Brewery Ministries’ Nathan Snyder (self-ID as, “Resident Theology Nerd”) wrote an article titled Post-Flood Giants? 15 Major Theories of how the Nephilim returned after the flood.
In part, the site/ministry, noted, “Brewery Ministries is a non-profit organization creating new ways to explore faith for people who don’t feel like a traditional church setting is the right fit for them.”
Snyder begins by noting, “One of the biggest unsolved mysteries in ancient history is how the giants returned after the flood. On this page I’ve created the ultimate list of every theory on the return of the Nephilim.” Note that the title refers to giants, the subtitle refers to Nephilim, the first sentence to giants, the second one to Nephilim, etc., etc., etc.
Thus, 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 Snyder’s usage? Do those two usages agree?
See, he’s jumping back and forth from a vague modern English term to a specific ancient Hebrew term. Perhaps we can assume that by giants his usage is a mere aka for Nephilim—let’s track whether that’s consistently the case.
The real primary issue to consider isn’t how the Nephilim returned after the flood but rather, did Nephilim return after the flood, the biblical answer to which is no, of course not since God didn’t fail, didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
Quite on point, Snyder notes, “Before we dive into the list of theories though, many people question whether or not the giants actually returned after the flood” and while I’d say that there’s literally below zero reliable indication of any such thing as a return of Nephilim, he notes, “Let’s quickly look at the best ancient evidence of post-flood sightings.”
First up is, “Stories of the giants’ post-flood return aren’t just a biblical phenomenon; other civilizations claim to have spotted them after the flood as well” but that’s rather odd since, for one, 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. So, how would they spot them?
One example is said to be, “Sumerians and Babylonians famously wrote of the giant Gilgamesh, a real historical king who was said to be two-thirds divine. In my research, I discovered that Gilgamesh may have been the first post-flood giant to appear in ancient writings. Not long after, Egyptians wrote about a giant who was too tall to enter a shrine to worship the gods (a).”
His usage of giants seems here to be the only thing that the term giants really means (outside of metaphoric usages such as, “Elon Musk is a giant of high tech”) which is 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, due to this usage, and more which follow, his usage doesn’t agree with the English Bible’s usage 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.
Thus, to Snyder, “giant Gilgamesh” means something about his height, as well as what he noted about the Egyptian.
Of course, we also need reason to believe what those folkloric tall-tales tell us.
He added, “A few centuries later, Egyptians claim to have spotted unusually tall warriors” but unusually and tall are just as vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as giants and just as irrelevant to Nephilology.
Snyder went on to assert, “Joshua and the Israelites saw them in the book of Numbers (c). They claimed these giants were 4-5 cubits tall (approximately 6’ 10” to 8’ 6”). With the average height being about 5’ 6”, a 7-8 ft warrior would have been absolutely terrifying. It is no coincidence that Joshua and the Israelites battled giants in the same region during the conquest of Canaan.”
The, “(c)” denotes a footnote which reads, “Numbers 13:25-33.” Thus, that was a deeply misguided assertion:
1) Joshua isn’t even mentioned in that entire chapter.
2) there’s no indication that, “the Israelites saw them” unless by the all-encompassing term, “the Israelites” he means merely 10 of them.
3) nothing in that entire chapter even comes close to that, “They claimed these giants were 4-5 cubits tall (approximately 6’ 10” to 8’ 6”).”
4) “the average height” is a big vague: the average of those giants or of the Israelites: the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft. in those days.
5) Joshua and the Israelites battled Rephaim, et al., not Nephilim.
Sometimes I think that pop-Nephilologists language jump when they realize they can’t argue in favor of post-flood nor very tall Nephilim so they chase a generic modern English word around a specific ancient Hebrew Bible and just mash together all places where the modern English Bible they’re reading mentions giants regardless of context.
Incidentally, I have corrected this ministry many, many, many times in comment sections to their various YouTube videos but they seem impervious to correction—I even gifted them one of my books on the subject since we’ve actually interacted in various comments but I never received as much as a thanks and no follow up whatsoever.
He then moves onto, “if the original giants were wiped out by the flood, how did they re-emerge after?” but his premise is faulty.
Nevertheless, we will consider his, “list of every theory I’ve come across ranked from the least commonly-held views to most commonly held.”
