Giants = Nephilim

[socharlie]

I'm talking about University or academic sources. Particular in the field of forensic archaeology.

There have been "giant" humans found and dig sites like Saudi Arabia and China, the largest from my understanding being 1.9 meters which translates to 6ft 2in in height. But generally speaking, people had a much lower stature in those days, so 1.9 m or 6 ft 2 in was unusually tall.

Many of these larger "skeletons" are pure hoaxes and I haven't seen any proper review or academic sources verifying that such has been found as the case.

for example: Giants - Lovelock skull

Humboldt Museum

 

[Twilight Hue]

for example: Giants - Lovelock skull

Humboldt Museum

The tallest human "giant" remains being just under 6 ft tall on display. The skulls are really no larger than most people would expect them to be.

 

[Thief]

To answer your question, It's easy to know who and where Cain got his wife. It's all in the 6th day creation.

What is the mark of Cain, this too is easy, It's there in Genesis Chapter 4, what the mark of Cain is.

not wanting to digress....but....
do you see Day Six as .....evolution?

I do

 

[Thief]

several photos of large people here....

is that a notation of recessive genetics?.....left behind by the angelic

 

[socharlie]

The tallest human "giant" remains being just under 6 ft tall on display. The skulls are really no larger than most people would expect them to be.

The mummies were large, from 6 and a half feet to more that 8 feet (2 to more than 2,5 meters), and they had red hair. from the article above,
A giant mystery: 18 strange giant skeletons found in Wisconsin: Sons of god; Men of renown -- Sott.net

The Ancient Giants Who Ruled America - Graham Hancock Official Website

 

[Twilight Hue]

The mummies were large, from 6 and a half feet to more that 8 feet (2 to more than 2,5 meters), and they had red hair. from the article above,
A giant mystery: 18 strange giant skeletons found in Wisconsin: Sons of god; Men of renown -- Sott.net

I'm having trouble finding actual academic sources. Most of it are pseudoscience websites on the subject.

 

[Faithofchristian]

not wanting to digress....but....
do you see Day Six as .....evolution?

I do

Day Six is where the first male and female were created
And Adam and Eve were created on the
8th day. on the day following the 7th day.

 

[socharlie]

I'm having trouble finding actual academic sources. Most of it are pseudoscience websites on the subject.

they too PC...there was talk that Smithsonian was systematically confiscating the bones and anything controversial...
https://phys.org/news/2016-03-world-neanderthal-denisovan-ancestry-modern.html
imo, Denisovan is "giant" component.

 

[socharlie]

they too PC...there was talk that Smithsonian was systematically confiscating the bones and anything controversial...
https://phys.org/news/2016-03-world-neanderthal-denisovan-ancestry-modern.html
imo, Denisovan is "giant" component.

 

[Thief]

Day Six is where the first male and female were created
And Adam and Eve were created on the
8th day. on the day following the 7th day.

have you been reading my stuff?

but when I post of it....I note as does the new testament
Adam is a chosen son of God
and the event of the garden displays Eve as a clone
not born of woman
no navel

 

[74x12]

they too PC...there was talk that Smithsonian was systematically confiscating the bones and anything controversial...
https://phys.org/news/2016-03-world-neanderthal-denisovan-ancestry-modern.html
imo, Denisovan is "giant" component.

Not just the Smithsonian but the Vatican(sorry Catholics) is apparently hiding history on purpose. Supposedly testimonies of local people digging up giant bones have pointed to Catholic priests as the ones making sure these bones are destroyed or taken away.

There is supposedly a recently released ancient writing by Og the giant who Moses and his followers killed. In it I think he reviles the God of Israel and boasts about how he will destroy the Israelites. I doubt it is legitimately written by Og, but who knows?

 

[Ingledsva]

Like I said, I'm not saying it's the right translation. I find it interesting the Hebrew scholars of those days(when they translated the Septuagint) felt the need to translate this passage as speaking of giants.

And like I said, The word is qâdash, H6942 in Strong's, sanctified - holy people. I find it rather strange that later people decided it should be giants.

A pure assertion on your part. It's really the most obvious way to read the Genesis chapter 6 account. The "sons of seth" theory is from fairly recent Rabbis and Christian writers.

