The comments I posted to the video are as follows.
You quoted Gen 6:4 and commented, “note, they were there before the flood and after the flood” but the verse did not refer to the flood. In fact, the flood is not even mentioned for the very first time until v. 17—a full 13 vss. later.
The verse tells you to what it’s referring, Nephilim “were on earth in those days and also afterwards, when the sons of god went to the daughters of men and had children by them” so the question is when was that?
Well, v. 1 told us “When men began to increase in number on earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God [you accidentally said, “men” here] saw that the daughters of men were beautiful and they married” so the question is when was that?
Well, it could have been as early as when Adam and Eve’s children, started having children.
Yet, the point is that Nephilim “were on earth in those days” which were “When men began to increase in number on earth and daughters were born to them” and then “also afterwards” so after “When men began to increase in number on earth and daughters were born to them” but that is all still pre-flood.
In other words, the sons of God married and mated with the daughters of men “When men began to increase in number on earth and daughters were born to them” and continued to do so until the flood.
You rightly note that “the LXX translates it ‘gigantus’ or ‘giants,’ that’s where the King James Version got that.” Just keep in mind that the ancient meaning of gigantus/giants is “earth born” and it is only the modern usage that has it as something to do with subjectively unusual height—such is not what Greek or English versions mean by gigantus/giants.
In passing, I thought to note that it seems to me that “some of these Angels fell and were in opposition to god” at the Genesis 6 affair timeline: that seems to record the very act which cased them to be considered fallen sinners.
Indeed, “some scholars believe that Yahweh gave instructions to utterly destroy entire cities of the Gentiles and Canaan land so that any remnant of the Nephilim could be destroyed” but “some scholar” are mistaken.
God told us various times why He gave such instructions and never said one single word about Nephilim—ever.
As for “a second incursion perhaps there were several of these incursions” well, I’m certain you know that no such thing in even hinted at in the Bible—also, Jude and Peter affirming that the Angels that sinned were incarcerated implies that just like the flood brought an end to Nephilim, so the flood marks the time of that incarceration (there is only a one time fall/sin of Angels in the Bible).
But what of Numbers 13:33 well, as you noted, “we have the report of the ten well, non-believing spies.” Indeed, they were unfaithful, disloyal, contradictory, embellishers who presented an “evil report” which contained five assertions about which the whole entire rest of the Bible knows nothing and whom God rebuked.
In short, there is the one and only post-flood reference to Nephilim and it is utterly unreliable. Thus, there is no such biblical thing as post-flood Nephilim—ever.
When you noted, “the Anakim were a race of giants” we’re back to the issue of what “giants” means and biblically, referring to them as such means that they were a race of Rephaim: which they were, they were a Rephaim subgroup. Regarding the modern usage of “giants” (which, again, the Bible is not doing) they were “tall” yet, subjective to the average Israelite male who in those days was 5.0-5.3 ft.
Also accurate is, “Goliath the Philistine was the descendant of Anakim.” Just in case, note that the Masoretic has him at just shy of 10 ft. but the earlier LXX, and earlier Dead Sea Scrolls, and the earlier Flavius Josephus have him at just shy of 7 ft.
Another just in case: the issue of height is irrelevant to Nephilim since only the 10 spies tell us that they were very, very tall: we have no reliable physical description of them at all.
As to “how can a spiritual being, an Angel, mixed with the human flesh” and that “we know there are cases where Angels are able to take on physical bodies”:
1) Be careful to not confuse and compound “spiritual” with “spirit” since here, you mean “spirit.”
2) That “we know…Angels are able to take on physical bodies” is nowhere stated in the Bible but is presupposed. In fact, it is putting the speculative cart before the biblical horse. Biblically, Angels are described as looking just like human males with no indication that they “take on” any bodies.
Thus, the implication is that they are, ontologically, embodied in a flesh of their own sort—and we were make “a little lower” than they. So there is no need think that “we may be entertaining Angels unaware” because they “take on physical bodies” but because such is how they naturally are.
Just a little correction about, “in Genesis 18 Abraham was visited by three Angels”: it was two Angels and YHVH Himself.
As for “at the resurrection people will neither marry or be given in marriage they will be like the Angels in heaven” indeed, Jesus was specifically talking about the loyal ones “in heaven” which is why those who did marry are considered sinners, having “left their first estate” as Jude put it.
For more details, see my relevant books.
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.