15. Miscarriage/Strange Births (Fringe / Linguistic Theory) This theory suggests that the term “Nephilim” doesn’t refer to a race of giants at all, but rather to “monstrous” births or congenital anomalies. It’s an attempt to explain the Nephilim through scientific means, identifying their size as the birth defect called “gigantism.” From this perspective, the appearance of Nephilim after the flood was simply the natural recurrence of rare genetic or developmental conditions.
Of course, “‘Nephilim’ doesn’t refer to a race of” his subjective usage of, “giants” and there’s no reliable indication of, “their size” so no reason to even mention, “gigantism” nor any, “appearance of Nephilim after the flood.”
14. Noah as a Nephilim Carrier (Fringe Theory) A more controversial take from later Rabbis suggests that Noah himself possessed the “giant” gene. If you’re not familiar with the supernatural origin of the giants, the traditional and oldest interpretation views the giants as half-angel; the children of human women and angels called the Sons of God (see Genesis 6:1-4). The view that Noah was actually a giant himself seems to have been inspired by extrabiblical passages in the Book of Enoch and The Genesis Apocryphon, but it’s not directly from either book.
There’s no indication that there’s any, “Noah as a Nephilim Carrier” view, “from later Rabbis suggests that Noah himself possessed the” Snyder’s misuage of, “‘giant’ gene”: which would also mean that God missed that loophole.
Not even the Book of 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) has Noah as Snyder’s usage of giants, in fact, he quoted it thusly:
Check out the passage from the Book of Enoch that inspired this view below:
1 Enoch 106:5-6 (Lamech, Noah’s father is speaking): “l have begotten a strange son:” He is not like an (ordinary) human being, but he looks like the children of the angels of heaven to me;” his form is different, and he is not like us. His eyes are like the rays of the sun, and his face glorious.”lt does not seem to me that he is of me,’ but of angels…’”
Lamech speculated that his wife Batenosh had an affair with an angel, implying that Noah himself was a Nephilim. To his credit, Noah was kind of unusual-looking. He was described as having white hair with red and white skin, looking nothing like his dad.
There’s not a single word about Noah’s size.
Snynder added:
Later, the Rabbis in Genesis Apocryphon elaborated even more:
“Then I considered whether the pregnancy was due to the Watchers and Holy Ones, or (should be ascribed) to the Nephil[im], and I grew perturbed about this child”.
In this story, Lamech goes on to confront his wife Batenosh and ask her if she had an affair with an angel. But she swears up and down that Noah is his son. The modern theory that Noah was a giant is rooted in this extrabiblical story and speculates that Batenosh lied about the affair. I provided the above background though to show that this conclusion doesn’t actually come directly from either story; it’s kind of its own thing.
There’s not a single word about Noah’s size.
13. Necromancy/Summoning (Fringe Theory) This view holds that the physical Nephilim were destroyed in the flood, but their disembodied spirits remained. Post-flood occultists and necromancers allegedly used ritualistic summoning to bring these spirits back into physical form.
This is really touching upon the claim that demons are the spirits of dead Nephilim but that’s just folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah. For a biblical view, please see my article Demons Ex Machina: What are Demons?
As for, “bring these spirits back into physical form” of course, there’s no indication that God missed that loophole.
12. Pre-Adamic Humanoids (Fringe / Harmonistic Theory) This theory attempts to harmonize theology with paleoanthropology by suggesting that Nephilim were not supernatural hybrids, but surviving remnants of pre-Adamic hominids like Homo erectus or Neanderthals. In this view, these groups survived in isolated pockets or were misidentified by later ancient civilizations.
I’m unsure what a, “pre-Adamic hominids” would be since there’s never been any such thing and Neanderthals not only were humans but still are, “All modern humans have Neanderthal DNA, new research finds…modern Europeans, Asians and Americans…inherited about 2% of the genes from Neanderthals…researchers from Princeton University now believe, based on a new computational method, that Africans do in fact have Neanderthal DNA” (Katie Hunt, “All modern humans have Neanderthal DNA, new research finds,” CNN, January 30, 2020).
11. The Sasquatch/Bigfoot Link (Fringe / Cryptid Theory) A popular theory in certain fringe and cryptid-hunting circles, this idea proposes that the Nephilim never truly went extinct but retreated into the deep wilderness. It suggests that modern sightings of creatures like Bigfoot or Sasquatch are actually encounters with the elusive, surviving descendants of the biblical giants.
This one is the sort of stuff that has turned Nephilology into a clown show. Why think that beings who’s parents looked human—since their Angel dads look just like humans and their mothers were humans—would look like big ol’ apes?
