I want to say that I will be reviewing Stephen Quayle’s writings but since he is a plagiarist I actually know not who wrote that which I will be quoting, I only know it was published within a book titled “Genesis 6 Giants” which is said to be by Quayle but it does contain plagiarized material: chapters and chapters of it as I proved here.
Stephen Quayle, or whomever, asserts, “The Rephaim giants that were produced by the angel/mankind marriage” but there is absolute zero evidence of this—we will find that he is playing fast and loose with terminology (and that, based on other assertions for which there is absolute zero evidence).
He holds to the Angel view of the Genesis 6 affair and argues thusly against the Sethite view, “the best demonstration that the parents of these creatures were not simply descendants of Cain and Seth” is that “Had they been, they would have produced human offspring, rather than the Rephaim giants. The Rephaim were…large beings or giants.
I also reject the (historically late-comer) Sethite view but not for such fallacious reasons.
At this point (before getting to Numbers 13), I will note that arguing that marriages between mere humans could not result in “creatures…giants…large beings or giants” is fallacious since Genesis 6 1) does not refer to Rephaim but to Nephilim and 2) offers no physical description of them.
Stephen Quayle wrote, “When the Greek Septuagint was created, the Hebrew word Nephilim was translated into Greek as gegenes. This is the same word used in Greek mythology for the ‘Titans,’ creatures created through the interbreeding of the Greek gods and human beings. The English words ‘genes’ and ‘genetics’ are built around the same root word as gegenes; genea meaning ‘breed’ or ‘kin d.’ Thus, the choice of this word again suggests a genetic component to the creation of these giants.”
Within this context, it does not matter much but the Greek is actually “gigantes” or “gigas” which means “earth-born” so he is playing upon the “born” part to reference breed or kin d.
Another technical point is that Nephilim was not translated into that Greek word but was rendered since Nephilim is plural for fallen or to fall and has nothing to do with earth or born.
He was appealing to genetics in order to assert, “In other words, the ‘lab rats’ of the past were human beings, with the ‘scientists’ conducting their genetic research were fallen angels” (sic.) since, apparently, having physical sex is conducting their genetic research—go figure. Yet, such is how pop-researchers such as Quayle weave their theo-sci-fi tall tales: he turned regular physical mating into genetic manipulation.
Stephen Quayle claims that the “modification of creatures also harks back to the idea that the pre-Adamic creation might have involved such work on the part of angels” since he holds to the anti-biblical gap-theory fantasy.
He urges us to “Think about the unbelievably large sizes of some of the ancient dinosaurs. That such monstrosities might have evolved (again without any ‘missing links’ in the fossil record) defies logic. But that such monsters might have been created by an evil regime of fallen angels or their giant offspring is something that doesn’t stretch logic nearly as far – provided one is able to shed the propaganda that has bombarded the public over the years in regard to Evolution.”
This is just part of the theo-sci-fi tall tale that arbitrarily attributes anything subjectively odd to “an evil regime.”
Ironically, Quayle holds to evolution since he claims that disembodied/spirit Angels came to Earth, possessed various animals (including fish), then underwent the evolutionary process until they became human, and then mated with non-Angel humans.
Stephen Quayle wrote:
“One might imagine that the giants of pre-Adamic times and pre-Noah’s flood times have long since vanished. But this is not the case. Because several other Hebrew word translated as ‘giant’ are used in the Bible, and there’s one other place where the actual word Nephilim is employed.
And it appears outside of the Genesis 6 passage, much later in history and after the flood. This passage appears in Numbers 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.’
This passage tells of a time long after Noah’s flood, which God sent to wipe out the offspring of the angel/human being interbreeding. That the Raphaim giants would be present in Canaan at this point in history can mean only one thing: the interbreeding between angels and mankind can and has happened not just once, and not just in the distant past before the Great Flood.”
One might imagine that any such as thing as “giants of pre-Adamic times” ever existed—all one could do is imagine such a thing.
The reference to where “the actual word Nephilim is employed” is key: they word is employed, the word appear—but Nephilim do not, they were not alive on the ground at the time, reference is made to them but they were not there.
Note a typical pop-researcher move which is to read all the way to Numbers 13:33 and use it to the loop back and misinterpret Genesis 6:4.
Because the word is employed in Numbers which records “after Noah’s flood” events, then Genesis’ reference to “those days and also after that” must refer to the flood—which it does not, it refers to “when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men and children were born to them” and after they first did so but still all pre-flood.
Now, Quayle wrote that Noah’s flood was what “God sent to wipe out the off spring of the angel/human being interbreeding,” he goes on to write, “God destroyed the Earth with a flood to wipe the Rephaim giants from the face of the Earth during Noah’s time” yet, “is not the case” that they “have long since vanished” which is a contradiction that implies that God failed.
See, (and this is typical of pop-researchers) he claimed that God meant to wipe out the offspring and destroyed the Earth to do so and yet, they still or again lived post flood so God could not get the job done and the flood was essentially a waste.
