On June 15, 2023 AD, Ken Ham posted about the Nephilim on his Facebook page.
He noted of Genesis 6:1–4 that, “this section doesn’t impinge on any major doctrines” and perhaps it shouldn’t but actually, fallacious Nephilology leads to fallacious theology proper.
He sought to, “take as straightforward an interpretation as possible without trying to complicate things” and, “It seems to me the simplest explanation is that the line of Seth (which could have been referred to as ‘sons of God’ because they were godly and called upon the name of the Lord) started marrying the line of Cain (the “daughters of men”—women who were beautiful but ungodly).”
The Sethite view is a historical late comer, it creates more problems than it solves and, as we just saw it’s based on mythology: the mythology of Sethites who were wholly godly and Cainites who were wholly ungodly. Those assertions alone utterly discredit that theory. Moreover, the Sethites were so wholly godly that they weren’t so godly after all—go figure.
Ken Ham notes, “The context of these verses is to relay the extent to which wickedness had come to prevail on the earth” and the premise is the terrible sin of the godly Sethies, or so the theory goes.
Ham notes, “We see a warning of this with the godly Israelites entering into ungodly Canaan (e.g., Deuteronomy 7:1–4, 1 Kings 11:2). In the New Testament, we are also warned in 2 Corinthians 6:14: ‘Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?’ Malachi was warning about such marriages (godly and ungodly) in Malachi chapter 2.”
It may be noted that those are from millennia after the Genesis 6 affair, as I term it.
Ken Ham quotes the comments thusly, “We read, ‘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.’ (Genesis 6:4) Who were the Nephilim? Certainly, the description may imply that they were of great stature (perhaps giants in the build of their bodies), greatly feared, and were well known, presumably for extreme wickedness.”
Did you discern anything in that verse about, “great stature…giants in the build of their bodies…greatly feared…for extreme wickedness”? No? Neither did I, “well known” yes, mighty, yes, but we’re not even told why.
While we’re at it, some key questions are:
What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles?
What’s Ken Ham’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
Do those usages agree?
Well, we got Ham’s usage, “great stature…in the build of their bodies” which is not the English Bible’s usage wherein giants merely render (don’t even translate) Nephilim in two verses or the utterly unrelated Rephaim in 98% of all others—and never implying any thing about size whatsoever.
Ken Ham notes, “An interesting point concerning the Nephilim is the phrase, and also afterward. It seems this is referring to after the flood, as Nephilim are mentioned once again in 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’ (Numbers 13:33). The Nephilim in Numbers 13 were indeed giant in stature as the text indicates.”
Also afterward has nothing to do with the flood: in fact, the flood’s not even mentioned for the very first time until a full 13 verses later, v. 17. The verse tells us to what days it’s referring, “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.”
The question becomes, “when” was that?
Well, verse 1-2 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.”
Thus, those days were when man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them and so afterward was just after man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them.
They commenced doing it then and continued doing so yet, the flood brought it all to a full and final end.
Ken Ham didn’t bother mentioning that Numbers 13:33 is merely a sentence from an, “evil report” by unreliable guys whom God rebuked: they just made up a tall-tale.
Thus, since theirs is the only physical description we have of Nephilim then we’ve no reliable physical description of them and can’t assert, “great stature…in the build of their bodies…giant in stature” even from that verse since what, “the text indicates” is that it’s false.
Ken Ham argues against the original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christians commentators, starting in BC days, 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) by subjectively emoting, “Personally I can’t accept as some do that wicked angels mated with humans” followed by merely asserting, “Angels don’t reproduce and don’t have human DNA.”
Well, Angles are described as looking just like human males, we were created, “a little lower” than they, and we can produce offspring with them ergo, we’re of the same basic kind—so the view is not that they had, “human DNA” but that theirs is compatible with ours.
Yet, to him, “it makes a much more logical and simpler explanation that when godly and ungodly mix in marriage” but, for some reason(s), such marriages no longer resulted in what they resulted in pre-flood.
Ham ends in a mini-sermon.
Well, with a myth, mishandling two key verses, subjectivism, and assertions: we have Ken Ham’s problematic theory.
For my previous Answers in Genesis Nephilim related articles, see:
Nephilim: Answers in Genesis – were Nephilim in the land?
Nephilim: Answers in Genesis – are Angels spiritual?
Nephilim: Answers in Genesis – Nephilim after the flood?
Nephilim: Answers in Genesis – Nephilim as “men” and on marriage
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.