A certain Abigail (“PhD student at Ariel University, where she is studying archaeology…Master’s degree in Biblical History and Archaeology from The Bible Seminary…”) wrote an article titled Goliath: A Giant of a Manfor the New Creation site (“our goal is to empower our readers to think critically and make their own informed decisions about God’s methods and handiwork…Above all else, we believe that Scripture is the inerrant and infallible word of God…”) along with the caveat, “The views expressed in this article reflect those of the author, and not necessarily those of New Creation.”
She asks, “But was Goliath really a giant? Or was he just a really big man? These are questions that I hear a lot, from two very different groups of people” and the first answer should be this series of questions: What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles? What’s your usage? Do those two usages agree?
See, when she follows with, “I grew up believing that Goliath was a giant” that reads as, “I grew up believing that Goliath was a __________” with a blank she didn’t fill in, especially within the context of a biblical discussion and, “giant? Or…really big man”—with, “big” being just as vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as, “giant.”
She follows that with, “Since then, both secular, minimalist scholars and respected biblical scholars have challenged my beliefs in this matter. And, a careful reading of the Bible reveals that the text never specifically calls Goliath a giant. So, then, was Goliath a giant? Or not?”
The statement, “the Bible reveals that the text never specifically calls Goliath a giant” is question begging: to which, “the Bible” is she referring? Some English Bibles do specifically call Goliath a giant which brings us back to the linguistics issues—Bible Encyclopedias and Dictionaries on Angels, Demons, Nephilim, and Giants: From 1851 to 2010.
Right on schedule, she includes a section titled, “What is a Giant?”:
In order to determine if Goliath was a giant, we must first define the word giant. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the word giant can refer to either “a legendary humanlike being of great stature and strength” or a “living being of great size.”
The word giant does not appear in the Hebrew Old Testament. But that is not surprising, because giant is not a Hebrew word! The English word giant comes from the Greek word gigantas. In ancient Greek poems, giants were half god and half earth. They were powerful, fearsome mythical creatures. Some were exceptionally tall, others were not.1
In the third and second centuries BC, the Hebrew Old Testament was translated into Greek. This Greek text is known as the Septuagint. There are two different Hebrew words that were translated as gigantas in the Septuagint. These are Nephalim [sic.] and Rephaim. Many English Bibles translate both these words as giant. Using one English word to describe two different Hebrew terms can be confusing. There is one Hebrew term that is also of interest in a study of giants, and that is Anakim. Let’s look at each term to learn the differences between the Nephilim, the Rephaim, and the Anakim.
Modern day grammatical English dictionaries aren’t really relevant and so we can say that, “giants” refers to something vaguely generic about subjectively unusual height of some unknown level above the parochial average (and yes, that is how useless the common parlance usage of that modern English word is).
It’s also question begging to write, “…the Greek word gigantas” without telling us what that word means: it, in that form or gigantes (or, gigantos as Josephus has it), means, “earth-born.”
To claim, “In ancient Greek poems, giants were half god and half earth” begs the question as to which giants we’re referring: I’d imagine she’s referring to Titans and/but if that’s the case we then need to ask to what generation of Titans reference is being made.
The original Titans were said to have been, “half god and half earth” only when we understand that by, “earth” Gaia is being referred to but she’s the Greek earth false goddess so it’d be, “half god and half earth-goddess” since the mythology has the sky false god mating with the earth false goddess.
It’s myopic to claim, “There are two different Hebrew words…” since there are three: 1) Nephilim, 2) Rephaim, 3) gibborim. Yes, “Many English Bibles translate both these words as giant” and they don’t do likewise with gibborim.
This means that 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.
Indeed, “Using one English word to describe two different Hebrew terms can be confusing” especially if strictly English readers chase an unspecific modern English word around a specific ancient Hebrew text—regardless of context.
Now, since she told us, “Nephalim and Rephaim…both these words as giant” when she tells us of, “one Hebrew term that is also of interest in a study of giants, and that is Anakim” indeed, we have to, “look at each term to learn the differences between the Nephilim, the Rephaim, and the Anakim” since we need to know if by, “study of giants, and that is Anakim” she means, “study of Nephalim, and that is Anakim” or, “study of Rephaim, and that is Anakim.”