10. Extraterrestrial Origins (Fringe / Pseudoscientific Theory) Often associated with the “Ancient Aliens” hypothesis, this theory argues that the Nephilim were actually extraterrestrial beings, such as the Anunnaki. Their “return” after the flood is explained as subsequent visits to Earth via advanced spacecraft, where they once again interacted with human populations.
It can’t be that, “Nephilim were actually extraterrestrial beings” since they were born on Earth, “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” (Gen 6, ESV).
Too bad that God missed the, “subsequent visits to Earth” loophole.
9. Interdimensional Portals (Fringe Theory) This theory suggests that the Nephilim escaped the flood through portals to another dimension. The region of Bashan is often cited as a primary location where the giants crossed back into the physical realm. Interestingly, that region was thought of as the gateway to the underworld, possibly explaining how this theory originated.
Clearly, all 15 of these imply that God failed via un-biblical fantasy tall-tales.
“The region of Bashan” is mostly focused upon Nephilologists who commit the category error of correlating Nephilim and Rephaim (such as the Repha, King Og of Bashan—see my book The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?
Nephilim were strictly pre-flood hybrids, Rephaim were strictly post-flood humans, and there’s zero correlation between them.
8. Ritualistic Possession (Fringe Theory) I’ve actually run across this theory on a couple well-known Biblical studies websites. Focusing on the spiritual over the genetic, this theory proposes that post-flood kings and leaders sought to recreate the original Nephilim by inviting demons to possess them during sexual rituals. This theory believes their children were “divine” or Nephilim-like due to this spiritual “indwelling” rather than by being literally fathered by angels.
As I just quoted Gen 6 above, there’s no indication that Nephilim come about in any way but that: good ol’ physical mating between Angels and humans: which hasn’t and can’t happen since the flood since 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/sin of Angels in the Bible.
7. Traditional/Legendary Survival (Og) (Traditional / Jewish) Rooted in Jewish Midrash and folklore, this tradition suggests that Og was a pre-flood giant who survived the flood (g). Some legends claim he either tied himself to the front of the ark, was fed by Noah through a window, or was so tall that he simply stood in the shallowest parts of the floodwaters until the flood was over.
Midrashim are sermonizing homilies and not history. Thus, we get literally incoherent, anachronistic, category errors such as a Repha who didn’t exist until centuries post-flood being a Nephil who lived pre-flood. We also have a guy for whom we’ve no physical description (until wild folkloric tall-tales from millennia after his time) being made to be a giant whom, BTW, Noah helped to save.
6. The Seed War Theory (Scripture-Based Inference) The Seed War Theory views the return of the Nephilim as a strategic attack; a supernatural attempt to corrupt human DNA. The goal? To pollute the bloodline of humanity so the promised Messiah of Genesis 3:15 could not be born. In Christianity, it’s thought of as a strategy that fallen angels used to prevent Jesus from being born.
That theory is actually not just about a fantasy, “return of the Nephilim” but serves as speculation about why they came into being in the first place.
5. Regional/Localized Flood (Mainstream / Harmonistic Theory) This perspective argues that the flood was a localized or regional event rather than a global one (but still a very large flood). If the water only covered the known world or a specific region, then Nephilim outside of the flood zone would have survived naturally, explaining their presence in the land of Canaan later on.
The scope of the flood is irrelevant to Nephilology since they either didn’t make it past the flood because it was global or because they lived in the flooded region: either way, they didn’t make it past the flood in any way, shape, or form—and there’s no such thing as, “their presence in the land of Canaan later on.”
4. Literary/Symbolic Motif (Mainstream / Academic Theory) Many modern scholars view the term “Nephilim” as a literary device used by ancient authors to describe terrifying or powerful enemies. In this view, the post-flood Nephilim weren’t literal giants or hybrids, but a symbolic way for the Israelites to describe the intimidating warriors they saw in Canaan. In this theory the Israelites’ enemies weren’t literal giants; they just seemed like giants. Some would say the Biblical authors were using the mythology of the day as an analogy. Others would call it exaggeration similar to the wild fish stories your uncle or your grandpa used to tell (ex: “I once caught a fish this big!”)
Indeed, there’s no reliable indication that Nephilim literal (Snyder’s usage of).
As for a, “way for the Israelites to describe the intimidating warriors they saw in Canaan” if that was the case, why is that only the case in only one single verse (the utterly unreliable Num 13:33)? This fits into the, “I once caught a fish this big!” since the fisherman only tells that long-tale but can’t produce any actual indication of it.
