Discussion on Nephilim and giants with “Daily Struggles” 6 of 6

The Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries.jpg

Within this series (which when all segments are posted, you will find here) you will find my discussion with a YouTuber whose pseudonym in Daily Struggles regarding his video The Nephilim.
He described it as “This is a video about the history, genealogy, purpose, and correlation of said entities throughout history and into the modern times. Enjoy.”

Within this series (which when all segments are posted, you will find here) you will find my discussion with a YouTuber whose pseudonym in Daily Struggles regarding his video The Nephilim.
He described it as “This is a video about the history, genealogy, purpose, and correlation of said entities throughout history and into the modern times. Enjoy.”

Picking up where we left off…

Ken Ammi
Friend, with all due regard, respect and love one major issue is that you are not actually engaging the bottom line issues which is why you are being tossed to and fro by pop-researchers who have literally based entire “ministries” on making much ado about not very much with regards to Nephilim and “giants.

An example of what I am referring to is that I have noted time and again that the term “giants” is generic and so it means very little unless you define it, and that it is used to translate both pre-flood “Nephilim” and “Rephaim” so that when you note “There is soooo much evidence around the world to support that they were giants” you must understand that this means nothing to me since you are still not defining your terms: are you claiming that there is a lot of evidence of people taller than 5.5 ft., or many, many entire body lengths taller than 5.5 ft., or Nephilim, or Rephaim, or what? Since you do not say then it is no wonder that someone presents a talk about giants (in which they also do not define the term) and you just go with it no questions asked.

Moreover, I already make you aware of the problems with newspaper accounts, the problems with the supposed charts of giants, the problem with the internet hoax about the Smithsonian, etc. And, by the way, if there were people taller than 5.5 or even 12 ft. then good for them: that is not my issue, my issue is the utter misinfo in this field of research.

But you do not need to misrepresent me (much less to myself) when you invent an idea such as that you “say actual news paper articals from the New York times” and that I say “so what” since that literally never happened so when you “say actual giant skeletons” it is not as simple as that I say “say they’re not real”: you have no skeletons to show me, you have news reports of what people claim, news papers hardly ever follow up on stories much less those sorts and those who do have trained scientists determining that they were dinosaurs of pachyderms. So it is not a case of my simple denials but a case of me having personally researched a lot of such claims and these are the simple facts—I do not stop at that Job Blow said giant human skeleton in 1920 so then, by golly, I believe it and that settles it: I have even corresponded with museums in other countries where such bones were supposedly kept—if you read the articles to which I directed you, you would know all of this.

And you prove my point all the more by writing “I say every single ancient archaeological City ever built, you say so what” but saying “every single ancient archaeological City ever built” is generic enough to be meaningless: what does that mean? Are you claiming that every single ancient archaeological City ever built was built by whatever you mean by “giants”? I also sent you info about how it is a non sequitur to simply claim that something large must have been built and used by large people. Friend, you are being dragged along by exiting sci-fi.

You “say almost every other story that does have descriptions of them from around the world, you say so what” but do you see what I mean: who are the “them” to whom you are referring? Giants? And so we are back to what do you mean by that?

But you may have a point because I am not going to look at any and every painting, statue or sculptures and simplistically take them literally. Pray tell, if you were holding lions would you hold full grown lions or baby ones?

Thus, if there is just no common ground to be found here between us it is because I know for a fact that there is no such thing as post-flood Nephilim in the Bible, which I have proved many times and you do because the wild sci-fi stories are just too exciting.

I am not sure why you need to dig another rabbit hole with the serpent seed thing but since you did: the issue is not whether you are saying that “since eve had sex with Lucifer, so did Adam” but the fact that if you hold to the false unbiblical serpent seed theory then you are forced to accept that they both did (as many serpent seed theorists admit) since you paint yourself info a corner by claiming that Eve eating fruit from a tree means sex with Satan well, then Adam ate of the same fruit from the same tree so you are stuck—what a tangled web you weave. So yes, “Eve (passed) the fruit to Adam. So eve passed whatever it was to Adam sexually” and what she passed was the same fruit from the same tree: you cannot get away from the implications of your own theory: like it or not.

