This pertains to a Reddit post titled POLL: What’s your view on the Nephilim and the Divine Council?
The options are:
Both were/are real
Nephilim were real, Divine Council isn’t
Divine Council is real, Nephilim weren’t
Neither are/were real
I’m not sure
I don’t even know these terms! What?!
My vote is for, “Both were/are real.”
The, “Bonus question ideas for the comment section” are listed as I’ll offer my replies:
When did you first learn about either?
Learned about Nephilim via pop-Nephilologists whom I first believed but whom I came to realize make a living by selling un-biblical tall-tales to Christians. I’ve written whole books (and hundreds of articles here on this website) debunking them such as 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. and Nephilim and Giants: Believe It or Not!: Ancient and Neo-Theo-Sci-Fi Tall Tales.
First learned about the concept of a Divine Council from Dr. Michael Heiser and while I tend to agree with his views on that, but his Nephilology (and demonology) wasn’t altogether biblical, and he tended to create more problems than he solved—search online for these articles for examples:
Review of Amy Richter and Michael Heiser on four Enochian Watcher related women in Jesus’ genealogy.
Rebuttal to Dr. Michael Heiser’s ‘All I Want for Christmas is Another Flawed Nephilim Rebuttal.”
I also included him in my book, The Scholarly Academic Nephilim and Giants: What do Scholarly Academics Say About Nephilim Giants?
What was your first impression when you first learned about either?
First impression about Nephilim was fascination since the pop-Nephilologists spin a good yarn, they tell utterly fascinating fantasy tell-tales but then I researched the issue biblically and found that they’re unreliable.
First impression of Divine Council was that it makes sense since God created Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, etc., and there’s no reason why He wouldn’t interact with them in the various ways that He does—such as Angels being His messengers, by definition.
How much did you study them before making up your mind?
Nephilim: a few years and a lot more years since.
Divine Council: less time since it’s a simpler issue in some ways.
Why do you believe what you believe?
Both based on the Bible primarily and then apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, folklore, etc. all of which I’ve consulted in order to have a well rounded view.
How does your belief about them impact you? (What difference do they make in your life?)
Both make me understand God better and also better understand those who reject one or both in terms of how they miss, ignore, or manipulate data points.
I’ll now jump to the discussion section so that I can review and offer critiques—and since I’ve been booted from Reddit and so I can’t reply directly ;o)
A certain Har_monia noted:
The nephilim existed, but who is to say that they were actual 9ft giants? Maybe they were just 6′ which would be crazy by ancient standards, and there was a mythos that surrounded them because of it
These are issues upon which I’m constantly going on since giants is a vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage and modern English word and since 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 pop-Nephilology—the modern branch of which is just un-biblical neo-theo sci-fi tall-tales.
Right_One_78 noted:
That idea usually comes from:
Numbers 13:32 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.
33 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.
Physically bigger men, that looked down on others as being below them. For context, Goliath was called a giant and he was 6′ 9″. So, the Nephilim were likely all over 6 foot tall whereas everyone else was probably 5′-5’6″.
The Sons of God refer to those led by the Spirit. so, when the sons of God took the daughters of men, it is talking about those within the gospel and having been taught the commandments rejecting the church in order to have families with these beautiful women of the world. Their children were the fallen ones, it those that fell away from the truth of God. Those that were lost.
Indeed, “That idea usually comes from…an evil report” which is why I noted, “no reliable physical description of Nephilim.”
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.
“Goliath was called a giant” is contextualized as having had something to do with his height but biblically contextually, “Goliath was called a giant” would mean, “Goliath was called a Repha.” Also, 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 (the Greek LXX Codex Venetus actually has 5 cubits and a span).
As for, “Nephilim were likely all over 6 foot tall” that may very well have been the case but they didn’t make it past the flood since God didn’t fail, didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
Note the claim, “those led by the Spirit” weren’t really led by the Spirit since they were actually such terrible sinners that their sin served as the premise for the flood: so, that’s rather odd.
Har_monia followed up with:
I know where it comes from, but the word “giant” is not in verse 33, only the term Nephilim, but in verse 32, it just says that they were men of stature, or great stature. We can presume that Goliath was 6’9″, but he was the champion of the Philistines. Maybe he was the largest one of them which caused him to be held as the champion.
I am arguing against the claims that the Nephilim were all 9′ giants. It seems the rest of what you said all agrees with me. The stories of angels and giants from the Book of Enoch are not canon.
It’s linguistically odd to say, “the word ‘giant’ is not in verse 33, only the term Nephilim” since it’s really a case of, “the word ‘giant’ is” in some English versions of, “verse 33, only the term Nephilim” in Hebrew and other English versions.
The, “they” in v. 32 who, “were men of stature, or great stature”—which is just as vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as giants—were, “all the people that we saw in” the land: and that’s one of the five mere assertions for which there’s no supporting data.