She then includes a section titled, “Who Were the Nephalim?”:
According to Genesis 6:4, there were Nephalim on the earth before the Flood. This passage seems to indicate that the Nephalim were the mixed offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men, although there is some ambiguity in the text. Some biblical scholars believe that the sons of God refer to the descendants of Seth who married into the family line of Cain. Other biblical scholars believe that the sons of God were fallen angels who mated with human women.
The Book of Enoch, Jewish literature written in the third century BC, supports the view that the Nephalim were the offspring of fallen angels and human women. The meaning of the Hebrew word Nephilim is uncertain, but it seems to have a connotation of falling, perhaps meaning, “the fallen ones.”
That, “According to Genesis 6:4, there were Nephalim on the earth before the Flood” is a mere assertion, isn’t the case, and there’s no manuscripts or printed Bibles in any language from any time that states that.
That, “descendants of Seth who married into the family line of Cain” is a late-comer of a view based on myth and prejudice. 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.”
A for, “The Book of Enoch” 1 Enoch is Bible contradicting folklore from centuries, if not millennia, after the Torah, see my book “In Consideration of the Book(s) of Enoch” and also see my article How Nephilim Absconded from the Tanakh and Invaded Folkloric Territory.
The, “seems that the spies saw Anakim, and reported seeing Nephilim” paragraph is a tricky one.
“During Noah’s Flood, the Nephilim were presumably wiped out”: there’s no presumably about it, we’re told five times who survived the flood but Nephilim aren’t mentioned (Gen 7:7, 23; Heb 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20 & 2 Peter 2:5) and there’s zero reliable indication of post-flood Nephilim.
She includes a very important qualifying term in, “In Numbers 13:33, ten spies reported back to Moses that they had seen the Nephilim” since those are the 10 unfaithful, unreliable, disloyal, contradictory, embellishers whom God rebuked—to death.
“the spies saw the Anakim” but that’s myopic since the first, reliable, report in that chap has it that they saw Anakim, Amalekites, Hittites, Jebusites, Amorites, and Canaanites.
“they equated the Anakim with the descendants of the Nephilim” is myopic as well since that’s based exclusively on non-LXX versions since that version’s version of that verse doesn’t even mention Anakim.
So, “the spies saw” Anakim, Amalekites, Hittites, Jebusites, Amorites, and Canaanites but that wasn’t scary enough to dissuade the Israelites from doing what God commanded them to do so they made up a fear-mongering scare-tactic tall-tale and falsely, “reported seeing Nephilim” which would have been impossible since they didn’t make it past the flood in any way, shape, or form since God didn’t fail, didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
As for, “Based on the biblical description of the Nephilim, it is unlikely that they were particularly tall” indeed 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 Nephilology—the modern branch of which is just un-biblical neo-theo sci-fi tall-tales.
She then includes a section titled, “Who Were the Rephaim?”:
The Rephaim appear in both biblical texts and other texts from the Ancient Near East. Extrabiblical texts describe the Rephaim as heroes of old who had died and gone to the underworld. Biblically, the Rephaim were originally a people group living in the trans-Jordan region (Genesis 14:5; 15:20; Deuteronomy 2:20). By the time of the Conquest, there were very few Rephaim left alive. Og, king of Bashan, was one of the few remaining Rephaim (Deuteronomy 3:11; Joshua 12:4; 13:12).
Yet, some descendants of the Rephaim survived all the way until the time of David, when David’s mighty men killed four descendants of the Rephaim: Ishbi-Benob, Saph, Lahmi, and an unnamed man with six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot (2 Samuel 21:16–22; 1 Chronicles 20:4–8). Lahmi is described as the brother of Goliath, which suggests that Goliath was also a descendant of the Rephaim.
The biblical text indicates that Rephaim were unusually tall. Moses reported in Deuteronomy 3:11 that King Og had an iron bed that was 9 cubits (approx. 13 feet) long. However, it is unclear whether that means that Og was unnaturally tall, or if it simply means that he was wealthy enough to have an extravagant bed. The extravagance of his bed is apparent in the fact that it was made of iron.4 Iron had just been invented and was a rare metal at that time in history. So, its large size might be another indicator of its extravagance, or it might relate to Og’s height.
Scripture contains other hints, though, of the size and nature of the Rephaim. The Rephaim that David’s mighty men killed carried unusually large weapons (2 Samuel 21:16, 19; 1 Chronicles 20:5). One of them was a man of great stature who had extra fingers and toes (1 Chronicles 20:6). Additionally, there is a connection between the Rephaim and the Anakim (see below), who were also tall people (Deuteronomy 2:11).