LOL! It is an "assertion" on my part that it is about YHVH's people mating with outsider Pagans - but - "obvious" to you that it is angels mating with humans???

The word nephilim (fallen ones) could be referring to the fallen angels themselves. Or else it could be a word designating giant beings. As in they are fellers. Or they can fell people etc. I agree the word "Rephaim" (giants) doesn't come into Genesis 6 directly. Yet, we can infer it from reading further in the Bible. And in the Septuagint for example Nephilim is translated as giants.

"... Now here we have an account of two things which occasioned the wickedness of the old world: - 1. The increase of mankind: Men began to multiply upon the face of the earth. This was the effect of the blessing (Gen_1:28), and yet man's corruption so abused and perverted this blessing that it was turned into a curse. Thus sin takes occasion by the mercies of God to be the more exceedingly sinful. Pro_29:16, When the wicked are multiplied, transgression increaseth. The more sinners the more sin; and the multitude of offenders emboldens men. Infectious diseases are most destructive in populous cities; and sin is a spreading leprosy. Thus in the New Testament church, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring (Act_6:1), and we read of a nation that was multiplied, not to the increase of their joy, Isa_9:3. Numerous families need to be well-governed, lest they become wicked families. 2. Mixed marriages (Gen_6:2): The sons of God (that is, the professors of religion, who were called by the name of the Lord, and called upon that name), married the daughters of men, that is, those that were profane, and strangers to God and godliness. The posterity of Seth did not keep by themselves, as they ought to have done, both for the preservation of their own purity and in detestation of the apostasy. They intermingled themselves with the excommunicated race of Cain: They took them wives of all that they chose. But what was amiss in these marriages? (1.) They chose only by the eye: They saw that they were fair, which was all they looked at. (2.) They followed the choice which their own corrupt affections made: they took all that they chose, without advice and consideration. But, (3.) That which proved of such bad consequence to them was that they married strange wives, were unequally yoked with unbelievers, 2Co_6:14. This was forbidden to Israel, Deu_7:3, Deu_7:4. It was the unhappy occasion of Solomon's apostasy (1Ki_11:1-4), and was of bad consequence to the Jews after their return out of Babylon, Ezr_9:1, Ezr_9:2..." Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible

Angels can size themselves accordingly. I think the point of whether or not their children were giants is only secondary to the main point here which is that angels had offspring with earth women.

The idea that Angels have sex with humans is ridiculous. I have shown Jewish writings which counter the angel idea, saying these are humans, not angels, and they make more sense.

Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

2Sa 7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are elohiym; and all of you are bên sons/children of the most High.

You folks seem to have missed a few very important verses in YOUR books.

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

Luke 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, 38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Rom. 8:14, "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God."

Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

If humans fit the verses, - it makes more sense to go with humans, rather then the supernatural.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

have you been reading my stuff?

but when I post of it....I note as does the new testament
Adam is a chosen son of God
and the event of the garden displays Eve as a clone
not born of woman
no navel

Adam is a hermaphrodite - both male and female - split apart by YHVH.

The clone of a male - would be another male.

*

 

[74x12]

And like I said, The word is qâdash, H6942 in Strong's, sanctified - holy people. I find it rather strange that later people decided it should be giants.

I meant the word Nephilim. Which means fallen ones. The other phrase we're concerned with is obviously the sons of God.

LOL! It is an "assertion" on my part that it is about YHVH's people mating with outsider Pagans - but - "obvious" to you that it is angels mating with humans???

... I used to believe the sons of Seth theory. But once I found out more I realized the sons of Seth theory didn't quite add up. The idea that angels did this in ancient times is inconvenient. People are uncomfortable with the idea. So they invented the sons of Seth theory.