I’m unsure what, “weren’t literal” Snyder’s usage of, “giants” but only, “seemed like” his usage of, “giants”: how does someone seem like a size they’re not?
3. Natural Genetic Variation (Mainstream / Academic Theory) This theory is very similar to the last theory with a slight twist. It puts forward the idea that the giants mentioned after the flood—such as Goliath or the Anakim—were simply exceptionally tall humans. It attributes their size to natural genetic variation, hormonal conditions (like gigantism), or selective breeding within certain tribes, requiring no supernatural explanation. What’s interesting about this variation is that it acknowledges literal pre-flood giants, just not post-flood giants. The previous theory (#4) usually does not believe either pre-flood or post-flood giants were true supernatural Nephilim.
Let’s breakdown, “Goliath or the Anakim—were simply exceptionally tall humans.” Yes, they were humans:
1) Anakim were like a clan of the Rephaim tribe: the only relevant thing we’re told about them is that, on average, they were, “tall” (Deut 2) so, taller than 5.0-5.3ft.
2) Goliath was a Repha/Anakim (when some English Bibles refer to him as a, “giant” the Hebrew that’s being rendered is, “Repha”) and the fact is 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. so, that’s the preponderance of the earliest data.
I’m unsure what, “genetic variation, hormonal conditions (like gigantism)” is necessary to be taller than 5.0-5.3ft. up to 7(ish)ft.
2. Genetic Transmission (Hamite Line) (Mainstream / Scripture-Based Inference) A common literalist view, this theory is an inference made from examining the genealogies in the Bible. Because the post-flood Nephilim emerge from Noah’s son Ham’s descendants, this theory suggests that one of Noah’s daughters-in-law (often identified as Ham’s wife) was part-Nephilim.
Some suggest she was a carrier of these recessive “giant” genes and passed them on to her descendants, leading to the resurgence of the Nephilim traits in the line of Canaan.
The only problem with this one is the same problem with the previous: there’s literally zero indication of it, it damages theology proper, and there’s not even a reason to appeal to such fantaties.
1. The Second Incursion (Mainstream / Scripture-Based Inference) This is the most direct interpretation for many theologians. It suggests the Nephilim did go extinct during the flood, but returned when the angels bred with human women again. A second, separate group of fallen angels is believed to have committed the same transgression as the first group, mating with human women after the flood to produce a new generation of Nephilim.
What’s interesting about this is that as I noted in my book Nephilim and Giants as per Pop-Researchers Rob Skiba would get on LA Marzulli’s case since Marzulli teaches that fantasy. Yet, Skiba asserted that Nephilim survived the flood genetically which is just another fantasy. Thus, I pointed out that both of them are wrong: they’re just appealing to different fantasies.
Snyder notes, “While no ancient writing confirms that the angels bred with human women again, there is a verse in 1 Corinthians 11 that opens the door for this as a possible explanation. Something Paul said suggests he was concerned that the angels could be tempted by women and more angels could still fall.”
Well, that’s reading much too much into that and ignores the logical, bio-logical, and theo-logical problems into which such a view runs.
Snyder paraphrased, “angels could be tempted by women and more angels could still fall” while the verse actually merely reads, “a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.”
I would never cheat on my wife but that doesn’t mean it’s right for women to attempt to entice me.
Bonus Theories: A couple rare theories that some have suggested include the idea that the giants hid deep in the earth in underground tunnels (possibly originating from the literal interpretation that the underworld is actually deep in the Earth) and that the giants developed gills to survive underwater.
See how it goes? God flood but they are smarter than God and also magically, “developed gills.”
He ends with:
…were the giants really created by angels who slept with human women? There’s a big debate about whether or not the offenders mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4 were actually angels or human descendents of Seth. I actually put the time in to trace both views backwards to see which interpretation is the oldest. There’s a pretty clear answer, as one view is 1500+ years older than the other!
I’m unsure I’d go with, “1500+ years older” but I created such as chart and began my 2018 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.
The original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christians commentators, starting in BC days, was the Angel view while the Sethite view is a late-comer based on myth and prejudice.
Overall, Snyder would to well to either write about Nephilim exclusively or about giants in general according to the English Bibles’ usage which doesn’t allow for mashing Nephilim together with Rephaim/Anakim or anyone else.
See my various books here—including some dozen on Nephilology issues.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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