Now, since he artificially inserts “Raphaim” (or “Rephaim,” he spells it both ways: which may be a hint as to when he is writing it vs. whomever he is copying and pasting into his book without attribution) he thinks that “Raphaim giants…present in Canaan” means they made it past the flood or returned.
I agree that “the interbreeding between angels and mankind can and has happened not just once” but it happened multiple times only pre-flood—and post-Adam since Genesis 6:1-2 tells us “when men [‘āḏām] began to multiply on the face of the earth [‘ăḏāmâ], and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men [baṯ ‘āḏām] that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.”
Stephen Quayle writes, “A careful reading of the first introduction of this word in Genesis also shows that the Rephaim giants have appeared more than one time in history. The verses don’t say that the first account was the only time this occurred.”
This is incoherent since he refers to how “the first introduction of this word” Nephilim “shows that the Rephaim giants…” who are not mentioned in Genesis at all.
True, “The verses don’t say that the first account was the only time this occurred” but do they really have to when it is so very clearly stated that it was “when men began to multiply on the face of the earth” and additionally when “daughters were born unto them” (perhaps as early as when Adam and Eve’s children started having children) was when “the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose”?
Thus, he ends up arguing, again, that since “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that” then we should “Notice that there were giants ‘in those days’ and ‘also after that’ time as well. Since the giants could only be coming from the sons of God interbreeding with the daughters of men, and since God wiped out the first instance of this with the Great Flood, this would have to mean that such couplings have occurred more than just once before the flood.”
Now since he is intermixing Nephilim (who were strictly pre-flood hybrids) and Rephaim (who were strictly post-flood humans), and both are rendered in some English versions as “giants” then “the giants could only be coming from the sons of God interbreeding with the daughters of men” which is incoherent.
Note that the entire post-flood Nephilim theory is literally based on one verse, Numbers 13:33 which is a rebuked evil report, which then becomes a worldview hermeneutic via which other texts are misinterpreted in order to force-fit them into the grand theory—this and that he mistakenly thinks that all references to “giants” are to pre-flood beings.
Now, Stephen Quayle also argues, “The Jewish spies, who reported the land was filled with Rephaim giants, take the time to describe the creatures’ size in relationship to human beings.
The spies tell those who listen that the Jews were like grasshoppers both in the light of the giants as well as in the sight of the spies.
If one stops to consider the relationship presented here, even given possible exaggeration of the differences in the mind of the spies, it is only logical to assume that the ‘sons of Anak’ were huge, dwarfing the human beings who saw them.”
He first writes generically of “The Jewish spies” but then specifies “the majority of the Jewish spies…the nay-sayers” since the twelve spies end up splitting to ten unfaithful, disloyal, contradictory, embellishing, spies whom God rebuked vs. Caleb and Joshua.
Now, we must dissect his claims since the twelve “reported the land was filled with Rephaim” but not Nephilim nor that any of them were “giants.”
Both sides first agree that the various, by the way, peoples in the land (some who were Rephaim) were “strong” but then the ten concoct a fear-mongering scare-tactic tall tale about Anakim (a Rephaim subgroup) being related to Nephilim and that Nephilim were very, very, very tall.
Again, it was not “The spies” who “tell those who listen…” but that was the ten.
Even taking the evil report as is, they were still not claiming that “the ‘sons of Anak’ were huge” but that the Nephilim were—of Anakim, we only know that they were, on average, “tall” compared to Israelites of those days, males of whom averaged 5.0-5.3 ft.
Thus, when Stephen Quayle writes, “The passage about the giants in Numbers also explains why the word Rephaim is rightly translated into ‘giants’ in English” is incoherent on various levels.
Recall that Quayle wrote that Noah’s flood was what “God sent to wipe out the off spring of the angel/human being interbreeding…God destroyed the Earth with a flood to wipe the Rephaim giants from the face of the Earth during Noah’s time” yet, “is not the case” that they “have long since vanished.”
Well, I pick up one of those quotes from “Just as God destroyed the Earth with a flood to wipe the Rephaim giants from the face of the Earth during Noah’s time, so he used the flood of invading Jews flowing into the Promised Land to wipe out the giants they encountered.”
This is a case of better late than never, I suppose: God failed to do the job via the flood and so used Jews to accomplish the task.
Stephen Quayle writes:
“Realizing that some of the cities in the Promised Land were filled with Rephaim explains why God ordered some of the cities totally destroyed, with the citizens in them to be put under the edge of the sword.
God didn’t want any of these monsters to once again pollute the human gene pool. God dealt out the same total destruction to these beings as he had with Noah’s Flood.
Sadly, most Christians and Jews are unaware of the biblical accounts that giants were found far and wide in the Promised Land. Most artwork, movies and the like, further the ignorance by portraying everyone but Goliath as being normal size.”
God Himself explains various times why He ordered such actions and never once mentioned Nephilim, nor (genetic) relation to them thus, nor that it was due to Rephaim having anything to do with Nephilim—see chapter “Herem: Were Post-Flood Nephilim Dedicated to Destruction?” of my book What Does the Bible Say About Giants and Nephilim? A Styled Giantology and Nephilology.
