Gary Wayne on the “Nephilim Wars Of The Exodus” and “The Biblical Case For Giants Occupying The Covenant Land”

The Paranormal in Early Jewish and Christian Commentaries.jpg

On Twitter, Gary Wayne (author on books about Nephilim related issues) posted the following, “#Mysteriesancient #Genesis6conspiracy ‘Nephilim Wars Of The Exodus’. Part 1: ‘The Biblical Case For Giants Occupying The Covenant Land’” along with this link to Facebook (where I can hardly ever interact with anyone as using FB via a fan page, as I do, is very restrictive).


On Twitter, Gary Wayne (author on books about Nephilim related issues) posted the following, “#Mysteriesancient #Genesis6conspiracy ‘Nephilim Wars Of The Exodus’. Part 1: ‘The Biblical Case For Giants Occupying The Covenant Land’” along with this link to Facebook (where I can hardly ever interact with anyone as using FB via a fan page, as I do, is very restrictive).

On Twitter, I commented this to him, “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.”
His reply was somewhat promising in that he agreed, “I agree post-flood giants are Rephaim, as opposed to pre-flood giants Nephilim” and yet, the last part of his sentence spelled t-r-o-u-b-l-e, “but from the same source and creation. Anakim were Rephaim in Nbrs 13.”
Thus, I replied, “I only disagree with ‘the same source and creation’ since there is no indication of that” but I received no reply in reply.

Thus, I will review his FB post. Note the specific claims: “Nephilim Wars Of The Exodus” which is impossible since there is no such thing as post-flood Nephilim—and yes, he agreed with that so he, himself, discredited his own claim to “Nephilim Wars Of The Exodus”—and he proports to make a “Biblical Case For Giants Occupying The Covenant Land” which is problematic for me since he jumped from the Hebrew “Nephilim” to the vague and generic English “Giants” so let us see to whom he is referring as such.

He begins by quoting Genesis 6:4 “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”
Since this is within the context of “…Giants Occupying The Covenant Land” then he seems to quote it as support due to the reference to “those days; and also after that.” I have elucidated this about 1,001 times but we cannot know when “after that” is unless we know when “those days” were and fortunately, the text tells us twice including within v. 4, “when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them” which is also stated in v. 1.
Thus, there is no reason to take “those days; and also after that” as pre-flood and post-flood for various reasons including that “those day” could have been as early as when Adam and Eve’s children began having children. In any case, both of those timeline points are pre-flood and he has agreed that “post-flood giants are Rephaim, as opposed to pre-flood giants Nephilim.”

Gary Wayne notes, “Giant…derives from ‘h5303 Nphyl’ meaning giant, Nephilim.” This reminds me of my English teachers telling me not to define a word using that same word. Now, of course, there is no indication that Nphyl means giant (and if we need to get into the Greek weeds we will) but I will remind us, yet again, that he agrees “post-flood giants are Rephaim, as opposed to pre-flood giants Nephilim,” but he is telling us that giants means Nphyl and Nphyl means giants and so dealing with giants in the post-flood Exodus must, therefore, be dealing with post-flood Nephilim. Thus, this is a contradiction.

Sadly, Gary Wayne then quotes Numbers 13:33 thusly, “…we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.”
He then writes, “Standard Christian dogma taught [sic.] dismisses the existence of Nephilim in Gen 6, and their connections to Rephaim after the flood and the Exodus.” Well that was quite the jump and I did not even see a springboard—did you?

Firstly, I noted that he “Sadly” in that one verse alone is enough to take a text out of context to make a pretext for a prooftext but not enough to inform us as to who is stating that and why. That was stated by unfaithful/disloyal spies who were said to present an evil/bad report just before that is quoted and they were rebuked for it. Thus, they were just making up a tall tale and there is still no such thing as post-flood Nephilim—with which Wayne agrees.
Secondly, “Standard” modern “Christian dogma” dismisses any paranormal aspect of the Genesis 6 affair but the Angel view is the majority, original and traditional one amongst the earlies Jews and Christians alike.
Thirdly, Gary Wayne asserts (at least thus far) Nephilim’s connections to Rephaim so let see if this is a mere assertion or if he argues for it—and if he argues for it viably (hint, he actually cannot argue for it viably since, as I noted, “there is no indication of that”).

Wayne tells us that Rephaim is from “‘h7497 Rapha’ meaning giant, a tribe of giants.” Note that we are being told that Rapha is “meaning giant” whilst before Nphyl was “meaning giant.” Yet, we run into the problem of “giants” being a vague and generic word since there are definitions of Rapha which include, “giants, Rephaim” and “old tribe of giants” but without defining “giants” this is essentially meaningless.

