Within his video Did God Command the Israelites to Slaughter Children and Babies?, Dr. Michael Brown proposed one theory that has been trotted out as an answer to that question so let us consider it.
He noted that the claim is that, “when the Israelites went into to the land of Canaan, that they commented on the inhabitants there were giants now no one ever denied that. Joshua and Caleb, the two spies out of the 12 who said we can take the land, they never denied that there were giants and Moses never denied it what they said.”
The key questions are:
What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles?
What’s Dr. Brown’s usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
Do those usages agree?
We will get a hint of that so, stand by. Note that it’s much too generic to assert, “when the Israelites went into to the land of Canaan, that they commented” since it was only 10 of them and not “the Israelites” as a whole.
Also, the 10 commented on that “the inhabitants there were” Nephilim.
As for, “no one ever denied that. Joshua and Caleb…never denied that there were giants and Moses never denied it.” Well, the narrative ends after the 10—who were unfaithful, disloyal, contradictory, embellishers whom God rebuked after the presented an “evil report,” mind you—make their fear-mongering scare-tactic tall-tale.
It was not a formal moderated debate so we can’t say no one denied it. In fact, in Deut 1 when Moses is relating this event, he affirms that Anakim were on the ground at the time but doesn’t say a single word about Nephilim. He seems to be too practical, he’s concerned about the real dangers on the ground, such as the notorious Anakim, but doesn’t have time for fantasy tall-tales—since that is the only reference to post-flood Nephilim and it’s utterly unreliable.
Another form of denial of what they said is that there’s not one single other reference to post-flood Nephilim in the entire Bible in any way, shape, form, context, genre, etc.
Any concept of post-flood Nephilim implies that God failed: He meant to be rid of them via the flood but couldn’t get the job done, He must have missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc.
Post-flood Nephilologists have to just invent un-biblical tall-tales about how they made it past the flood.
This describes 100% of pop-Nephilologists and many scholarly ones. And those who claim they survived the flood contradict the Bible five times.
I’ve written whole books debunking them such as, Nephilim and Giants: Believe It or Not!: Ancient and Neo-Theo-Sci-Fi Tall Tales.
Also, 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, The Scholarly Academic Nephilim and Giants: What do Scholarly Academics Say About Nephilim Giants?
The point Dr. Michael Brown made, based on those who hold to this view, is that Caleb and Joshua’s point was that sure, there were Nephilim/giants around but, “God’s with us and we can take the land.”
As for, “where did the giants come from?” Dr. Brown elucidates:
…you remember in Genesis the 6th chapter that before the flood…gives the account how the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they look good, they took them as their wives and then their offspring called the Nephilim. So, there’s great debate about what that means and fallen ones, those who fall on others, etc.
But it’s clear contextually, even in ancient versions, that they’re giants and it is a mixed breed…a Satanic mix-breed. These were fallen Angels who somehow were able to take on human form and if you’re going to quote the Bible, I mean, here’s what the Bible’s saying…
Let’s pause for a moment. That, “their offspring called the Nephilim” is good enough reason to not bring the problems causing term modern term “giants” into it. As for that in, “ancient versions…they’re giants” well that can mean more than one thing—part of why it’s a best practice to ignore that word—since it can refer to a description of their size or it can be a word-concept fallacy. The latter would be to merely imagine some unknown height above the subjective average and the former is based on what utterly unreliable guys whom God rebuked said plus some uncited, “ancient versions” (to whatever that refers).
Indeed, they were, “a mixed breed” and it’s too bad that Dr. Brown didn’t take the time to, “quote the Bible” since it doesn’t contain one single sentence about, “Angels who somehow were able to take on human form.” Rather, Angels are always described as looking like human males, performing physical actions, and without indication that such isn’t their ontology.
Continuing Dr. Brown’s statement:
…their offspring it was it was something abominable. God says the Earth was filled with violence in those days. It was so bad that He had to wipe the human race out, lest it destroy itself. If He didn’t rescue…Noah…and then rescues his family—so, his wife, three sons, and their wives to repopulate the Earth—we wouldn’t be here. The whole world would have been completely wiped out…He wipes out everyone on the Earth, if He doesn’t do that, no one survives, no one survives if he doesn’t do that.
But it does say that after the flood there’s still giants and Genesis 6 could say it was before the flood and even after.
So, God sought to destroy everyone besides whom Dr. Michael Brown noted but must have missed a loophole: do you see how fallacious Nephilology damages theology proper?
Now, the answer to the first key question—What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles?—all but does away with statements such as, “But it does say that after the flood there’s still giants and Genesis 6 could say it was before the flood and even after.”
That is because post-flood usages of the term “giants” refers to Nephilim only in one single sentence, the evil report of Num 13:3, 98% of all other usages are references to Rephaim and they have utterly nothing to do with Angels, mix-breeds, the flood, etc.
As for Gen 6: the evil report becomes a hermeneutic for those who for some odd reason demand post-flood Nephilim (siding with unreliable guys whom God rebuked rather than with God) since it tell us exactly to what days it’s referring but post-flood Nephilologists ignore what it states.
They merely assert that, “in those days and also afterward” refers to the flood but the flood isn’t even mentioned for the very first time until a full 13 verses later—verse 17.
Gen 6:4 states, “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.”
The question becomes: when were those days?
Well, Gen 6:1 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.”
The next question becomes: when was afterward?
Since it was after those days then it was simply after, “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them…”
Thus, the began doing it then and they continued to do it but that’s all pre-flood.
Continuing with Dr. Michael Brow’s statement:
So, there are those who hold the view that those living in Canaan were the descendants of the Nephilim, were a wicked half-breed that had to be destroyed, that simply had to be destroyed, and wiped out.
Otherwise, as Israel came into the land, with intermarriage and other things like that, now Israel itself would be destroyed and
Israel would never be a light to the Nations Messiah would never come to the world, the whole world now ends up destroyed.
So, there are those who believe that the ones that Israel was called to wipe out were this dangerous half-breed of humans fallen Angel and human, and their descendants. And that ultimately, they were wiped out finally by Israel: that none of the descendants of the giants were left, and that that was the reason, the justification.
Indeed, some appeal to that as an excuse for God having commanded what He did. Yet, such personages only make things worse since those who double-check them will realize that it’s just a tall-tale. God told us many times why He commanded such things but never said one single word about Nephilim—see chapter, “Herem: Were Post-Flood Nephilim Dedicated to Destruction?” in my book What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim? A Styled Giantology and Nephilology.
He also notes that this scenario proposes a, “mixture in the human race which is now going to corrupt the whole human race and had to be dealt with radically” and it was: via the flood.
He again states, “here’s the deal if you’re going to quote one part of the Bible then you can’t throw out the other part of the Bible” indeed, and for post-flood Nephilim all we have is one single sentence from unreliable guys (and within a textual criticism problematic sentence) which is illogical and ill-theo-logical and ill-bio-logical—see my Chapter sample: On the Post Flood Nephilim Proposal.
Dr. Michael Brown notes, “different scholars, different interpreters are going to have different perspectives and you can read what Dr Michael Heiser said…” yet, while Dr. Heiser was credentialed and experienced but not infallible, his Nephilology wasn’t biblical, and he tended to create more problems than he solved—see these articles for examples (and I featured Dr. Heiser in my books about scholars):
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”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.