Joshua Charles wrote an article on Giants/Nephilim in Scripture for the Study Bank site. Well, I should note that he wrote, “A Study Bank, therefore, is in no way an article, or presenting an argument. It is simply a compilation of data.”
He’s described as, “former White House speechwriter, historian, scholar, speaker…came into full communion with the Catholic Church” and is the Founder, Board Member, and President of either the Study Bank branch of the Eternal Christendom org or the org itself which was, “officially founded…on the Feast of Our Lady’s Assumption.”
Their vision is, “The preservation and revival of the Great Tradition for future generations.” He notes, “This Study Bank on the giants in Scripture is part of the Becoming Catholic series.”
Up front, he notes, “These ‘giants’ are also called ‘Nephilim’ and descendants of ‘Anak’ (the plural of which is ‘Anakim’).”
I can only imagine that, “These” is in reference to the title’s reference to, “Giants/Nephilim in Scripture.” Thus, he’s communicating that it’s a case of giants/Nephilim/Anakim so we will have to keep an eye on just how that can possibly be the case: he claimed he wasn’t, “presenting an argument” but we will see that it’s not, “simply a compilation of data” since he categorized the data and that’s a form of argumentation in terms of how he presented the data.
For example, he noted, “The giants/Nephilim are mentioned in 22 verses in Scripture” but he can only claim that after watering down his usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word giants.
The fact is that the Nephilim are mentioned in 2 (not 22) verses in Scripture.
We can then say Anakim as giants are mentioned never in any verse in Scripture.
See, we’re playing version, linguistics, translation, and rendering games here and I’m unaware of any English version that employs giants for Anakim.
First on his list is the Gen 6 affair (as I term it), specifically v. 4:
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.
That is the historical record of them.
Next up is what he prefaces as, “Spies Sent into Canaan (Num. 13:1-24)” and he quotes v. 22 the contextual portion of which is, “the descendants of Anak, were there” referring either to, “Hebron; and Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai” or just to the latter.
Having referenced the 12, “Spies” in general, he then prefaces, “The Report of the Spies (Num. 13:25-33)” contextual parts of which are, “we saw the descendants of Anak there. 29 The Amalekites dwell in the land of the Negeb; the Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country; and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan.”
Then, “Caleb quieted the people before Moses, and said, ‘Let us go up at once, and occupy it; for we are well able to overcome it.’”
Yet, “the men who had gone up with him” who are the 10 unreliable ones (since Joshua sided with Caleb) objected, “We are not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we.”
And then, the second reference to Nephilim, “they brought to the people of Israel an evil report of the land which they had spied out, saying…we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim); and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.” Note that they embellished the original, reliable, report by adding Nephilim to whom they (merely assert) they saw.
They most certainly didn’t see them since that’s illogical, ill-bio-logical, and ill-theo-logical since God didn’t fail, didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
Also, note that in order to assert, “These ‘giants’ are also called ‘Nephilim’ and descendants of ‘Anak’ (the plural of which is ‘Anakim’)” he:
1. relied on one single sentence
2. from an evil report
3. exclusively from non-LXX versions since that verse in that version lacks reference to Anakim
4. by unreliable guys
5. who God rebuked—to death
6. which contradict Moses, Caleb, Joshua, God, and the rest of the whole Bible
7. which damages theology proper
For even more on the problems with just picking up one version of one sentence, running with it, and applying it, see my post Chapter sample: On the Post Flood Nephilim Proposal.
So, that ends the 2 verses that reference Nephilim. Oddly, not even then RSVCE (Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition) he’s quoting has Anakim as giants: as I noted, none do.
Thus, we can say that the Study Bank concludes here.
Yet, let’s quickly review what he threw into the mix by misreading, misinterpreting, misunderstanding, and misapplying from his myopic version of the evil report.
Deut. 9:2, “a people great and tall, the sons of the Anakim, whom you know, and of whom you have heard it said, ‘Who can stand before the sons of Anak?’.”
In case it’s of interest to anyone, note that Anakim, in general, were, “tall” which is just as vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as giants. Yet, we know that, in this case, it’s subjective to the parochial average which was that the average Israelite male was 5.0-5.3ft. in those days.
Deut. 9 is actually part of a relating of the Num 13 event and in Deut 1, as here, Moses doesn’t mention Nephilim: he’s too practical, he’s concerned about the real dangers on the ground, not some impossible fantasy tall-tale.
As for those to rely on vague terminology such as giants and tall and (mis)use those to tie together data points that don’t belong together: 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.
The only physical description we have of them was in Num 13:33 so we’ve no reliable physical description. As for those who would argue that the vague term giants denotes something about generically unusual height above the average in general (yes, that’s how useless that usage of the term giants is) keep in mind that Joshua Charles’ usage was that it’s a mere rendering of Nephilim and (mistakenly) of Anakim and nothing to do with height of any sort.