Gary Wayne references “Gen 14’s war against giants of the greater Covenant Land” but due to his contradiction, we no longer know if he is referring to war against Nephilim, war against Rephaim—and that is not a false dichotomy since, again, there is not indication that Nephilim are related to Rephaim (nor to Anakim).
Well, Wayne helps us out by quoting a version which clearly has Genesis 14:5 as stating “in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims…” This is great since we know that these are not Nephilim—and he has yet to attempt to tell us how Nephilim have “connections to Rephaim after the flood and the Exodus” but perhaps he will get us there—not ;o)

He tells us “The Zuzim, Emim, Horim, Amalaqim, Anakim, Zamzummin, and Avvim of Gen 14 and Deut 2 were some of the giant tribes of the Middle East. Giant in Deut 2, and all cases but 3 in the the KJV Bible OT derives from ‘h7497 Rapha.’” Right, and in none of those many manes/terms/titles do we find any reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim whatsoever.
He directs us to Deuteronomy 2:19-21 the key portions of which are “a land of giants…the Ammonites call them Zamzummims…A people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims…he destroyed the Horims…And the Avims” and still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim (note that “tall” is as vague and generic as “giants”).
Gary Wayne notes, “Post-diluvian giant nations like Anakim were Rephaim branches” but still no relation to Nephilim.
He then backs up and quotes from Deuteronomy 2:10-12, “The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims…were accounted giants, as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims….The Horims…” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.

Wayne tells us “Rephaim tribes interbred with Canaan’s sons and their posterity, to create hybrid Rephaim nations in the greater Covenant Land region that Rephaim reigned over” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.
Also, “Sidon, Heth, their posterity, and Canaan interbred with Rephaim producing hybrids: Jubusites, Amorites, Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites, and Hamathites” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.
He quotes a lot of text so as to show “a hybrid class/species of Canaanites and Rephaim” but since my main interest is him actually closing his circumlocution, wherein I still seek Nephilim and/or relation to Nephilim, I will jump to his reference to Amos 2:9 which states that “the Amorite” were “strong as the oaks”—are you impressed? Well, you might be but do you think that this text implies conducting a one-to-one mathematical ratio comparative correlation between the strength on an oak to the strength of the Amorites? No, of course, not: it is just telling us that they were strong.
But wait, the text actually refers to the Amorite “whose height was like the height of the cedars, and he was strong as the oaks.” Most Nephilim sci-fi-ers ignore the latter statement and do demand that the former one does in fact imply conducting a one-to-one mathematical ratio comparative correlation between the height on a cedar to the height of the Amorites. But since the latter is clearly not of this sort then neither is the former: they were big and strong—period. And there are more problems with claiming that people are as tall as cedars since, for example, someone as tall as a cedar would not be a skinny as a cedar but the growth would be exponential so that they would be that much wider and would break their bones just attempting to walk—much less the caloric requirement to just stay alive much less be formidable warriors.

Gary Wayne writes, “This then was the Exodus scenario scouts encountered when Moses sent them to explore the Covenant Land: the land of milk and honey promised by God to Israel, but a land still overflowing with Rephaim, and Rephaim/human hybrids.”
There are a lot of problems with this simple statement:
“This then” is a styled “therefore” which means that he is brining his argument to a conclusion but his premise was specifically “Nephilim” not Rephaim “Wars Of The Exodus” and “The Biblical Case For Giants Occupying The Covenant Land” with “Giants” meaning both Nephilim and Rephaim but there were “post-flood giants are Rephaim, as opposed to pre-flood giants Nephilim” so it all gets very convoluted.
And yes, this was supposed to be about “Nephilim” nor Rephaim “Wars Of The Exodus” but his conclusion is about “Rephaim, and Rephaim/human hybrids” and not Nephilim nor Nephilim hybridizing with anyone else.
Interestingly, he has done so much maneuvering that it turns out to be accurate that this “was the Exodus scenario scouts encountered when Moses sent them to explore the Covenant Land: the land of milk and honey promised by God to Israel, but a land still overflowing with Rephaim, and Rephaim/human hybrids” since they encountered Anakim, who are Rephaim, but did not encounter Nephilim nor anyone related to Nephilim.

Gary Wayne then tells us of “other people not recorded in the Canaanite nations of Gen 10 created from Rephaim/Canaanite intermarriage that included Perizzites” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.
He then quotes Genesis 34:30 which refers to “the Canaanites and the Perizzites…the Egyptians…the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.
He then quotes Exodus 3:17 referring to “the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.
Then Genesis 15:18-21 “The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites…the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims…the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.
He tells us “God forewarned Israel…promising to send His angel to drive out Rephaim and Rephaim hybrid nations” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.