As for, “stories of angels and giants from the Book of Enoch are not canon” well, that the sons of God were Angels is biblical but indeed, 1 Enoch is Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah, see my book In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch.
foundtheseeker posted two comments back-to-back that I’ll combine here:
That’s a really interesting interpretation of the Sons of God. Very naturalistic, which I think always should be considered as the first possibility if a thing is of unknown origin. Do you know what branch of Biblical study that idea comes from?
I think an all powerful Creator God necessitates the possibility of all things; and the more we observe about the structure of the universe, the more we should suspect that a purely naturalistic framework is insufficient to explain our world.
I believe in the so-called Divine Council because, 1, it is unavoidable in the Bible and in the Bible’s context; and 2, because that appears to be how the Creator God wants to do things. And it stands to reason that a God that exists eternally and fully in three distinct and relational parts values cooperation. Frankly, it explains a lot about the act and purpose of creation.
The Nephilim, I am less inclined to accept at face value. Much of early Genesis seems to clearly be etiological, that is, mythical in its retelling of things, but fully truthful in its intentions and philosophical teachings. Could that statement fit the scant mentions of the Nephilim? Sure it could. It’s one of those things in the Bible I’ll be glad to learn more about when I join the Lord.
The, “really interesting interpretation of the Sons of God. Very naturalistic” has, as its hidden assumption, the Sethie view which is a late-comer based on myth and prejudice. 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 not a case of, “a thing is of unknown origin” since we’re told Nephilim were offspring of sons of God and daughters of men. Job 38:7, as one example, shows us that, “sons of God” can refer to non-human beings (which some LXX editions have as “Angeloi”: plural of “Angelos”) since they, at the very least, witnessed the creation of the Earth.
Jude and 2 Peter 2 combined refer to a sin of Angels, place that sin to pre-flood days and correlate it to sexual sin which occurred after the Angels, “left their first estate,” after which they were incarcerated, and there’s only a one-time fall of Angels in the Bible. So, if they’re not referring to the Gen 6 affair, we’ve no idea to what sin they’re referring.
As for, “an all powerful Creator God…the so-called Divine Council” the most straight forward text is:
I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; and the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’
And one said one thing, and another said another.
Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’
And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’
And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’
And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’
Now therefore behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has declared disaster for you.
Arise_and_Thresh noted:
All of the OT authors confirm the “divine counsel” as well as the Nephillim… not only that but even the heathen Near East cultures confirmed this reality pre and post flood
It’s simply hyperbolic that, especially, “All of the OT authors confirm the ‘divine counsel’ as well as the Nephillim” and especially specially since Nephilim are only mentioned in two sentences in the whole Bible.
dougrattmannn noted:
If Nephilim did exist as giant humanoids, as the Bible claims, we would have skeletons of them. And they would 100% be on display by loads of cultures, caus the idea of giant humans is basically universally beloved as a concept.
Personally, I think the idea of the Nephilim was just a literary way to describe the gaint empires that were a constant within biblical history.
As noted above, “If Nephilim did exist” there’s no reliable indication they existed, “as giant humanoids” so that’s not what, “the Bible claims” thus, we may have found, “skeletons of them” and not know it since, again, we’ve no reliable physical description of them.
This person is also contextually misusing the term giants since 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.
Thin_Syrup67 noted:
Ever heard of lovelock cave? The Kandahar giant? There are instances of giant bones being found.
Yes and yes:
See my article Lovelock Cave Giants: lost or found?
The Kandahar giant tall-tale is just an internet hoax based on some anonymous guys making vague claims about generic regions and sold to us by two guys who make a living by selling un-biblical tall-tales to Christians: LA Marzulli and the plagiarist and evolutionist Steven Quayle. And those who merely assert that it was a Nephil imply that God failed, missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
DesperateAdvantage76 noted:
“The “giant” scale comes from exaggerated early newspaper reports, oversized woven sandals (which actually fit normal people or served different functional uses), and natural post-mortem chemical staining that turned dark human hair reddish over millennia. Scientists and historians confirm no giant skeletons were ever scientifically documented at the site.”
“Fact-checkers, military historians, and official records confirm the story is complete fiction. There are no Department of Defense logs, casualty reports, or verifiable military personnel accounts supporting it.”
I’m unsure to what, “The ‘giant’ scale” refers but as for, “exaggerated early newspaper reports” I filled a whole chapter with those in my book Nephilim and Giants: Believe It or Not!: Ancient and Neo-Theo-Sci-Fi Tall Tales and they’re what you expect from newspaper reports: they’re mostly momentary (a guy said a thing), without follow up, and about bones of who knows what (in with the bones being mysteriously gone by the time any reporter even went to the location—if anyone went anywhere since some cases are just literally: a guy said a thing).
Also, “oversized” is as vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as giants.
And we’ll end here since those are the comments that were substantive—most of which didn’t result in ongoing discussions.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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