Undergoing review is the fifth chapter titled “Giants Nephilim and Anakim” of a book that L.C. Geerts posted on the earth-history.com site (which does not seem to include a bio of him) that is titled or is to be titled, Earths Ancient History, a theory about ancient times and dawn of Mankind (sic.).
He notes something that I discern will be key “the reason why the Gods destroyed most living Creatures on Earth by a Great Flood” which was “a disaster carefully planned by the Gods” and yet, he is writing in the plural of “Gods.”
For more perspective on him, note that he claims “there were at least 3 sunken continents (islands) in ancient times…Atlantis…Lemuria…The Egyptian Keftiu” and is “sure that the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha books should be part of the ‘new’ Bible” since, as is implied, the Apocrypha (whereby L.C. Geerts also mean pseudepigrapha: texts written centuries after the Tanakh closed and millennia after the Torah was written) must contain the actual truth, or augmentations of the bits of truth in the Bible yet, one thing is certain: he would be in charge of determining the canon of the “‘new’ Bible.”
For example, he writes “…the meaning of Genesis 6:3 is wrong translated or it’s a part of the text which does not belong to this part of the story because in The Book of Jasher we can read…” so he is putting the modern day hoaxed fraud cart before the original Torah’s horse—see my book The Apocryphal Nephilim and Giants: Encountering Nephilim and Giants in Extra-Biblical Texts.
L.C. Geerts specifies:
“After their descent to Earth, the Watchers indulged in earthly delights with their chosen ‘wives’, Through these unions were born Giant offspring named as Nephilim a Hebrew word meaning ‘those who have fallen’, which rendered in Greek translations as Gigantes, or ‘Giants.’”
I deeply appreciate that he qualifies that “Nephilim” is “rendered” rather than translated “in Greek” as “Gigantes.”
Now, he claims the result of the Genesis 6 affair was “Giant offspring” called “Nephilim” rendered as “Gigantes, or ‘Giants’” which still does not tell us what “Giants” means and if he thinks it has something to do with unusual height then, why is the “Hebrew word” “Nephilim” “meaning ‘those who have fallen’” but the “Greek translations” being “Gigantes, or ‘Giants’”? Well, gigantes merely means “earth-born” with no implication of anything to do with height—usual or unusual.
L.C. Geerts refers to a “mistake made by ‘The Church Fathers’ and the Jews, was that they forgot to erase the verses that contains stories of Gods, Angels and Watchers” but why does he think this? Because then “what is left over of Monotheism?” which cannot be a biblical theological question.
Firstly “Angels” and “Watchers” mean the same thing “Watchers” is just a Second Temple Era (516 BC-70 AD) manner whereby to say “Angels,” a mere aka.
Secondly, Angels and Watchers are ontologically different from the one true Almighty God so that they are in an utterly different category—that of being created beings, beings created by one true Almighty God.
Thirdly “Gods” are likewise in a different category as the term “God”—el, eloah, elohim, elohenu, elyon—is generic and well, we will get into this more as we progress.
L.C. Geerts then appeals to the unholy trinity of pop-researchers’ preferred texts, with a fourth thrown in, and these are Jubilees, Jasher, 1 Enoch/Ethiopic Enoch, and the KJV.
He writes:
“Genetic there was nearly no difference between Satana and his companions and the Daughters of Men this was also the same by ‘The Watchers’ (Children of Seth) and the Daughters of Men, otherwise they were unable to make children together. It is obvious that their Genetic structure was nearly the same because they were all ‘Angels’ and relatives at the beginning” (sic.).
Note the terminology: “Satana” and “his companions” who are “The Watchers” who are “Children of Seth” and “Daughters of Men” were genetically the same because “they were all ‘Angels.’”
Yes, he claims that Satana, Watchers, Sethites, daughters of men were all Angels—for some odd reason and whatever that means. I am granting that no, I will not be reviewing his entire book but regardless of how he arrived that this chaos of category errors, the point is that it is a concoction of category errors.