"... Now here we have an account of two things which occasioned the wickedness of the old world: - 1. The increase of mankind: Men began to multiply upon the face of the earth. This was the effect of the blessing (Gen_1:28), and yet man's corruption so abused and perverted this blessing that it was turned into a curse. Thus sin takes occasion by the mercies of God to be the more exceedingly sinful. Pro_29:16, When the wicked are multiplied, transgression increaseth. The more sinners the more sin; and the multitude of offenders emboldens men. Infectious diseases are most destructive in populous cities; and sin is a spreading leprosy. Thus in the New Testament church, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring (Act_6:1), and we read of a nation that was multiplied, not to the increase of their joy, Isa_9:3. Numerous families need to be well-governed, lest they become wicked families. 2. Mixed marriages (Gen_6:2): The sons of God (that is, the professors of religion, who were called by the name of the Lord, and called upon that name), married the daughters of men, that is, those that were profane, and strangers to God and godliness. The posterity of Seth did not keep by themselves, as they ought to have done, both for the preservation of their own purity and in detestation of the apostasy. They intermingled themselves with the excommunicated race of Cain: They took them wives of all that they chose. But what was amiss in these marriages? (1.) They chose only by the eye: They saw that they were fair, which was all they looked at. (2.) They followed the choice which their own corrupt affections made: they took all that they chose, without advice and consideration. But, (3.) That which proved of such bad consequence to them was that they married strange wives, were unequally yoked with unbelievers, 2Co_6:14. This was forbidden to Israel, Deu_7:3, Deu_7:4. It was the unhappy occasion of Solomon's apostasy (1Ki_11:1-4), and was of bad consequence to the Jews after their return out of Babylon, Ezr_9:1, Ezr_9:2..." Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible

But Matthew Henry has no proof that it's about the sons of Seth marrying the daughters of Cain or whatever. If that were true, then why doesn't the scripture go ahead and say so? Why does it say they married the "daughters of ADAM"? Matthew Henry has no answer (God rest His soul) but anyway, the point is that Sons of Seth are obviously descended from Adam also. So why is it a big deal for sons of Adam to marry daughters of Adam? How does he even know the whole race of Cain was excommunicated? That's pretty far-fetched. What allowed the sons of Seth to take wives of all they chose? Doesn't that seem strange to you? They must have been extremely good looking or something? Maybe they had lots of money and nice cars ... See that's kind of silly; it's obviously talking about supernatural beings who were able to have any woman they wanted and no one could or would stop them. Most likely they were worshiped as "gods" by many of the people of those days.

The idea that Angels have sex with humans is ridiculous. I have shown Jewish writings which counter the angel idea, saying these are humans, not angels, and they make more sense.

No it isn't. We find in multiple places that angels became corporeal to fulfill their mission. The two angels that God sent to Sodom even ate and drank with Abraham first. (story begins in Genesis 18) Then when they went to Sodom the people their apparently attempted to rape them; which didn't end well for Sodom ... But anyway, the point is they seem to have been very corporeal.

Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

This is about Jesus Christ ... yes Adam was the son of God (Luke 3:37) but not the begotten son of God. Neither are the angels born of God. They're created sons like Adam was.

When God rebukes Job out of the whirlwind. He begins to question Job about things because Job was acting like he knew everything. So, God asks Job if Job was there when the "morning stars" sang and all the "sons of God" shouted for joy. This is definitely not talking about humans but is about angels.

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:7)

2Sa 7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:

Yes this is again foreshadowing the Messiah ...

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are elohiym; and all of you are bên sons/children of the most High.

This psalm is prophecy addressed to those called "gods". They are angelic beings. This is a counsel of angels set up in some authority over the affairs of humans; who have clearly rebelled against Yah's good ways and have decided to do things their own way. This is why they will "die like men" and "fall like one of the princes". I believe the last reference to "one of the princes" is probably satan who Jesus saw fall from heaven like lightening. And obviously you clearly don't need to be told "you are going to die like a man" if you are a man do you? You already know that. But these are angelic beings so they have to be told they will die like men.

I believe these are the "princes of this world" who Paul mentions that "would not have slain the Lord of glory" if they had known the wisdom of God. (1 Cor. 2:8) Also see Daniel 10:20 where two "princes" are mentioned. The prince of Grecia and the prince of Persia. These are clearly spiritual "angelic" beings called princes of certain gentile nations because they oppose the angel that God sent from heaven.

You folks seem to have missed a few very important verses in YOUR books.

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

Thou are my Son, this day I have begotten thee. Again it's about the begotten Son of God. They're created sons whereas He is begotten.

As for the second part "I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son" Alright, that's about a specific quote from Messianic prophecy. (2 Samuel 7:14, 1 Chronicles 17:13) These prophecies were not spoken to angels. It is prophecy to the Messiah and in context speaks of His eternal reign and throne. So that's definitely not said to any angel at any time.