And, indeed, 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 (not Anakim) in 98% of all others and so never even hints at anything to do with any sort of height whatsoever.
Theer’s no real point in reviewing the rest of the texts he quotes since they’re just references to Anakim but here’s a quick survey:
Josh. 15:13-14, “Caleb drove out from there [“Kiriath-arba, that is, Hebron”] the three sons of Anak, Sheshai and Ahiman and Talmai, the descendants of Anak.”
This text also told us, “Arba was the father of Anak” and we’ve no indication whatsoever that anyone up or down the Arba lineage had anything to do with Nephilim, of course.
Now, Anakim (and Emmim: Deut 2) were like a clan of the Rephaim tribe so all Rephaim were taller than 5.0-5.3ft. in general and yet, only the tribe in general is rendered as giants and not their clans: but, again, these are mere linguistics issues—see my book Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010 and maybe even my book 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.
Josh. 21:11, “Kiriath-arba (Arba being the father of Anak).”
Judges 1:20, “Hebron was given to Caleb, as Moses had said; and he drove out from it the three sons of Anak.”
2 Sam. 21:16, 18, 20, 22, in which case Anakim aren’t actually mentioned by (clan) name, “Ishbi-benob, one of the descendants of the giants…Abishai…killed him…Sibbecai…slew Saph, who was one of the descendants of the giants…Elhanan…slew Goliath the Gittite…there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers on each hand, and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also was descended from the giants…Jonathan…slew him. These four were descended from the giants.”
As noted, here giants renders Repha with reference to Goliath (who was a Philistine by region, Gittite by city (as in of Gath), of the Anakim by clan and of the Rephaim by tribe).
The, “Elhanan…slew Goliath” part is clearly meant to communicate that this was a Goliath, Jr. since we’re told of 1. Ishbi-benob, 2. Saph, 3. Goliath and 4, a man of great stature who were the, “four.”
Just in case, as for, “great stature” well, that’s just as the vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as tall and giants.
The simple mutation stated of this one single individual, the extra digits, has been coopted by pop-Nephilologists when the 1. merely that he was a Nephil and that ergo, 2. extra digits was a Nephilim trait for which, of course, there’s literally zero indication—see the, “Polydactyly or Prestidigitation?” chapter of my book Nephilim and Giants: Believe It or Not!: Ancient and Neo-Theo-Sci-Fi Tall Tales.
1 Chron. 20:4, 6, 8 is a reiteration of the previous text.
He also includes the apocryphal deuteron canonical book Judith at 16:7, “their mighty one did not fall by the hands of the young men, nor did the sons of the Titans smite him, nor did tall giants set upon him; but Judith the daughter of Merari undid him with the beauty of her countenance.”
Interestingly, if giants mean tall then tall giants is redundant (and doubly vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage) and who, pray tell, were the Titans?—FYI some versions have this verse as being 8 rather than 7.
Titans is transliterated from the Greek τιτάνων and giants is rendered from γίγαντες: gigantes which means earth-born (as in born of the Greek earth false goddess Gaia).
Long linguistics story short: for some unknown reason, the LXX translators/renderers had the terrible idea of rendering Nephilim and also gibborim and also Rephaim all as gigantes (or gigas: a shortcut to Gaia): why render three very different words with very different morphologies and very different meanings all with one word was a terrible idea.
So, just like we shouldn’t pick up the words great stature, tall, giants, merely assume to what they refer, run with them, and apply them, we can’t do the same with Titans since who knows what the author of Judith meant by it, in Greek mythology there were more than one generation of Titans which varied greatly, etc., etc., etc.
Next up is another apocryphal deuteron canonical book, Wisdom 14:5-6, “men trust their lives even to the smallest piece of wood, and passing through the billows on a raft they come safely to land. 6 For even in the beginning, when arrogant giants were perishing, the hope of the world took refuge on a raft, and guided by thy hand left to the world the seed of a new generation” which may very well be in refence to the flood and we have the same issue: gigantes.
Another apocryphal deuteron canonical book, Sirach, is quoted at 16:6-7, “In an assembly of sinners a fire will be kindled, and in a disobedient nation wrath was kindled. 7 He was not propitiated for the ancient giants who revolted in their might.”
Same thing: gigantes.
And the last one is also apocryphal deuteron canonical, Baruch 3:24-28, “O Israel, how great is the house of God! And how vast the territory that he possesses! 25 It is great and has no bounds; it is high and immeasurable. 26 The giants were born there, who were famous of old, great in stature, expert in war. 27 God did not choose them, nor give them the way to knowledge; 28 so they perished because they had no wisdom, they perished through their folly.”
Whoever these giants were, they were not Nephilim since they were born in Israel.
Note that the apocryphal texts didn’t reference Anakim.
Thus, overall, we got 1 reliable Nephilim reference, 1 unreliable one, and various two unrelated Anakim and references to giants regarding Rephaim and whatever the usage was of gigantes—and Titans.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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