And yes, we have to keep going like this as he then quotes, Exodus 23:23 “the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.
Then Exodus 33:2-3 “the Canaanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim.

But he then gets into a key text a bit more noting “a land filled with tall warriors, and the children of Anakim; Rephaim” but still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim—which is odd since he is referring to a text that refers to Nephilim, even if just in a made-up fake manner.
He refers to Arba as “the father of the Anakim branch of Rephaim” which is fine and verifiable but he ends the sentence with “and descendants of Nephilim” which he just snuck in without evidence—we are starting to see, or continuing to see, that the claim that the Nephilim and Rephaim had “the same source and creation” even though the former were strictly pre-flood and the latter strictly post-flood in reality—and only sometimes in Wayne’s retelling—is merely an assertion.

But wait, there’s more as he quotes Joshuah 14:15 and 15:13, “And the name of Hebron before was Kirjatharba; which Arba was a great man among the Anakims….And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a part among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of the LORD to Joshua, even the city of Arba the father of Anak, which city is Hebron” but no Nephilim nor relation.

Wayne then pulls a styled quick one in actually writing that “Loyal scouts” note that qualifying term “reported the land of milk and honey was occupied by Anakim of Kiriatharba, and other powerful militaristic giant hybrid offspring nations.”
He then actually quotes more from Numbers 13 which will be quite instructive:
v. 27 “We came unto the land whither thou sentest us, and surely it floweth with milk and honey; and this is the fruit of it”: so far, so good and the claim is taken at face value.
v. 28 begins with “Nevertheless” which is when apprehension is being expressed since “the people be strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are walled, and very great: and moreover we saw the children of Anak there”: even this is taken at face value and no, no reference to Nephilim or relation.

At this point, Wyane tells us that “Even though God forewarned Israel about these nations, promising He would send his angel to drive out the reprobate nations” nevertheless “the giant monsters incited fear into many of the scouts” about which I will say, “What?!?!” where are giants, monsters or giant monsters mentioned?

Well, he rightly refers to “Frightened scouts” and tells us that they “did not deny they saw men of great stature or descendants of Anak, but confirmed those details listed previous in Num 13: 21-23 and 13:27-29”: indeed, they did not deny it because they were the one claiming it and the claim was simply “the people be strong…the cities are walled, and very great” which denotes wilderness dwellers being intimidated by fortified walls protected by warriors and they note the presence of the Anakim, Amalekites, Hittites, Jebusites, Amorites and Canaanites but not Nephilim nor relations.

Gary Wayne then quotes v. 30 wherein “Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it” which is countered by “the men that went up with him” in v. 31 when they reply “We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we” and now Wayne’s quoting gets spotty as he only quotes part of v. 32 and then 33 thusly, “Num 13:32… and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature. Num 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.”

I am unsure why he quoted them thusly and I do not have to know, I just know that he missed a gigantic point in so doing.
So, we were at the point of the—no longer qualifiable as “Loyal” spies—stating “We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we” but not Nephilim nor relations.
It is only at this specific point that we are told something Gary Wayne did not alert us to which is that, again, only now are we told that “they brought up an evil report of the land” and within this section wherein they make an “evil report” do they kick up the fear mongering scare tactic up a notch by going from “the people be strong…the cities are walled, and very great…they are stronger than we” and “it floweth with milk and honey” to suddenly claiming that it “is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it are men of a great stature” with v. 33 being the icing on the tall tale cake “And there we saw the giants [Nephilim], the sons of Anak, which come of the giants [Nephilim]: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.”

Before I seal this deal, Wayne actually focuses on this by writing, “What the frightened scouts did do was to used the scary details within their ‘evil report’, to strike fear into Israel, to challenge God’s power, and to call God a liar”—thus, again, they are not rightly called “Loyal.”
He thinks that “The 1st deception was they rejected God’s promise that He would send His angel to drive out the giants…” but again, what does he mean by “giants”? Then “The 2nd deception by implication was God lied about His ability to protect Israel.” And “The 3rd deception was the land devours people, and thus was not good for Israel, challenging God’s promise of good things for Israel in the Land: Num 10.”

It is fascinating that he misses the main deception but before emphasizing it myself, let us see what else he states.

I noted above that he skipped the key text which is all of v. 32 but he now quotes it and adds Numbers 10:29 “And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel the Midianite, Moses’ father in law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you: come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good concerning Israel.”