Luke 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, 38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Alright, as I said Adam was created the son of God.

Rom. 8:14, "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God."

What about angels who are led by the Spirit of God?

But seriously, this was written in the new Covenant we have the sonship restored to us through Jesus Christ who is the Son of God and the "second Adam". As it says in the next verse (Rom. 8:15) we've received the "Spirit of Adoption" and He comes into our hearts through the Spirit we cry "Abba Father" Also see Galatians 4:6.

Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Yes the angels who are in heaven. God did not give marriage to the angels; especially not with mortal earth women. Those angels who came down from heaven to earth in corporeal form to marry earth women were committing sin. This is what Jude is talking about the "angels who kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation". (Jude 1:6)

If humans fit the verses, - it makes more sense to go with humans, rather then the supernatural.

I know it may be shocking to think that fallen angels did this. In fact I used to believe the sons of Seth interpretation because that's what I read in a Bible study book and I didn't know better. However, once I read the book of Enoch I realized there had to be more to it. So I studied further and became convinced the book of Enoch was correct at least about Genesis chapter 6.

 

[Ingledsva]

The mummies were large, from 6 and a half feet to more that 8 feet (2 to more than 2,5 meters), and they had red hair. from the article above,
A giant mystery: 18 strange giant skeletons found in Wisconsin: Sons of god; Men of renown -- Sott.net

The Ancient Giants Who Ruled America - Graham Hancock Official Website

We have people in modern times with Gigantism - whom were almost 8 feet tall. And unofficially even taller.

They are not ancestors of giants. It is a medical problem.

*

 

[socharlie]

We have people in modern times with Gigantism - whom were almost 8 feet tall. And unofficially even taller.

They are not ancestors of giants. It is a medical problem.

*

Medical problem is now, but if they all were one 2.5 meter talk, it is not a medical problem it is norm.

 

[Ingledsva]

I meant the word Nephilim. Which means fallen ones. The other phrase we're concerned with is obviously the sons of God. ... I used to believe the sons of Seth theory. But once I found out more I realized the sons of Seth theory didn't quite add up. The idea that angels did this in ancient times is inconvenient. People are uncomfortable with the idea. So they invented the sons of Seth theory.

It is not "inconvenient," it is ridiculous to think angelic beings mated with humans.

But Matthew Henry has no proof that it's about the sons of Seth marrying the daughters of Cain or whatever. If that were true, then why doesn't the scripture go ahead and say so? Why does it say they married the "daughters of ADAM"? Matthew Henry has no answer (God rest His soul) but anyway, the point is that Sons of Seth are obviously descended from Adam also. So why is it a big deal for sons of Adam to marry daughters of Adam? How does he even know the whole race of Cain was excommunicated? That's pretty far-fetched. What allowed the sons of Seth to take wives of all they chose? Doesn't that seem strange to you? They must have been extremely good looking or something? Maybe they had lots of money and nice cars ... See that's kind of silly; it's obviously talking about supernatural beings who were able to have any woman they wanted and no one could or would stop them. Most likely they were worshiped as "gods" by many of the people of those days.

And you have no proof of supernatural mating. The human makes far more sense in those verses.

No it isn't. We find in multiple places that angels became corporeal to fulfill their mission. The two angels that God sent to Sodom even ate and drank with Abraham first. (story begins in Genesis 18) Then when they went to Sodom the people their apparently attempted to rape them; which didn't end well for Sodom ... But anyway, the point is they seem to have been very corporeal.

Not sure what your point is here? Angels "appearing" human does not mean they can mate with women. Not their job. Also obviously not giants.

This is about Jesus Christ ... yes Adam was the son of God (Luke 3:37) but not the begotten son of God. Neither are the angels born of God. They're created sons like Adam was.

Again what is your point? You claimed these sons of God were angels. Also I find no proof that Jesus was a begotten son of God in any other sense then King David was called a begotten son. Jesus only claimed to be the awaited Messiah, - a HUMAN from the line of David.

