Pastor Mike Signorelli (“leads V1 Church….Mike and Julie Signorelli founded V1 Church”) wrote an article titled The TRUE Origins of the Nephilim with Apostle Alexander Pagani—which is, “a written guide” based on a recorded discussion but also refers to, “the article” without indication of to what that’s referring.
I attempted to find out something about Pagani but his website is just a PR marketing site which only consists of, “Home” which only lists the items he has for sale, “Giving,” and, “Contact Us” but the article undergoing review notes he’s, “…a digital creator, pastor, and preacher.”
Of, “The Origins of the Demonic Realm” it’s noted, “Apostle Pagani introduces the discussion by connecting the Nephilim to Ephesians 6, where principalities, powers, rulers of darkness, and spiritual wickedness in high places are addressed. According to Pagani, understanding the Nephilim involves acknowledging the belief that the sons of God intermingled with human daughters, leading to a broader understanding of the demonic realm and multiple angelic rebellions.”
The original, traditional, and majority view among the earliest Jewish and Christian commentators, starting in BC days, was the Angel view as I proved in 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.
Yet, I’m unsure how that ties into, “principalities, powers, rulers of darkness, and spiritual wickedness in high places.”
It’s noted that, “Apostle Pagani introduces the concept of hybridization, drawing parallels with the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary during the conception of Christ…aligns with the idea of angels mating with humans.” Yet, that’s a category error since Angels physically mated with human women in the good ol’ fashioned way but of Mary we’re told, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).
For some reason, it’s noted that, “angelic rebellions” ended up, “resulting in the creation of hell” one of the problems with which is that hell is a generic term that’s used by some to render various Hebrew and Greek words—see my book What Does the Bible Say About Heaven and Hell? A Styled A Styled Superumology and Infernology.
We’re told, “sons of God, also referred to as watchers” indeed yet, that’s during the Second Temple Ear, centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah.
Now, 99.999999999% of the time that someone uses the term Watchers you can instantly know that they’re using it due to appealing to 1 Enoch. And we can know that such is the case in this case due to that “According to Pagani, these fallen sons of God shared forbidden knowledge and technology” which is from that Bible contradicting folklore—see my book In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch.
We’re told, “Paul speaks figuratively about women covering themselves not only as a display of submission but also ‘because of the angels.’ This phrase raises questions about the ongoing free will of angels and the potential for rebellion, emphasizing that angels, including Michael and Gabriel, still retain the opportunity to rebel, although scripture suggests they never will.”
Yet, that’s not the case and there’s only a one-time fall of Angels in the Bible along with indications that the Angels who didn’t fall saw what happened to their fallen comrades and determined not to do likewise. However, just because they won’t fall doesn’t make it acceptable to tempt them, as it were. I’m married and won’t be unfaithful to my wife but it’s not acceptable for other women to attempt to tempt me.
It’s noted, “The logical progression leads to the discussion of angels observing the newly created species—humans, particularly the female, referred to as the ‘Woo man.’” Well, species isn’t biblical taxonomy, kinds are and Woo man is only something an English speaker would imagine saying.
A subsection refers to, “giants like Goliath” and that the article goes about, “Dismissing the notion that these beings could be associated with conditions like gigantism or disability, we emphasize the supernatural characteristics of the Nephilim, distinct from any physical deformity.”
Primary questions are what’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles? What’s Pastor Signorelli’s and/or Apostle Pagani’s and/or the author of the written guide and/or the author of the article’s usage? Do those two usages agree?
Likely, Goliath can’t be associated with conditions like gigantism since the Masoretic text has Goliath at just shy of 10 ft. Yet, the earlier LXX and the earlier Dead Sea Scrolls and the earlier Flavius Josephus all have him at just shy of 7 ft. (compared to the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft. in those days) so that’s the preponderance of the earliest data (the Greek LXX Codex Venetus actually has 5 cubits and a span).
I’m unsure what, “supernatural characteristics of the Nephilim” has anything to do with this since 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 pop-Nephilology—the modern branch of which is just un-biblical neo-theo sci-fi tall-tales and so no one can be correlated do them due to height of any size and Goliath was a Repha, not a Nephil.