Well, sure, by definition Rephaim, “died and gone to the underworld” just like everyone else—sans Enoch and Elijah.
It’s more of a case of that, “Lahmi is described as” one of the sons of Goliath and indeed, he was a Repha: he’s referred to as such every time he’s mentioned.
“The biblical text indicates that Rephaim were unusually tall” with, “unusually” and, “tall” being just as vague, generic, subjective, and multi-usage as, “giants.”
Deut 2 tells us that they were, “tall” subjective to the average Israelite male who was 5.0-5.3 ft. in those days.
The issue of, “an extravagant bed” is a very important one—especially considering that he was a king. Yet, indications are that it was a ritual object, not something on which he slept—see my book The King, Og of Bashan, is Dead: The Man, the Myth, the Legend—of a Nephilim Giant?
As for, “the size…of the Rephaim…carried unusually large weapons” well, regular guy Benaiah took a spear like a weaver’s beam, just like Goliath’s, from a 7.5 ft. Egyptian and successfully wielded it against him in hand-to-hand combat (2 Sam 23). Also, you can search for strongman or weightlifting competition vids and see guys who are around 6 ft. lifting 1,000 lbs.
As for, “connection between the Rephaim and the Anakim” indeed, the latter were like a clan of the former tribe.
The next subsection is, “Who Were the Anakim?”:
Although Bible translators did not translate the word Anakim as giant, the Anakim are also of interest in a study of biblical giants. Numbers 13:33 describes the Anakim as being descendants of the Nephilim, but it is unclear whether they truly were descended from the Nephilim or whether this was a falsehood reported by the spies.
Anak appears to have been a person who lived around the time of the Conquest. Anak’s father’s (or perhaps anscentor’s) name was Arba, and Anak had at least three sons (or perhaps descendants) named Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai. Joshua and Caleb, with God’s help, drove the Anakim out of the central hill country, leaving them only in Philistine cities (Joshua 11:21–22; 15:14; Judges 1:20).
Multiple Bible passages describe the Anakim as being tall people (Deuteronomy 2:10, 21; 9:2). However, their exact height is unknown.
Due to her mention of, “a study of biblical giants” her usage of that term is something vaguely generic about subjectively unusual height of some unknown level above the parochial average. And we’re back to a non-LXX version of the unreliable mere assertions in Num 13:33.
Indeed, Abra fathered Anak and there’s literally zero reliable indication they had anything to do with Nephilim.
We then move on to, “What About Goliath?” which sets off two other subsections which end the article:
Having examined the biblical references to three different people groups who might be described as giants…Goliath was likely descended from the Rephaim…Goliath may have also been one of the Anakim…
How Tall Was Goliath?
Biblical texts vary regarding the height of Goliath…The Masoretic text describes Goliath as being six cubits and a span (9’ 9”) tall…According to the Septuagint, Goliath was four cubits and a span (6’ 6”) tall…The Dead Sea Scrolls…agree with the Septuagint regarding Goliath’s height…This matches well with the Papyrus Anastasi I, in which the Egyptians encountered people in Canaan ranging in height from four to five cubits tall.
Was Goliath a Giant?
So, was Goliath just a big man? Or was he a giant? Remember, the dictionary definition of giant is: “a legendary humanlike being of great stature and strength” or a “living being of great size”…Goliath does fit the second definition of “a living being of great size.” This is true whether he was 6’ 6” or 9’ 6”. Considering that the average height of a full-grown man in the Ancient Near East was around 5’ 6”,7 Goliath would have been abnormally tall even at 6’ 6”.
Papyrus Anastasi I refers to, “An Egyptian execration text (a curse against an enemy), now in the Berlin Museum, references a people group known as the ly Anaq, very likely the Anakim. Another text, the Papyrus Anastasi I dates to around 1300 BC. It describes the Egyptian army encountering nomadic people in Canaan who were very large: four to five cubits (6’ 8” to 8’ 6”) tall.”
She also neglected to mention that Flavius Josephus also has the shorter range for him—I included a lot of info about Goliath in my book about Og.
Thus, we learn that giant can refer to 6’ 6” so that Goliath was subjectively, “a big man” and subjectively, “a giant” which is why it’s better to ignore the word giants and just say to what one is referring.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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