But at least the job was finally accomplished since “God didn’t want any of these monsters to once again pollute the human gene pool.”
As for Christians and Jews being unaware and such ignorance leading to “portraying everyone but Goliath as being normal size” well, we are only told two specific heights in the Bible and the tallest of those is 7.5 ft.
Stephen Quayle quotes, “Og king of Bashan…bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? Nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man” and tells us “the iron bed described in this passage could accommodate an individual over twelve feet tall – far larger than would be expected if the giant were simply a victim of gigantism.”
Now, let us begin commonsensically, “the iron bed…could accommodate” one little baby yet, could also accommodate an individual over twelve feet tall—which is a styled admission that we are never told his height.
Bottom line is that archeologists have found “beds” of such dimensions and they are not meant to be slept upon, they were ritual items upon which supposed gods and alleged goddesses mated.
He tells us that Gary Stearman (who contradicts the Bible by claiming that Adam and Eve were not naked before the fall) stated the following about “ruins in the region that the Canaanites occupied,” “Today, tourists marvel at the ruins in this region. They are of truly gigantic proportion” and goes into what I identify as a non sequitur that large things must have been built for and by large people.
Thus, Stephen Quayle writes:
“…in Numbers when the Rephaim giants re described as the sons of Anak; the spies then note with which cities these giants are associated. Later, when giants are referred to in the Old Testament the writer occasionally notes that the giant was like those found in one of these cities. This then gives the ‘link’ to prove that these giants are also Rephaim giants, even though a different Hebrew word is being used to describe them.
The key to making these relationships is in Numbers:
Nevertheless the people are strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are walled, and very great: and moreover we saw the children of Anak there. The Amale kites dwell in the land of the south: and the Hittites, and the Jebusites, and the Amorites, dwell in the mountains: and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and by the coast of Jordan.
Thus, when Moses uses another Hebrew term for ‘giant,’ he took pains to show the link between this term and the Rephaim giants during his cataloging of the peoples who were dwelling in the Promised Land:
The Emim dwelt therein in times past, a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim, who also were accounted giants as the Anakim; but the Moabites call them Emim.
The word translated as ‘giant’ here is Raphah (or Rephaim in its plural form), a word that has several meanings including ‘giant,’ ‘ghost,’ and ‘deceased.’”
Interestingly, the original report in Numbers 13 is accepted as is and specifies were the various people groups they saw lived. Yet, when the ten produce their evil report they claim they saw Nephilim but do not specify whereabouts which is a missing data point.
Now, since some render “Rephaim” as “giants” then Quayle is confusing himself, and his undiscerning readers, when he writes sentences such as “Rephaim giants” since, biblically, that means “Rephaim Rephaim.” Of course there were Rephaim tribes and subgroups—what of it?
Also, of the various meanings of Repha/“Raphah” “giant” is only claimed by undiscerning Bible dictionaries or encyclopedias that are biased by the evil report and are not based on etymology. Etymologically, repha/rapha ranges in meaning from dead to healing.
Stephen Quayle claims, “The biblical contention that giants roamed the Promised Land is supported by archeogical evidence” of the non sequitur sort, “as well as the Ras S[h]amra Texts, discovered in 1928, which make frequent mention of the Rephaim.” Now, since Ras Shamra is a Ugaritic text then this means that dead kings and/or heroes are at first referred to as just that: kings and/or heroes.
Yet, once those kings and/or heroes are long dead, they are then called Rephaim. Thus, Rephaim are long dead humans—who, according to such Pagan texts, can be summoned via occult rituals.
We are also told about how Flavius Josephus wrote, “And when they had taken it, they slew all the inhabitants. There were till then left a race of giants, who had bodies so large, and countenances so entirely different from other men, that they were surprising to the sight and terrible to the hearing. The bones of these men are still shown to this very day, unlike to any credible relations of other men.”
Of course, Josephus was writing that millennia after the fact and he was not an expert anatomist to know whether those bones were human or whale, dinosaur, pachyderm, etc.
Lastly—here we go again—Quayle wrote that Noah’s flood was what “God sent to wipe out the off spring of the angel/human being interbreeding…God destroyed the Earth with a flood to wipe the Rephaim giants from the face of the Earth during Noah’s time” yet, “is not the case” that they “have long since vanished” yet, “he used the flood of invading Jews flowing into the Promised Land to wipe out the giants they encountered” since “God didn’t want any of these monsters to once again pollute the human gene pool” and so “God had to destroy these beings in order to save mankind.”
And yet, he goes on to tell us of “races of giants,” he tell us that “their marks are still seen there even today” since “the Hebrew fighters tired of their work and didn’t wipe out the very last of the Rephaim giants in the Promised Land. After seven years of fighting, Joshua permitted them to stop” and so Anakim “migrated northward over the next millennium, traveling westward through Europe.”
So, God sent the flood to wipe them out but failed so He then sent the invading Jews but they got tired so they are with us till this day and thus, so much for not polluting the human gene pool and so much for saving mankind.
For more details, see my various Nephilim related books, including Nephilim and Giants As Per Pop-Researchers wherein I featured Quayle.
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.