Dr. Preston Bailey’s critique of Joe Jordan, Guy Malone & Mike Tatar re: Nephilim and SRA/DID

The Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries.jpg

Dr. Preston Bailey, PhD., D.Min. made some comments directed at Joe Jordan, Guy Malone and Mike Tatar with regards to the issue of Nephilim Hybrids within the context of counseling people dealing with Satanic ritual abuse and dissociative identity disorder (SRA/DID).

I will leave the counseling debating to them but thought to make some comments about Bailey’s theological statements.


Dr. Preston Bailey, PhD., D.Min. made some comments directed at Joe Jordan, Guy Malone and Mike Tatar with regards to the issue of Nephilim Hybrids within the context of counseling people dealing with Satanic ritual abuse and dissociative identity disorder (SRA/DID).

I will leave the counseling debating to them but thought to make some comments about Bailey’s theological statements.

Preston Bailey notes that he counsels people who claim to have “SRA/DID and testify about Nephilim, hybrids and being abducted” and “even counseled some from many years ago who talked about ‘Nephilim’ before any recent modern books…before any major discussion” became “popular” as it is “at this time.”

The issue is that, at least how Bailey puts it, “Guy Malone, Joe Jordan, and Mike Tatar, Jr) says this is related to just ‘giantism’ as a genetic issue” and he considers this “ridiculous.”

He elucidates, “Numerous Bible scholars also relate Genesis 6 to Nephilim as real and that they were giants caused by a union of fallen angels and human women.”

A few issues to consider, already.

My readers know that I take the Angel view of the Genesis 6 affair so that Nephilim are half Angel and half human hybrids and yet, that there is no such thing as post-flood Nephilim (which is why absolutely no one can prove that there are).

There may be a lot of reasons that certain personages “talked about ‘Nephilim’ before” it became the stuff of which neo-“ministries” are made—is how I will put it.
This includes that it is in the Bible and commentary has been written about it since pre-Christian times. In other words, this has been in der luft for a long, long, time. This means that anyone could have encountered such info in many formats before the internets ;o)

So to the issue of giants due to hybridization or due to giantism as a genetic issue. This is simply based on a confusion of terms, concepts and texts. Genesis 6 is the only reliable reference to Nephilim and it give us no physical description whatsoever.
Numbers 13 is the only other reference to Nephilim and does claim they are very, very, very tall but that claim is made by unfaithful/disloyal spies who were said to be presenting an evil/bad report and were rebuked for it.

And, by their way, if many first world country city dwellers are dealing with Nephilim—and Bailey is clearly believing the Numbers 13 deception—then were are their many, many neighbors reporting beings who are many, many entire body lengths taller than a normal human—lemme guess: Nephil-men-in-black shut them up!

As for that “Numerous Bible scholars also relate Genesis 6 to Nephilim as real and that they were giants caused by a union of fallen angels and human women”:
Yes, the majority, original and traditional view of the earliest Jews and Christians alike was the Angel view: that it pertained to the “union of fallen angels and human women.”
Yet, it is problematic, for a few reasons, to claim that this “they were giants caused by” such a union. The English word “giants” is not only vague and generic but merely a pseudo-translation of “Nephilim” (a strictly pre-flood phenomena) and, worse still, is also used to pseudo-translate “Rephaim” (a strictly post-flood phenomena) so it causes confusion.

Preston Bailey notes, “The Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon gives the meaning of the word ‘Nephilim’ (Hebrew) as ‘giants’ but does not imply that this union was just a genetic anomaly.”
Do you discern the unclosed loop? The lexicon defines Nephilim as giants but how does it define giants? What is a giant to a Pygmy or to an average Hebrew male of biblical days (who were 5.5 ft.) or to a pro-basketball player? Most seem to define giants via tall tales from folklore of children’s stories from their youth.

Preston Bailey complains that “The three men said ‘We do not believe there are modern Nephilim today!…We also believe there is sort of a Christian theological deception making people believe that Matthew 24:37 that says, ‘As it was in the days of Noah so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. NIV’ is referring to Nephilim from Genesis 6.”
May God richly bless anyone suffering from SRA/DID but we should not let such people define our theology. In other words, Bailey should treat them as is and not formulate his theology on the views of people who are, at the very least, suffering from some or another form of mental strain.