Gary Wayne emphasizes that “The ‘evil report’ deceptions caused many to doubt God…Israel did not believe God, His promises, His Covenant…they believed the frightened scouts. Num 14:2 ‘And all the children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron…Joshua/Hoshea (Num 13:8&16) and Caleb, then interceded speaking against specious parts of the ‘evil report’…But Israel accepted the specious arguments from ‘evil report’ fearing giants would slaughter them…Num 14:6 ‘And Joshua the son of Nun, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh…rent their clothes” and told of the good of the land, etc.

Wayne then tells us “The ‘evil report’ did not deny Anakim or the reality of giants, but was used to incite sedition and fear to rebel against God.” No, it “did not deny Anakim” nor would it have to since that was true, but Wayne continues directly with “or the reality of giants, but was used to incite sedition and fear to rebel against God.” But the reality of whom? Since the Anakim were there and Anakim were Rephaim then fine, that was “the reality of giants” but then again, since the disloyal/unfaithful spies reference the Nephilim then there was no “reality of giants.”
Thus, I will put it this way: yes, the Wayne’s “3rd deception” was a good point since it was about how “the land devours people and I noted above how this contradicted the true part of their report.

But Gary Wayne misses three main points in the evil report: they claimed they saw Nephilim, that Anakim are related to Nephilim and that Nephilim are very, very, very tall. The issue is that these are three things about which the whole entire rest of the Bible knows absolutely nothing. That these three claims only exist with the specific portion of the report which is termed “evil” should seal the deal. Yet, if it does not then consider that Moses, Caleb, Joshua all affirm that the Anakim were in the land but say nothing of Nephilim nor that Anakim are related to them and God affirms that the Amalekites were in the land but say nothing of Nephilim nor that Anakim are related to them.
So, will you believe unfaithful/disloyal fear mongering spies or Moses, Caleb, Joshua and God—as for me and my house, we will believe Moses, Caleb, Joshua and God: there is no such thing as post-flood Nephilim and thus, no post-flood personages are related to Nephilim, there are no Nephilim bloodlines, the Nephilim will not return or any such thing whatsoever.

Yet, for whatever reason, Wayne decided to believe the unfaithful/disloyal fear mongering spies in insisting “one cannot dismiss the veracity of giants utilizing Num 13:31-33, unless previous verses are ignored, as well as all the other OT passages describing giants.”
This is flummoxing and the generic appeals to “other OT passages describing giants” are just that. The fact is that the Bible only provides us three specific heights of people and the only one that may possibly make it beyond even 8 ft. if Goliath who was either just shy of 7 ft. or just shy of 10 ft. The fact is that the average Hebrew male of biblical days averaged 5.5 ft. (so women were shorter) so that even a 6.5 ft. warrior was intimidating.

Gary Wayne claims that “the ‘evil report’ used to deny the veracity giants is debunked later in Deu 1 by God, when He reminds Israel of the evil report when they did not ‘believe God.’” But that is about the report’s premise and affect not the contents.
He tells us that “God re-affirmed the scouts brought evidence of fruits of the land . God confirmed Israel rebelled against Him and refused to enter into the land of milk and honey” right, but not that there were Nephilim, that Anakim are related to them nor that they were very, very, very tall.

He also notes, “God confirmed Israel rejected God would fight for them against the giant nations. God confirmed Israel was afraid of the Amorite hybrids with cities protected by great walls, and who were ‘greater and taller’ than Israel. God confirmed the sons of Anakim dwelled there; Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai” and quotes Deuteronomy 1 to this affect but, you guessed it, still no reference to Nephilim nor relation to them.

Gary Wayne ends by noting that “Much later, Judah battled Canaanites in Hebron where they slew Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai testifying to the veracity if the first report, and that ‘the evil report’ did not deny the existence of giants, but was designed to cause rebellion against God” but in this case we are forced to take “the existence of giants” as the existence of Rephaim which no one is denying.

Thus, the only conclusion we can reach regrading the claim of “Biblical Case For Giants Occupying The Covenant Land” is that in this case, “Giants” can only refer to Rephaim (which includes Anakim). As for the claim of “Nephilim Wars Of The Exodus”: this has utterly failed as there is no such thing.
Moreover, it was affirmed that “There is no such thing as post-flood Nephilim” since he agrees that “post-flood giants are Rephaim, as opposed to pre-flood giants Nephilim” and the claim that they came “from the same source and creation” we have seen zero evidence.
The one and only way he can make his (contradictory) theory even appear to seem to work is to actually accept the three points of the “evil report” and in doing so, he merely discredits himself.

The Bible knows of no such thing as post-flood Nephilim and one way you can know that is that no one can direct you to any such statement: not pop-Nephilim-Giant-researchers, not entire “ministries” devoted to such, not lecturers on the topic, not books written about it—no one can because there is no such thing.

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:
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 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, on my Google+ page and/or the “Share/Save” button below the tags.