It says it was written for the people living in the end times.

I researched the Nephilim and the word giants, in order to do research about the Nephilim in the Western bible. But the western canon also talks of the books of Nathan, Gad, Iddo, Baruch, Jubilees and it mentions the book of Jasher three times.

I, Ken Ammi, replied

1 Enoch is Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah.

Jasher is just a modern day hoaxed fraud.

If you “researched the Nephilim and the word giants” then you know that the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles is that 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.

Janet Morrison

Anakim.

zamzummin

Rephaim.

Emin.

Nephilim.

Ken Ammi

My friend, I’ve explained this to you so many times:

Anakim: like a clan of the Rephaim tribe.

zamzummin: it’s “Zamzummim” and that’s merely an a.k.a. for Rephaim.

Rephaim: a tribe of post-flood humans.

Emin: it’s “Emmim” and they were like a clan of the Rephaim tribe.

Nephilim: pre-flood hybrids.

Now, what of it?

As for, “Rabbinical Judaism recognizes Enoch 1” that’s tragically generic and irrelevant. You use a statement such as that to continue to ignore that it’s Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if no millennia, after the Torah.

Rabbinical Judaism doesn’t recognize Jesus as Messiah: do you go with that as well?

Janet Morrison

My good old friend, they all mean Nephilim giants after the flood.

Ken Ammi

As I’ve elucidated for you dozens of times: there’s literally ZERO indication “they all mean Nephilim giants after the flood.”

That’s not only unsupportable by even one single word in the whole Bible or apocrypha or pseudepigrapha, again, you’re teaching people on the WORLD WIDE web that God failed, missed a loophole, and the flood was much of a waste: do you realize how accountable you are for that?

What does your pastor think about your Bible contradicting tall-tales?

Janet Morrison

And as I have explained many times, Numbers 13 clearly states that there were Nephilim thrre, the son of Anak, the Anakim giants who were called the long necked ones in Hebrew. That was AFTER the flood. Look up all the words for giants in Hebrew and it is interesting. Rephaim, Anakim, Emin and Zamzummin. The men of terror, the sight of whom made the heart faint.

Ken, I think you are making YHVH God look bad for the genocide of the Caananite giants. If God had not used Israel to wipe out the Nephilim Anakim giants of Canaan, then the human race would have ceased to exist a long time ago. Why do you think God kept telling Israel to keep their seed pure? Who do you think we’re the seed of Satan?

Ken Ammi

So, “What does your pastor think about your Bible contradicting tall-tales?”

Indeed, the only thing you have to back your un-biblical and theology proper damaging post-flood Nephilim tall-tale is:

1) one single sentence

2) from an “evil report”

3) by unreliable guys

4) whom God rebuked

5) who contradicted Moses, Caleb, Joshua, God, and the rest of the whole Bible

6) and you rely only on non-LXX versions

Why do you side with guys whom God rebuked rather than with the God who rebuked them.

The one and only true living God of the Bible doesn’t fail: why does your god fail?

As for, “Numbers 13 clearly states” that’s no only uncontextual (have you ever read Num chaps 13-14?) but we’ve already discussed this: just because it’s in the Bible doesn’t mean that it’s true—don’t you recall that discussion?

I’ve also told you many times that biblically contextually, “Anakim giants” means, “Anakim Rephaim” so you debunked yourself since that shows us they were Rephaim (Deut 2) not Nephilim.

You’re also myopic and debunked yourself again since you say, “Look up all the words for giants in Hebrew and it is interesting” and you manipulate the data by listing, “Rephaim, Anakim, Emin and Zamzummin” but that’s simply note the case: what you read in modern English as, “giants” in Herew is “Nephilim” in 2 verses or “Repha/im” in 98% of all others so never, “Anakim, Emin and Zamzummin” and I’ve told you that many times.

Why do you refuse correction—a correction that would take you mere seconds to verify?

But I can see that this is partly based on your personal fantasies since you say, “The men of terror, the sight of whom made the heart faint” but you plug that into your un-biblical tall-tales rather than taking it at face value: there are, “men of terror, the sight of whom made the heart faint” today (have you ever been on a battle field where your life is on the line?): are you claiming they’re Nephilim?