The biblical facts are that there are no “modern Nephilim today” nor have there been any since the flood nor will the return—period.
It is also accurate that Matthew 24:37-39 has absolutely nothing to do with Nephilim since Jesus made what He meant by appealing to the days of Noah very clear, “the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be.”

Thus, this was about business as usual and being unaware of the coming judgment. So it is not enough to say Nephilim were in the days of Noah so days of Noah must mean Nephilim in the end times.

And if that is not enough for you then consider that Jesus re-emphasized His emphasis by also referring to the days of Lot in likewise manner, “It was the same as happened in the days of Lot: they were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building; but on the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. It will be just the same on the day that the Son of Man is revealed” and this was from Luke 17:28-30 where Luke quotes Jesus’ fuller statement which begins just as did Matthew 24’s reference to the days of Noah.

Preston Bailey then goes back to the background of the theological issue, “The traditional Jewish view of Genesis 6 is that the fathers of the Nephilim (sons of God) were the Grigori or the fallen angels which some refer to as ‘Watchers’” and directs us to “the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees” and also how “ancient civilizations” such as in “Greek and Roman mythology” have “Different ‘demi-gods’, hybrids between a god and human women, or Nephilim were born to different women.”
Indeed, all of that is accurate but what does it have to do with post-flood Nephilim?
It seems that when humanity dispersed throughout the Earth after the Tower of Babel event, what was then commonly known shared history change on this or what point and came to be called myth and legend.

Bailey relates that one of the men he is addressing refers to “the ‘serpent seed’ which he says is not in any texts, the Septuagint, or Masoretic texts…The speaker brings in this doctrine of ‘serpent seed’ that is not related to Nephilim at all and is considered false doctrine by Protestant denominations.”
Well, I have written a five volume set of books contra the serpent seed theory and the issue is that there is no such biblical thing as a genetic serpent seed but the only seedlines are those who follow God and those who follow Satan—so the good news is that the latter can always repent.

Bailey then notes that during a lecture by one of the three, “A member of the audience brought up Daniel 2:43 and one of the speakers said that verse actually teaches that hybridization will be attempted but will not work. So he says this goes against the argument of hybridization today. ‘It will not adhere. It will not work!’”

The issue is actually a lot simpler than that, the Daniel verse reads, “you saw the iron mixed with common clay, they will combine with one another in the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, even as iron does not combine with pottery.”
As I elucidate in great detail in my book What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim? A Styled Giantology and Nephilology, when one reads this single verse within the context of discussing Nephilim, giants, hybrids, etc. then it is easy to make of it whatever one wants yet, the simple fact is that the immediate and greater context is that the entire book of Daniel states absolutely nothing about Nephilim, giants, hybrids, etc. and so the one thing we can know for certain is that this has absolutely nothing to do with Nephilim, giants, hybrids, etc.
This is a case of taking a text out of context to make a pretext for a prooftext and building an entire theory on one single verse.

Preston Bailey notes that “The Book of Revelation is filled with evil entities which are clearly more than just demons such as those mentioned in Revelation 9.” However, on my view (which I outlined in detail in my book What Does the Bible Say About Demons? A Styled Demonology, that text is saturated with symbolism that is defined by other parts of the Bible and refers to the fallen Angels who were incarcerated due to the Genesis 6 affair being released from the bottomless pit/Abyss/Tartarus. Ironically, for all of the hype about the return of the Nephilim (which will not happen), people seem to miss the return of the fallen Angels (which will happen).

Bailey notes, “If these three men are right and these are just demons/fallen angels, then why would they spend so much effort to convince these women they had a Nephilim child if it was not true? What would be the point? That sure is making a lot of effort to deceive a woman that fallen angels/demons have raped her and produced an offspring.”
Well, who can know the mind of a demon? At least Bailey admits, how could he not, that demons are deceptive. One answer may be that claiming to have hybrid children makes one special: especially cursed or blessed—depending on how the person views it.

Thus, overall Preston Bailey’s criticisms are peppered with error.

I hope that this review has been instructing and for some related info, see my books (on which I am offering a money saving deal:
Cain As Serpent Seed of Satan (five volumets)
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.