We’re told, “The scriptural accounts point to the existence of giants in the post-flood era, referred to as ‘Rephaim’ or ‘Zuzim.’ These beings are considered derivatives of the Nephilim, maintaining a genetic connection but exhibiting variations in their hybrid nature.” Biblically contextually, “giants…‘Rephaim’ or ‘Zuzim’” would mean, “Rephaim…‘Rephaim’ or ‘Zuzim’” since Zuzim (aka Zamzummim) is just an aka for Rephaim and 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 in 98% of all others and so never even hints at anything to do with any sort of height whatsoever.
As for, “considered” we’re not told by whom they’re considered, “derivatives of the Nephilim” but there’s literally zero reliable indication of any such thing. As for, “hybrid”: Nephilim were strictly pre-flood hybrids, Rephaim were strictly post-flood humans, and there’s zero correlation between them.
It’s noted, “The term ‘Rephaim’ signifies a copy of a copy, indicating a genetic lineage with a majority human composition yet retaining traces of the Nephilim’s divine ancestry” but that’s 100% made up stuff including due to that Rephaim’s root is rapha and ranges in meaning from healing to death, not a copy nor a copy of a copy—see my linguistics book Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010.
Reference is made to, “the descendants of Cain and their increasing darkness, eventually leading to the rise of these post-flood giants” but there’s zero indication of either of those assertions.
We’re told, “Examining biblical figures like Ogg [sic.], we find the continuation of this genetic strain. Ogg, a giant king, adds another layer to the multifaceted tapestry of Nephilim descendants. His significant stature, combined with references in archeology, suggests a scale beyond the ordinary human dimensions.”
We’ve no physical description of Og so we can’t correlate him to Nephilim for whom we’ve no reliable physical description based on a misusage of the term giant or the equally misguided and unevidenced, “significant stature.” Yet, “references in archeology” may assist us in a way unfathomed by all involved in the written guide since referring to Og’s size is a non-sequitur based on various mere assumptions about basing his supposed height on the size of his, “bed.” Yet, archeological indications are that it was a ritual object, not something upon which he slept—see my book The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?
It’s noted:
God’s instructions to Abraham regarding the conquest of Canaan shed light on the specific targeting of the land inhabited by these giants. The land promised to Abraham was not merely a random geographical area but a strategic strip, a hotspot of Nephilim activity.
The concept of wiping out these beings, often criticized as genocide, is reinterpreted as a divine intervention to eliminate a genetic strain not of earthly origin. The focus shifts from conventional ethical debates to a recognition of the necessity to curtail the resurgence of these hybrid extraterrestrial entities.
The narrative confronts Western interpretations that tend to downplay the supernatural elements, asserting that the biblical accounts speak of an otherworldly species rather than human deformities. The giants, existing as a constant threat to the divine plan, necessitated extraordinary measures to ensure the preservation of humanity’s intended genetic purity.
That’s a very, very common pop-Nephilology talking point but God told us many times why He commanded such things but never said one single word about Nephilim—I included an entire chapter just about this issue in my book What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim? A Styled Giantology and Nephilology.
Now, since the written review asserts post-flood Nephilim, we need to know just how Nephilim got past the flood, past God, and how it is that God failed, missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
And that’s utterly key since we’re told, “the aftermath of the flood, as God wipes out the Nephilim and genetically modified sentient beings” but that would be intra-flood, not “after…” since He didn’t fail.
Now, that statement followed directly with, “we see the emergence of unregistered spirits, decommissioned and left to wander the earth. These entities, once part of the unauthorized hybrid experiment, become what we now refer to as demons. Their existence is tied to the prince of the power of the air, operating under the rule of fallen angels and principalities.” That demons are the spirits of dead Nephilim is just folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah. For a biblical view, please see my article Demons Ex Machina: What are Demons?
Interestingly, it’s noted, “This exploration challenges us to distinguish between myths (exaggerated truths) and fables (lies)” indeed and what the written review did is to mostly provide us fables.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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