As for me, “making YHVH God look bad for the genocide of the Caananite giants” have you ever read the many times that YHVH told you why He commanded such things?

He never said one single word about your fantasy, “God…used Israel to wipe out the Nephilim” so you’re falsely attributing to God something He never said nor did.

Why do you have to literally manipulate God just to protect your Nephilology?

As for, “If God had not used Israel to wipe out the” followed by an incoherent category error then, “the human race would have ceased to exist a long time ago” I’ve told you before, the biblical view is, “If God had not used the flood to wipe out the Nephilim…then the human race would have ceased to exist a long time ago.

“God kept telling Israel to keep their seed pure” so that they would keep their seed pure: it has nothing to do with genetics—or, are you claiming that since some people in Jesus’ genealogies weren’t genetic Israelites then, what, Jesus was a Nephil?

“the seed of Satan” are those who commit un-Godly actions, it’s not about genetics.

Now, note that I just asked you 10 questions: please answer them.

Janet Morrison

I have disagreed with your teaching ever since I first heard it because you refuse to look at the Hebrew meaning of words. You are basing everything on English translations. You can’t get aroun the fact that Numbers13 clearly states there were Nephilim in Canaan. The sons of Anak. The Anakim. The long necks ones. Why do you resist this fact?

Ken Ammi

Why do you ask me a question when I specifically noted that I asked you 10 and now I see you flatly refuse to answer them: although I know it’s because you can’t because you’re not familiar with this topic.

Also, why are you being manipulative by misrepresenting me? I also told you that while you merely asserted that I “refuse to look at the Hebrew meaning of words” I’ve not only engaged you on that issue literally dozens of time, I told you that I literally wrote the books on that issue, “Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010.”

Thus, your assertion, “You are basing everything on English translations” is 1,001% wrong.

As for, “can’t get around the fact that Numbers13 clearly states there were Nephilim in Canaan. The sons of Anak. The Anakim. The long necks ones. Why do you resist this fact?” what makes you merely assert I’m trying to get around it?

Of course, “Numbers13 clearly states” that but dozens of times, you have refused to read God’s word for context and don’t accept that you’re relying on:

one single sentence

from an “evil report”

by 10 unreliable guys

whom God rebuked—do death

and you’re only looking at non-LXX versions

plus, you accept post-flood Nephilim on their say so alone

even though that implies that God failed, missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.

so you side with guys whom God rebuked rather than the God who rebuked them

and you use them as authorities so that you use their “evil report” to misinterpret other texts

And I’ve told you these things dozens of times, literally dozens.

Janet Morrison

Ken, the reason why I reject your assertion that there were no Nephilim in Canaan AFTER the flood is because of Numbers 13, which clearly states there were Nephilim, the sons of Anak there, who were called the Anakim / the long necked ones. You seem to think it is a light detail that you can just ignore, and you want me to ignore it and you want me to ignore the other verses about giants in the Torah. You ignore the verses about Og the King of Bashan who had a bed 13 feet long. Or Goliath of Gath who was a Rephaim giant 9′8″ . And when I mention the other names that the giants were called such as the men of terror, or the sight of whom made the heart faint, you dismiss these points.

Let it Go Ken. I am not going to agree with you, because you ignore the Torah Scriptures.

Ken Ammi

What about all of those questions you can’t answer?

What about the nine points I made in my previous reply?

What about that’s we’ve discussed this dozens of times already and you still misunderstand how to read in terms of reading comprehension, hermeneutics?

I’ve come to this conclusion: you’re the victim of spiritual warfare that has literally blinded you so you can’t see the truth even when it’s explained to you dozens of times.

You don’t mean, “because of Numbers 13” since that’s an entire chapter?

Why not be more honest by being more accurately detailed and say, “because of one single sentence in the entire Bible, one of the sentences which make up the version of the evil report I’m reading by unreliable guys whom God rebuked”?

So there you have it, you side with guys whom God rebuked rather than with God—on this one.

We already had a discussion about how there are many wrong, false, untrue, lies in the Bible: do you remember that?