Now, I will agree that Genesis 6’s sons of God are Angels and that Angels do share genetics with humans, we were made “a little lower” than they (Psalm 8:5), which is evidenced by that they can reproduce with us so that we are of the same basic “kind.”
However, if by Satana he is actually referring to Satan, the Devil, then he is excluded because he is not an Angel but is a Cherub (Ezekiel 14:28).
L.C. Geerts argues:
“These unions between the daughters of Men, Satan and his hosts and the Watchers were:
1. ‘Satana and his companions’ and ‘The Children of Cain’ The offspring of this mingling were called ‘Demons and Monsters’
2. ‘The Watchers’ [sic] and the children of Cain’ called Nephilim The offspring of this mingling was called ‘Anakim’.
Both were called Giants…”
Here he has three groups (apparently within only one category: all being Angels) 1) “Satan” (he either missed an “a” here or vacillates between “Satan” and “Satana”), 2) “his hosts” and 3) “the Watchers.”
He seems to be arguing that Nephilim came about either due to “Satana” and whoever “his companions” may be and “The Children of Cain” (biblically, the “daughters of men”—on a certain very late-dated view) and that Nephilim “were called ‘Demons and Monsters’” even though he tells us not whereabouts.
Or, they are the result of “The Watchers’ and the children of Cain” and that “children of Cain” are “called Nephilim” and that when Watchers mated with Nephilim then “The offspring of this mingling was called ‘Anakim’” which is incoherent (Anakim are post-flood humans).
That “Both”—both whom?—“Demons and Monsters” and “Anakim”? “were called Giants” is essentially irrelevant—and stinks of a word-concept fallacy.
He actually provides a “CREATURE table” which has:
“The GODS, ELOHIM (AN, ENLIL, ENKI and others)” as “GODS.”
“Heavenly and Arch Angels, Seraphim, Nephilim” as “ANGELS.”
“The Fallen Angels: Satana, Adam and Eve, Watchers” as “Naphilim” (sic.). FYI: L.C. Geerts is borrowing this term from Jubilees 7:21-22 which has it that “the fornication” of “the Watchers” resulted in that they “begat sons, the Naphidim…the Giants slew the Naphil, and the Naphil slew the Eljo, and the Eljo mankind, and one man another.”
“The Children of the Devil and Watchers, Cain MAN” as “GIANTS.”
“Adam, Eve (The Children of God), SETH – NOAH MAN, Watchers” as “Nephilim.”
“The Demy GOD’S” (sic.) as “Anakim.”
“DEMONS and MONSTERS, children of the evil Giants” as “DEMONS.”
And “HOMO SAPIENS (MEN) created shortly after the great flood” as “MEN.”
These terms are not only incoherent on its monstrous face but all the more so when he attempts to apply his mis-categorizations.
L.C. Geerts then argues:
“There is another enigma contained within the lines of Genesis 6, for its appears to embody two entirely different traditions. Look again at the words of Genesis 6:2:
Gn:6:2: That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
They speak of the Sons of God coming unto the Daughters of Men, while in contrast with Genesis 6:4:
Gn:6:4: There were Giants (in Hebrew bible Nephilim) 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.The meaning seemed clear enough: there were two quite separate traditions entangled here, one concerning the fallen race known to the early Israelites as the Nephilim (mentioned elsewhere in the Pentateuch as the progenitors of a race of Giants called Anakim), and the other concerning the bene ha-Elohim, the Sons of God, who are equated directly with the Angels of God in Jubilees tradition and the Watchers in Enoch tradition.
With other words [sic.]: Nephilim, in Hebrew Bible Giants, is another word for ‘Watchers’, their offspring was called Anakim. The Children of Seth (God) were called Bene Ha-Elohim, their offspring was also called Anakim. Both offspring were Giants or, named in the Bible ‘men which were of old, men of renown.’”