Nephilim were the real offspring of sons of God/Angels and human women, we have no physical description of them, the last of them died in the flood never to return again, they were likely the inspiration of later myth and legend that came about after the Tower of Babel dispersal of humanity when what was then shared pre-flood history was taken all over the world and changed in this and that point.
But when you say “So what do you think a half human, half angel would look like? A regular human? No man. Just no” that is no way to make a case and you are ignoring some very key points. Yes, of course I think that a half human, half angel would look like a regular human because in the Bible Angels look just like human males and also because we have no physical description of Nephilim in the Bible so “No man. Just no” is only indicative of the level in which you (mis)handle such issues.

But I am getting very convinced that you are not really bothering to read my comments since you go round and round rehashing issues that I already responded to so let me simplify the many points you go on to make again: the skulls on Smith’s videos—if they are real then they are either from pre-flood Nephilim or not from Nephilim but from some sort of genetic abnormality.

The “accounts from ancient Greece about the titans” I already commented on above.

The “many skeletons found” I also just dealt with and since I am the one that sent you a link to a lot of old newspaper articles about giant skeletons that I compiled and posted to my website I cannot even imagine why you still write, “I also provided semi modern (news paper articals) from pre 1920,” etc.

To say that “the ancient word giant, also matches up with the modern word giant” is to say nothing since you do not say what was the ancient word giant, nor do you say what the modern word giant means. The only thing they might have in common is that they are both generic: or are you really claiming that over 300 ft. giant Nephilim is the same as giant pro basketball players (none of which even reach 8 ft.): see what I mean, you cannot simply accept fuzzy, generic, undefined terms and claims just because it make it easier to weave tall tales.

“Why was everything so big? Steps, building blocks, etc.” I am going to guess that you fell for the meme that shows tourists climbing what you were told are steps but that does not make it so: look at the Mayan ziggurats—they have regular sized steps surrounded by much larger structures that are not steps—just because tourists climb something does not mean that is the objects intended purpose.

“Why are there carvings (in stone) of very little people, interacting with very big people?” because there were very little people and very big people (with “little” and “big” being generic subjective terms) or because the ruling class depicted themselves as larger than life.

But you are arguing against something I never claimed: I am not claiming that people who were taller than 5.5 ft. never existed so your points are moot. So, again (and again) when you say that I am not going to convince you “they weren’t giants” I still do not know to what you are referring and you really need to stop using the word “giant” as if it means anything on its own: stop talking in Nephilim-sci-fi language and get into the meat of these issues.

You say you “believe in the book of Enoch” and I do too since I have read it so it exists but what do you mean by “believe in”? You also say “there is a reason it’s not in modern bibles” and that is because it contradicts the Bible which is part of the reason that it is not in the canon. However, it “(is) in Ethiopian orthodox bibles” and so are a few other books that you would not consider canon.

But you misrepresent me again since you write “I think ancient manuscripts are valuable information, you don’t” but I am the one who noted that that book of Enoch is important for historical, cultural and literary context so, again, you cannot take me out of context to me because I know what I said.

You also say you “believe the epic of Gilgamesh” but again, what does “believe” mean? Do you mean that it is canonical? I will point out that it too contradicts the Bible and yet, it is useful for historical, cultural and literary context.

I said it before and will say it again (and I will qualify my statement in referring specifically to Nephilim and not to generic “giants”): no one will ever be able to show you post-flood Nephilim in the Bible because there is no such thing: if there is then just take all of the info you have taken in from so many articles and videos and derive from them even one single quotation or citation—it does not exist.

Well, he never replied again but I went on to post one more comment:
Just an FYI, friend: I told Gary Wayne “There is no such thing as post-flood Nephilim. You are either thinking of Rephaim or believing the evil/bad report of unfaithful/disloyal spies who were rebuked for it and with whom Moses, Caleb, Joshua and God disagree.”
He replied, “I agree post-flood giants are Rephaim, as opposed to pre-flood giants Nephilim” and yet, the last part of his sentence spelled trouble, “but from the same source and creation. Anakim were Rephaim in Nbrs 13.”
Of course, I pointed out “I only disagree with ‘the same source and creation’ since there is no indication of that” but, at least as of yet, I received no reply in reply (at least not as of Jan 15, 2019).

For some related info, see my books (on which I am offering a money saving deal:
What Does the Bible Say About Angels? A Styled Angelology
What Does the Bible Say About Demons? A Styled Demonology
What Does the Bible Say About the Devil Satan? A Styled Satanology
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 Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries: Over a Millennia’s Worth of Comments on Angels, Cherubim, Seraphim, Satan, the Devil, Demons, the Serpent and the Dragon

The Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries.jpg


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. Here is my donate page.

Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page. You can also use the “Share / Save” button below this post.