Someone going by the username The Secret History Of The World wrote an article titled Arba, The Mythical Father of the Biblical Giants.
That instantly brings to mind these questions: What’s the usage of the vague, generic, subjective, multi-usage and modern English word “giants” in English Bibles? What’s Vocal Creators’ usage? Do those two usages agree?
These questions are especially important in that we’re told of, “Arba” and, “Biblical Giants” and then, “Nephilim” so what’s what and who’s who?
The inclusion of his image may be a hint of what which follows in the article:
It’s noted, “The first mention of Arba in the Bible is related to the name Hebron. In several passages, Hebron is called Kiryat-Arba, which means ‘the city of Arba’ or ‘the city of four.’”
Reference is made to Josh 14:15 and it’s noted that Arba was, “the great man among the giants” and in Joshua 15:13 and 21:11, “‘the father of the giants’ or ‘the father of Anak’” and we’re told, “Anak was the ancestor of a race of giants called the Anakim.”
So, by giants the author means Anak since we were told the renderings/translations range from father of the giants to the father of Anak. Thus, “a race of giants called the Anakim” must mean, “a race of Anaks called the Anakim” but that seems since Anak was an individual after whom the Anakim were named—besides that Anaks is basically Anakim since the im ending is just the Hebrew male plural (when some versions have them as Anakims it’s a styled double plural: Hebrew plural and English plural).
We’re next told that Anakim, “inhabited the land of Canaan before the Israelites conquered it. The Israelites feared the Anakim for their size and strength, as reported by the spies who scouted the land in Numbers 13:28-33. The people living on the land are strong, and the cities are fortified and large. Moreover, we saw the descendants of Anak there. … We saw the Nephilim there (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim), and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.”
This ranges from a category error to a misrepresentation and missing data points.
Yes, Anakim, “inhabited the land of Canaan before the Israelites conquered it.”
That they were, “feared” as per, “the spies” lacks elucidating that it was not generically, “the spies” who said that and that there were more than one report in that chapter: the first one is reliable and the second it not.
There were 12 spies but it was the unreliable 10 who presented an, “evil report” and merely asserted that—and they were rebuked by God.
Actually, it’s later in the article that it’s actually elucidated, “twelve spies Moses sent to scout the land….ten spies spread fear and doubt among the people, saying that the land was full of giants and that they were like grasshoppers in comparison. As a result, God punished the Israelites by making them wander in the wilderness for forty years until that generation died out. Only Caleb and Joshua survived and entered the land with the next generation” since the 10 were not just punished by making them wander in the wilderness for forty years but were specifically offed.
The part about that they, “saw the Nephilim” is obviously logically, bio-logically, and theo-logically impossible since they didn’t make it past the flood in any way, shape, or form, of course, since God didn’t fail, didn’t miss a loophole, the flood wasn’t much of a waste, etc., etc., etc.
It also wasn’t mentioned that Anakim aren’t even mentioned in the LXX version of that unreliable report.
For more details, see my post Chapter sample: On the Post Flood Nephilim Proposal.
Now, till now, giants was an aka for Anakim but now, “According to Genesis 6:4, the Nephilim were another group of giants” which would mean that Nephilim were Anakim which is an incoherent and anachronistic category error.
FYI: pop-Nephilologists tend to use the modern English word giants without defining it and use it to mean various things all without telling their audience about it, leaving it to the reader to do the hard discernment work of attempting to figure out to what is being referred with any usage—a best practice is to ignore that word and just say to what one is referring.
By definition, Anakim didn’t exist until centuries post-flood.
Now, the, “Nephilim were another group of giants” line actually concluded with, “who lived before and after the flood” even thought that’s literally impossible and there’s not one single reliable sentence to support that mere assertion.
This implies that God failed, missed a loophole, the flood was much of a waste, etc., etc., etc. and just how did Nephilim get past the flood, past God?
It’s actually noted, “They were among the reasons why God decided to destroy the earth with a flood, sparing only Noah and his family” but that’s followed up directly with, “However, some Nephilim survived or reappeared after the flood, as Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33 indicated.”
Gen 6:4 indicates no such thing and that it does is merely asserted.
Num 13:33 does indicate it but it’s an unreliable evil report by unreliable guys whom God rebuked.
Post-flood Nephilology damages theology proper: it has it that, “God decided to destroy the earth with a flood, sparing only Noah and his family” but failed.
We’re next told, “Anak are part of the Nephilim”—based on one unreliable sentence from one version of an evil report by unreliable guys whom God rebuked—and it’s asked, “How did Arba become linked to Hebron and the Giants?” which biblically contextually means, “How did Arba become linked to Hebron and the Anakim clan of the Rephaim tribe?”
But, recall that based on one unreliable sentence from one version of an evil report by unreliable guys whom God rebuked, the author pulled what I term an expandio ad absurdum since from assuming Anakim were Nephilim we were told that in some even more mysteriously unknown (and impossible) way, all Rephaim, by any other name, and also Horim were Nephilim.
The answer to the posed question ranges from, “One possibility is that Arba was a historical person who lived in Hebron and was either a giant or a leader of a clan of giants” see how slippery the term giants is in the hands of pop-Nephilolgists?
That can mean, “Arba was…either a generically subjectively taller than average guy compared to the parochial average or a leader of a clan of generically subjectively taller than average guys compared to the parochial average.”
Or, “Arba was…either an Anak or a leader of a clan of Anakim” only after his son was born.
Or, “Arba was…either a Repha or a leader of a clan of Rephaim.”
Or, “Arba was…either a Nephil or a leader of a clan of Nephilim.”
A best practice is to ignore the term giant and just say what one mean.
Oddly, we’re also told, “He may have also been related to Anak or his descendants by blood or alliance” but the Bible is very clear on this point and was previously quoted, he was, “the father of Anak.”
We’re then told, “Hebron became associated with the giants” so is that, “Hebron became associated with the generically subjectively taller than average guys compared to the parochial average” or, “Hebron became associated with the Anakim” or, “Hebron became associated with the Rephaim” or, “Hebron became associated with the Nephilim”?
My interest in this article is what it builds around whoever (or whatever) Arba may have been and that’s tall-tales about Nephilim.
Num 13:33 (preferably read as one single verse disconnected from it’s context, picked up, run with, and applied) is the mother of post-flood and giant Nephilology since without it there’s no post-flood Nephilim and 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.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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