I am unsure how a basic chronology is read as “two entirely different traditions” since “the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose” and “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.”
At least they did it in the right order: marriage, sex, offspring.
This seems to simply be a case wherein he is misreading 6:4 which just tells us that Nephilim were in the Earth “in those days; and also after” the time “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” so that they first did so (those days) and kept doing so (after that).
So no, there is no way that “Nephilim…is another word for ‘Watchers.’”
No, there is no way that “Nephilim, in Hebrew Bible Giants” since “Giants” is an English word so actually “Nephilim, in Hebrew Bible Nephilim.”
That “The Children of Seth (God) were called Bene Ha-Elohim” is something that was not dreamed up until millennia after the Torah was written, it was after the time of Jesus, in fact: centuries after His time—see my book 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.
Note the interesting statement “Both offspring were Giants or, named in the Bible ‘men which were of old, men of renown’” so that biblically, their offspring (not “Both”) were “men which were of old, men of renown” and not “Giants.”
Now, it is because he claims “Nephilim (mentioned elsewhere in the Pentateuch as the progenitors of a race of Giants called Anakim)” that he had asserted “Nephilim The offspring of this mingling was called ‘Anakim’” which is something to which we shall get.
L.C. Geerts claims:
“…the ancestors of the Jewish race that at some point in the distant past a Giant race had once ruled the earth, from the time of Jared until the time of David, the second King of Israel, with other words the offspring of the Anakim existed until historical times.”
He pinpoints “from the time of Jared” because such is the pseudepigraphical time-frame, and it might be correct, Genesis 6 is vague about the time-frame “when the children of men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them” which is any time after Adam and Eve’s children started having children.
Now, recall that I noted that “I discern with be key ‘the reason why the Gods destroyed most living Creatures on Earth by a Great Flood’ which was ‘a disaster carefully planned by the Gods’”?
So “The GODS, ELOHIM (AN, ENLIL, ENKI and others)” carefully planned destroying most living Creatures on Earth by a Great Flood but must have missed the “The Children of the Devil and Watchers, Cain MAN” and/or “The Demy GOD’S” aka “Anakim” and/or “DEMONS and MONSTERS, children of the evil Giants” since post-flood they persisted “until the time of David…until historical times.”
This is the same bottom-less pit into which Christian post-flood-pop-researchers fall: they want to claim the flood was meant to be rid Nephilim but that there were post-flood Nephilim so that the implication is God failed and the flood was much of a waste.
L.C. Geerts notes that in Jubilees 7:21-22 “we can read also about the Nephilim (Naphidim) even as in the Bible, even we found a new name for the Giants, namely the Eljo. Even the Giants (Naphidim, Naphil, Eljo).”
Now, these “sinned against the beasts and birds, You can imagine that the enormous number of stories in Myths and Legends about half Men-half Beast and half Men-half bird could be true, and it was true, they lived indeed a long ago and even until historical times”?
Well, this is not about what I can or cannot imagine—an argumentum ad imaginarium—but about even what a pseudepigraphical text actually states.
It states “they sinned against the beasts and birds, and all that moves and walks on the earth” and prepped by his assertions you might think that this was about creating chimeras.
Yet, the text reads:
“…they begat sons the Naphidim, and they were all unlike, and they devoured one another: and the Giants slew the Naphil, and the Naphil slew the Eljo, and the Eljo mankind, and one man another. And every one sold himself to work iniquity and to shed much blood, and the earth was filled with iniquity. And after this they sinned against the beasts and birds, and all that moves and walks on the earth: and much blood was shed on the earth, and every imagination and desire of men imagined vanity and evil continually. And the Lord destroyed everything from off the face of the earth; because of the wickedness of their deeds, and because of the blood which they had shed in the midst of the earth He destroyed everything.”
This tall-tale is about what was being “devoured” so that when they “sinned against” animals, it means they slaughtered them for food “shed much blood.” But why was slaughtering animals sinful? Because this was pre-flood, before God allowed animals to be slaughtered for food.
L.C. Geerts claims of Genesis 6 that “In Enoch we see the most extensive version of the same story” but how is that to be taken? All indications are that someone living millennia after the Torah was written decided to fill in gaps—and whoever wrote is ended up contradicting the Bible so much that I have a whole chapter of such examples in my book In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch.
He then writes of “THE GREAT GIANTS in Enoch” and notes that as per 1 Enoch 7:2, they were “three thousand ells.”
Pause: this text mirrors Jubilees and so he comments “Reading this story makes it more understandable what is written in Legends and Myths where is told that the most ‘strange’ beings once existed on Earth.” Yet, he missed the text’s very clear statements about how when the Nephilim “consumed all the acquisitions of men” they then “began to sin against” animals “devour one another’s flesh, and drink the blood,” etc.
So now, he reckons 3,000 ells to amount to 900 meters which is 2,952.7 ft. or half a mile. Actually, an ell ranges from 27-45 in./68.58-114.3 cm, this range results in them being 81,000-135,000 ft./24,689-41,148 m. or 15.3-25.6 mi./24.6-41.2 km. tall.
In any case, take half a mile if you want: that is still impossibly tall—they would never be able to grow that tall and if they attempted to even take one step, they would shatter their own bones.
L.C. Geerts claims that “Anunnaki, Igigi and Sebitti,” from “Mesopotamia, in the Sumerian, Acadian and Babylonian stories” (sic.) are “three different Angels” groups, that “were one and the same and we will call them from now on ‘The Nephilim’” which is incoherent—clearly, he is simply watering down literary, historical, and cultural context so as to use the term “Angel” for just about anything/anyone.
He references Genesis 6 and claims “That’s all the Bible tells about ‘The Nephilim’” so it will be interesting to see what he does with Numbers 13:33 since that is the second, and only other, biblical reference to Nephilim—and whence he gets that Anakim has anything to do with any of this (which they do not).
L.C. Geerts references Jubilees and 1 Enoch and, contradictorily, tells us “We can here clearly read that ‘ALL’ Nephilim and Anakim, Demons and Monsters were destroyed from Earth BEFORE THE FLOOD but we will see later that NOT ALL of them were destroyed before the flood because also after the Flood we will meet them again in great amounts” (sic.) so, all but not all and, again, the flood was not successful.
He thinks that these pseudepigraphical texts, perhaps with a little Bible thrown in “Gods created a new ‘race’ HOMO SAPIENS, our real Ancestors” and that “we know” how exactly? “that Homo Sapiens was created shortly before or shortly after the Flood.”
He again emphasizes “the punishment of the ‘Nephilim’…this judgment” whereby “the Gods and the ‘Good Angels’ were extremely wrath to their leaders” but, again, apparently not wrathful enough.
In 1 Enoch, Azazel is the name of a Watcher/Angel but to L.C. Geerts this refers to “one of ‘Nephilim’” which “we can imagine that is because Azazel was the Leader of the ‘Nephilim’” even though he was not—not even, by the way, as per his own misguided definition of “Adam, Eve (The Children of God), SETH – NOAH MAN, Watchers” being “Nephilim.”
L.C. Geerts claims “in spite of the great sins the ‘Nephilim’ made, the Gods told the Angels that their offspring, the Anakim, still would live for 500 years” but I am unaware of wherein the Bible or apocrypha or pseudepigrapha or any text at all states any such thing.
He speculates “It seems that the Gods didn’t have absolute power over ‘The Nephilim’ otherwise they would have destroyed them directly” which is a merely argument from incredulity, and follows with “In the ‘age’ prediction lies concluded that the Flood should not come directly or that several ‘Nephilim’ and ‘Anakim’ should survive the Flood” (sic.)—see what I mean, he got it, any view of post-flood Nephilim (biblical or “The Demy GOD’S” aka “Anakim”) implies failure.
His view is that “a great amount of the Children of The Anakim’ still lived in the time of Moses, Joshua, Saul and David” but biblically, a great amount of the Children of The Anakim’ only lived in the time of Moses, Joshua, Saul and David since they did not exist pre-flood.
L.C. Geerts claims “The ‘Anakim’ and the daughters of men, The Giants, ‘produced’ all kinds of Demons and Monsters, from the knowledge of their ‘Fathers’ the ‘Nephilim’ and they created what ever they liked and so were born the most ‘Strange Creatures’ that ever existed on Earth” which is a pure form of neo-theo sci-fi based on chaotically concocted mis-definitions.
He quotes 1 Enoch 19:1 about “the angels who have connected themselves with women” about that “their SPIRITS ASSUMING MANY DIFFERENT FORMS” and that “the women also of the angels who went astray shall become SIRENS” (emphasis by Geerts). Since, by definition, disembodies spirits have no form, I am unsure how they assume forms or how women became sirens (in certain mythologies this means women-bird hybrids).
He repeats the error that such “hybrid Creatures…demonic hybrids” had to do with “sin against the animals” which I already debunked. He adds that “Many of these ‘children’, Creations were also of Giant stature” which is biblically unknown except that such is what ten unfaithful, disloyal, contradictory, embellishing spies claimed within an evil report for which they were rebuked.
L.C. Geerts ponders “Can you imagine what strength these Giant ‘Nephilim’ had when their body was to 100 meters tall” 328.1 ft. But “imagine” is all we can do since there is no such reliable evidence about Nephilim—especially when you keep in mind that to him, Nephilim means “Adam, Eve (The Children of God), SETH – NOAH MAN, Watchers.”
But he is appealing to such tall-tales to weave a tall-tale of his own based on a basic level non sequitur which is the mere non sequitur of an assertion that large things must have been made to and for large people.
Thus, he argues, that for Nephilim “it’s nearly no problem to carry stones and build Giant structures”—see my video, Ancient Alien Megalithic Builders vs. Wally Wallington & Edward Leedskalnin.
He claims “The Giant ‘Nephilim’ were the builders of most Pyramids in Egypt” in which case, they must be pre-flood. But he also claims “The same conclusion can also be drawn for most great structures build all over the world” sine this is about broad-brush watered-down painting with a generic broom.
In a subsection titled “The GIANT ANAKIM” he writes “The ‘Anakim’ were quite tall and fierce” which is just about the only thing that is accurate—keeping in mind that the term “tall” is as vague, generic, subjective as “giants” especially when considering they were “tall” compared to the average Israelite male who in those days was 5.0-5.3 ft.
L.C. Geerts asserts that Anakim “were living…before the destruction of the flood, there was a remnant of them after the flood…The destruction caused by the great flood…was a result of the increasing evil done by the ‘Anakim’ and their children…even after the Flood they still existed until historical times.” Simply stated, Anakim are a subgroup of Rephaim named after a man named Anak whose dad was Arba who lived quite a long time post-flood (Joshua 15:13, 21:11, Judges 1:20).
L.C. Geerts then focuses on “THE GIANT Anakim in the Bible” as per another subsection. Within the context of the subgroup Anakim, L.C. Geerts directs us to “king Og (the Giant)” even though “King Og was a ‘small’ Giant because he needed a length of his bed of 9*46 cm = 4,14 meters, so his real length would be about 4 meters” 13.1 ft. but he does not tell us how the size of a “bed” amounts to the size of a person—and it is not as simple as it seems since, for example, he lived the lavish lifestyle of a sovereign. Yet, the issue is really that it was not a bed upon which he slept but was a ritual bed upon which alleged gods and alleged goddesses supposedly copulated—see my book The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?
But when Geerts writes “king Og (the Giant)…King Og was a ‘small’ Giant” it biblically means king Og (the Repha )…King Og was a ‘small’ Repha—even though all we know is that some Rephaim were “tall.”
Yet, he insists that “Giant Anakim were the offspring of the Giant Nephilim from before the Flood” and by “from before the Flood” he means having also lived pre-flood, unlike Christian pop-researchers who (also mistakenly) assert that for them “from before the Flood” means born post-flood from Nephilim who somehow impossibly lived post-flood.
He quotes texts from Deuteronomy and Joshua but they are all just about how Anakim lived post-flood, of course, and not a single word about them living pre-flood, of course.
L.C. Geerts writes “In the Bible we can find a large amount of stories regarding the Anakim and their ‘degenerated’ offspring called the children of Anak, Emims and other names.”
He does not seem to realize that it is the Anakim who are the children of Anak. He does not seem to realize that, Emim and Anakim were a subgroup of Rephaim and also “Zamzummim” is an aka for “Rephaim,” “The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; Which also were accounted giants [Rephaim], as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims…a land of giants [Rephaim]: giants [Rephaim] dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims; A people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims” (Deuteronomy 2:10-11, 20-21).
Thus, the main people group is Rephaim aka Zamzummim which splits off into subgroups such as Emim and Anakim—“were accounted” as Rephaim.”
Yet, he goes on to write “The Emims were as tall as the Anakims and belonged also to the Giants [biblically, Rephaim], and they were Children of the Anakims and Moses referred that these children of the Anakims still lived on Earth in the days of Joshua and later still in the days of David. (Goliath).”
Yet that is because biblically, such is when they lived, of course: they did not come from pre-flood times. Goliath was Philistine who were a subgroup of Ankaim who were a subgroup of Rephaim and nothing to do with Nephilim.
When L.C. Geerts writes “Moses spoke also of Giants in the days of the journey out of Egypt, again proof that the Gods didn’t destroy all of them during the Flood because they still lived thousands of years after the flood” it is readily discernable that he is making a typical pop-researcher error: he is merely reading an English version that has “Giants” in Genesis 6:4, then continuing to read about “Giants” in post-flood texts, and concluding that one word/term/concept can only ever mean one thing ergo, the post-flood “Giants” are the same as pre-flood “Giants”—this is a reading comprehension issue, a hermeneutical one.
Yet, of course and again, in such versions pre-flood “Giants” are Nephilim and post-flood “Giants” are Rephaim and there is no relation between them—and if you are thinking “Hey, what about Numbers 13:33?” well, we come to this next.
I previously noted “He references Genesis 6 and claims, ‘That’s all the Bible tells about ‘The Nephilim’’ so it will be interesting to see what he does with Numbers 13:33 since that is the second, and only other, biblical reference to Nephilim—and whence he gets that Anakim has anything to do with any of this (which they do not).”
Now, he quotes “Nm:13:32: And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search 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. Nm: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.”
His comment is “Even the Children of Anak (Anakim) were still of a great stature, still so great that Joshua and his army were like grasshoppers before them, so even after a long period of degeneration the Children of the Anakim were still Giants in their eyes. A strange detail is that is written that these sons of Anak eats the inhabitants of that land, so they were also Cannibals.”
This is typical pop-researcher modus operandi in a few ways. Note that he does not interact with the narrative of the text but merely appeals to two verses. He quoted but ignores that he is appealing to, and trusting, an “evil report.” He reads “it, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants” as that Anakim were cannibals when the narrative denotes that they were contradicting the previous, accurate, report (Num 13:32-33) about how the land flows with milk and honey: they were asserting that the land was bad.
Oddly, he focuses on Anakim but ignores that v. 33 also refers to Nephilim. Yet, since he quoted a version that has “there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants” it really does seem that he literally does not realize that here “giants” is rendering “Nephilim” especially since he claimed that Genesis 6 contains “all the Bible tells about ‘The Nephilim’”: he really does not know what he is reading.
Okay but what about the verifiable fact that the Bible says, or Moses said, or God inspired it, or however one may term it. The issue is that God inspired that it be written, Moses wrote it, and the Bible says it and yet, the key issues are always the same: who said what was recorded, why did they say it, how was it taken (accepted or rejected), etc.?
The elucidation of this text is that upon which I focused in post Chapter sample: On the Post Flood Nephilim Proposal.
In short, that was merely recording a statement by ten unfaithful, disloyal, contradictory, embellishing spies who presented an evil report for which God rebuked them. They made five assertions about which the whole entire rest of the Bible knows nothing: 1) that the land was bad, 2) that all of the people of the land were of great stature, 3) that there were post-flood Nephilim, 4) that Anakim were related to them (at least in non-LXX versions), and 5) that Nephilim were unusually tall.
They also contradicted Moses, Caleb, Joshua, God and the rest of the whole entire Bible: all of whom affirm that presence of Anakim in the land but say not a word about Nephilim nor relation to Nephilim—never, ever.
That is merely naming a few of the problems with those two verses.
L.C. Geerts goes on to claim “in the time of Saul and David we can still find the Giants” and quotes 2 Samuel 21:18, 1 Chronicles 20:4-8, 21:1, 1 Samuel 17:4-7, and 1 Chronicles 20:4-8 which prove not his point but rather, prove that he does not realize that he has been reading about Rephaim, of the Anakim or not, and that Rephaim had no relation to Nephilim.
But he is not done yet as he offers “more proof that the Children of the Giant ‘Anakim’ still lived on Earth in the time of Saul and David.”
One such “proof” is “The children of ‘The Nephilim’ and the daughters of Man (the children of Cain) were the Giant ‘Anakim’ with enormous strength and length. (from 10 to 100 meters tall) and their lifetime was about 500 years”: this is merely made-up stuff—period.
“These Giants were the builders of the enormous structures all over the word, including the Pyramids of Egypt, Stonehenge in England and many more structures and ancient cities”: mere assertion based on arguments from incredulity and the non sequitur that large things were built by and for large people. FYI: there is a door where I work that is about 25 feet tall and I have never seen a “giant” walking around the building. This is also based on assuming that them primitives didn’t know how to do that and we are oh, so much smarted and we don’t know so……………GIANTS!!!
He note his theory about “after the flood…creation of a new ‘race’, namely ‘HOMO SAPIENS’” and Anakim “‘created’ all kinds of Demons and Monsters…Strange Creatures” and then writes “Can you imagine why I don’t belief in the theory that all living people on this earth are children of ADAM and EVE ?. People who still belief that story are unwilling to read the Bible and other books as historical books.”
I do not have to imagine, I know by reading his assertions that is because he is very confused, does not know what he is reading, redefines and waters down terms/concepts to force-fit them into his theory, etc.
He concludes that our world is in such a state before we “are unwilling to use our intelligence” so “Let us open our eyes and minds and let us search together for the real history of our Home planet and ancestors then to use a lot of time to fight each other with dogma’s within our religions” which, of course, means that if we accept his dogma, there will be world peace—somehow.
He proposes that we, or he “rewrite the Bible” to “including at least, the book of Jubilees and the books of Enoch.” Yet, he is “sorry to announce that this will not happen because of the reason I mentioned already ‘Monotheism’” but well, also because those late dated folkloric texts contradict the Bible.
He adds that “Our church fathers…deceive the religious people” which L.C. Geerts knows based on “all secret books and scrolls that are stored in the Vatican and other places” which is a form of the claim that lack of evidence is evidence: there are text that we cannot see so they must be there.
He ends his can’t we all just get along—while I besmirch you crusade with “the Bible exists in several versions, (Jewish, Bibles of Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox Christianity, each differing in some of their contents” and yet, unified in their overall primary message: salvation by grace through faith in Jesus’ sacrifice.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.