This discussion took place due to the video @RobSkiba explains NEPHILIM, the ANCIENT GIANTS | Scientism Exposed 2 (Bonus Interviews) that was posted to the Celebrate Truth Youtube channel
A certain @MyChihuahua commented
People in general before the flood were larger in stature.
Gen 6 does not teach angel hybrids of large stature, but of ‘tyrants, bullies and fellers’ (RockeFELLERs), MEN of renown, those of the line of Cain that lorded it over others in power. Compare to Jasher 4.
I, @kenammi355, replied
What makes you assert “People in general before the flood were larger in stature”?
Indeed, “Gen 6 does not teach angel hybrids of large stature” but the “angel hybrids were the “MEN of renown.”
But I’m unsure what makes you assert that the daughters of men were exclusively of the line of Cain.
As for Jasher: that’s just a modern day hoaxed fraud–see my book “The Apocryphal Nephilim and Giants.”
@cdmajesty4803 chimed in with
Lots of very large Giants in the not-so-distant past also
@kenammi355
That begs these key questions:
What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles?
What’s your usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants”?
Do those usages agree?
@MyChihuahua
‘giants’ is from the Greek ‘gigantes’ and refers to excellence, skill and social status not physical stature. So, the word is used correctly in Gen 6 to describe the tyrants that were in power at that time. Same as we say today ‘Steve Jobs was a giant in the electronics field’. Using ‘giant’ to describe physical stature is a metaphor.
@kenammi355
‘giants’ is from the Greek ‘gigantes’ and refers to “earth-born” as in born of Gaia not physical stature. So, the word is rendered for some unknown reason in Gen 6, et al., to describe the might and renown Nephilim. Using ‘giant’ is using a vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word.
@MyChihuahua
the reason is not ‘unknown’, I explained it in my comment. In the Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon it states that it is also used to mean ‘fallers (fellers), rebels, apostates’ by Hebrew interpreters, referring to those who fall upon to attack or bring others low. Strong’s gives the definition of ‘nephal/nephilim’ as ‘tyrants, bullies, fellers’, but it is translated as ‘giants’. We still have it today in names like ‘RockeFELLER’, a modern tyrant in the financial realm.
@kenammi355
Friend, recall that this began when you made assertions you still haven’t supported.
Since you claim to know the reason that please quote and cite the ancient source that tells us why they did that.
Recall that my observation was the fact that, “’giants’ is from the Greek ‘gigantes’ and refers to ‘earth-born’ as in born of Gaia not physical stature. So, the word is rendered for some unknown reason in Gen 6, et al., to describe the might and renown Nephilim…”
As for, “fallers (fellers)…fellers”: first recall that I noted that “giants” is a rendering, it’s not a translation and also, “RockeFELLER” has nothing to do with any of this whatsoever. Please don’t make jumps in meaning or implication based on modern English transliterations of words: Rockefeller refers to an open country, from a German word, and came about due to describing someone the village called “Rockenfeld.”
@MyChihuahua
I already cited the Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon for the word ‘giant’. I also referred you to the parallel account to Genesis 6 in Jasher 4. These are 3 witnesses to the truth of what Scripture clearly teaches in it’s whole counsel without adding sensational ideas (angels mating with women) to the text. At the end of the day, it seems we are in agreement on this point that ‘giants’ does not mean here what most are claiming.
@kenammi355
Friend, I wrote an entire book about the linguistics and have read dozens upon dozens of dictionaries, encyclopedias, lexicons, etc. called Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010. A best practice isn’t to just take one isolated definition and run with it but to determine what they mean by “giants,” why they think that, how that applies to the actual context in which the word is found at any given usage, etc. But most “Nephilim giants” obsessed people merely read the word “giants” merely assume they know to what it refers, and run with it.
Recall that I already told you, “As for Jasher: that’s just a modern day hoaxed fraud–see my book ‘The Apocryphal Nephilim and Giants.’”
Oddly, you assert, “These are 3 witnesses” but one isolated definition and one hoax don’t among to even one. At least, indeed, “‘giants’ does not mean here what most are claiming.”
@MyChihuahua
I already cited the Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon for the word ‘giant’. I also referred you to the parallel account to Genesis 6 in Jasher 4. These are 3 witnesses to the truth of what Scripture clearly teaches in it’s whole counsel without adding sensational ideas (angels mating with women) to the text. At the end of the day, it seems we are in agreement on this point that ‘giants’ does not mean here what most are claiming.
@kenammi355
What you are saying is that Genesis 6 and the modern day hoaxed fraud Jasher 4 are about “fallers (fellers), rebels, apostates…those who fall upon to attack or bring others low…tyrants, bullies” and sure, no problem: that doesn’t mean they weren’t half-Angel and half-human. Indeed, “‘giants’ does not mean here what most are claiming.”
@MyChihuahua
Correct. And no where are angels even mentioned in that passage.
Jasher is the only Apocryphal text actually referenced in Scripture. Parts of it may have been corrupted, but the parallel passage of Gen 6 matches the same info.
@kenammi355
“Correct” about what?
Now, you noted “no where are angels even mentioned in that passage” but it doesn’t matter since it’s just a “modern day hoaxed fraud” and the “fallers (fellers), rebels, apostates…those who fall” refers to Nephilim (due to the root word naphal) and not to the Angels who fathered them.
As for, “Jasher is the only Apocryphal text actually referenced in Scripture” nope, there’s some 33 of them. And just because Scripture refers to a book of Jasher doesn’t mean that the modern-day hoaxed fraud is that book.
@MyChihuahua
‘not to the angels that fathered them’ – again, there is NO mention of angels in relation to the Gen 6 account.
@kenammi355
At least you accept that Jasher is a modern day hoaxed fraud so what it states is irrelevant.
It’s a bit unclear what you mean by, “there is NO mention of angels in relation to the Gen 6 account.”
Do you mean that the English word “angels” doesn’t appear in the version you’re reading?
Do you mean that the Hebrew word “Malakim” doesn’t appear in Hebrew versions?
Just in case you’re fixating on one word (in either language) I’ll just note that there’s no grammatical, reading comprehension, literary, or hermeneutical rule that only one word can ever be used to refer to any one thing.
For example, in Job 38:7 it’s clear that “bene ha Elohim”/“sons of God” can refer to non-human beings.
That brought the discussion to and end as no more replies were forthcoming.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.