When God rebukes Job out of the whirlwind. He begins to question Job about things because Job was acting like he knew everything. So, God asks Job if Job was there when the "morning stars" sang and all the "sons of God" shouted for joy. This is definitely not talking about humans but is about angels.

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:7)

1. It could be referring to the 5th and 6th day creation, animals and humans, as the 4th day light is created, - so on the 5th - the first morning stars. Followed by the joy of the created.

2. As usual the word has multiple meanings including Firstborn, servants, stewards, etc. Firstborn humans and animals. Angels are servants and stewards.

3. So we could also read it as -

When the morning stars sang together, and all the Firstborn of God shouted for joy?

When the morning stars sang together, and all the creations of God shouted for joy?

When the morning stars sang together, and all the servants/stewards of God shouted for joy?

Angels are called servants and stewards of God.

Yes this is again foreshadowing the Messiah ...(2 Sa 7:14)

No it isn't. It is about Solomon whom immediately followed King David to the throne.

2Sa 7:12 And when thy (King David) days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels (his son Solomon), and I will establish his kingdom.

2Sa 7:13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. (Solomon built the Temple)

2Sa 7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son (same as his father David). If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:

2Sa 7:15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.

This psalm is prophecy addressed to those called "gods". They are angelic beings. This is a counsel of angels set up in some authority over the affairs of humans; who have clearly rebelled against Yah's good ways and have decided to do things their own way. This is why they will "die like men" and "fall like one of the princes". I believe the last reference to "one of the princes" is probably satan who Jesus saw fall from heaven like lightening. And obviously you clearly don't need to be told "you are going to die like a man" if you are a man do you? You already know that. But these are angelic beings so they have to be told they will die like men.

No Psalm 82: isn't. Judges, Kings, etc., are called Elohiym - sons of God.

Psa 82:1 A Psalm of Asaph: The Elohiym/Magistrates/Judges stand to assembly before El (Almighty) the Elohiym He to judge.

Psa 82:2 For how long will you judge unjustly, and by reason of, advance the wicked?

Psa 82:3 Defend the weak and bereaved, needy and destitute, be righteous!

Psa 82:4 Deliver the weak and destitute from the hand of the wicked.

Psa 82:5 Of a truth, they observe and don't understand. In misery they walk. Rotten is the whole foundation.

Psa 82:6 I said Elohiym/Judges thou are; and sons elevated above all others!

Psa 82:7 Nevertheless as human beings, shall die, and of a certainty, as all leaders, fall.

Psa 82:8 Arise o Elohiym/Judges, execute judgment on the land/nation; for you shall inherit the whole nation/people.

No angels are inheriting the earth.

Getting too long - part 2 will follow tomorrow.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Medical problem is now, but if they all were one 2.5 meter talk, it is not a medical problem it is norm.

However it doesn't actually say that. The word was later translated as giants. It means great men, men of renown, great or fierce warriors, etc.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

According to Jewish tradition Noah's wife Naamah was from the line of the nephilim. But since Noah's genealogy was pure, his seed kept their offspring from being born nephilim. God had commanded Noah to be fruitful and multiply. But he, like Abraham later, was impotent and couldn't fulfill the command. So he became distraught and started drinking. So Ham hatched a plot to secretly impregnate Naamah so that Noah would think he did it.

Unfortunately, Ham possessed recessive nephilim genes such that when combined with Naamah's, Canaan was born a full technicolor nephilim. The nephilim hid on the ark in the genes of Naamah and Ham. . . But don't be too perturbed by that. Our so-great salvation required it. Without Canaan, Jesus could not have been born. . . Had the flood completely destroyed the nephilim Jesus wouldn't have been born.

The Lord works in mysterious ways. John

All of that is outside what Tanakh actually says. Naphilim means fallen.

If we get away from the more fanciful angel matings, - we are left with a more logical, Ham became "fallen" - evil, - by his act of uncovering Noah, which can also mean he raped Noah, rather than his wife.

His FALLEN (evil) line leads to the Canaanites.

*

 

[socharlie]

However it doesn't actually say that. The word was later translated as giants. It means great men, men of renown, great or fierce warriors, etc.

*

I am not sure that it is correct translation , Nachmanides in his
" Commentary on the Torah" said that it means "inferior" not Giants. Inferior to Sons of God. Nachmanides is one of recognized authority.