When a lie by Satan is recorded in the Bible that doesn’t make the lie true, it mean that a wrong, false, untrue, lie was recorded.

So, you reject Caleb and Joshua, of whom God approves, and you accept 10 unreliable, unfaithful, disloyal, embellishing, deceivers, whom God rejects—to death. I ask if you ever read Num chaps 13-14 and your refusal to reply seems to imply that no, you haven’t. Please do so.

So, when you vaguely and generically merely assert, that an entire chapter, “clearly states there were Nephilim, the sons of Anak there, who were called the Anakim / the long necked ones” you’re manipulating the chapter.

You should have written, “the evil report by unreliable guys whom God rebuked to death said what was recorded in Numbers 13:33, which clearly states there were Nephilim, the sons of Anak there, who were called the Anakim / the long necked ones only in non-LXX versions and that’s literally impossible since God didn’t fail, didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste, etc., etc., etc. and anyone arguing for post-flood Nephilim doesn’t have even more single more sentence to appeal to.”

See, those guys whom God rebuked to death got the Israelites to doubt God, they damaged theology proper: that was a failure in spiritual warfare and it has haunted us every since when people like you also fail by rejecting Moses, Cable, Joshua, God, and the rest of the whole entire Bible and accepting that one sentence.

In this case, you’re worshiping 10 men whom God rebuked rather than the God (and his loyal ones like Moses, Caleb, and Joshua) who rebuked them.

You then play a language game by switching from, “Nephilim” to “giants” and merely assert that I, “want me to ignore it and you want me to ignore the other verses about giants in the Torah” when the on record fact is that I’ve engaged you in every single text you’ve ever brought up.

However, since you suffer from spiritual blindness, on this issue, you literally can’t even remember those dozens of discussions.

You really should look them up again and re-read them: I have all of them saves in Word docs.

You’re so blind that you actually repeated a previous accusation, “You ignore the verses about Og the King of Bashan who had a bed 13 feet long” even though I’ve engaged you on that dozens of times—and I wrote a whole book about him, and I’ve told you that, The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?

How can you take yourself seriously when you tell someone who wrote a whole book about Og that he’s ignoring Og?

You’re blind.

Likewise with, “Goliath of Gath who was a Rephaim giant 9′8″” indeed, he wa a Repha, not a Nephil, and I’ve told you dozens of times that the Masoretic text has Goliath at just shy of 10 ft. Yet, the earlier LXX and the earlier Dead Sea Scrolls and the earlier Flavius Josephus all have him at just shy of 7 ft. (compared to the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft. in those days) so that’s the preponderance of the earliest data.

Why are you ignoring those facts?

You’re blind.

You can’t even recognize what I’ve told you dozens of times which is that when you use the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in statements such as, “names that the giants were called” I can’t know to what you’re referring.

But fine, let’s play your watered down vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” game: what does “men of terror, or the sight of whom made the heart faint, you dismiss these points” have to do with anything?

Do you want me to drop you down into the middle of a moder war between two armies consisting of 100% humans on both sides? Then you’ll get a good idea of what, “men of terror…whom made the heart faint” means.

It’s just that you chose the failed side of spiritual warfare so you read one of the definitions of one word and merely fantasy imagined to what, “men of terror, or the sight of whom made the heart faint, you dismiss these points” refers, and you claim that it’s God’s word.

Meanwhile, I did a survey of 159 years worth of definitions, meanings, and usages as published in my book, “Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010” of which I’ve made you aware dozens of time—and after I do that, you have to gull to tell me that I ignore such issues?

So, you should have ended with, “Let it Go Ken. I am not going to agree with God or His Word on this, because I’m blind and am on the wrong side of spiritual warface and so I ignore the Torah Scriptures.”

Janet Morrison

Read the entire chapter of Numbers 13

Ken Ammi

I have, many times, as you know since you read my article “Chapter sample: On the Post Flood Nephilim Proposal” to which I’ve directed you many times: right?

Now, I’ve asked you many times if you’ve read Num chaps 13–14 and, as usual, you never replied.

Now: