Giants on the Earth
Presented By: Maqsood Hasni
Giant Adj.
A person or thing of great size.
A person or thing of extraordinary power, significance, or importance: a giant in the field of physics; automotive industry giants.
Greek Mythology. One of a race of humanlike beings of enormous strength and stature who were destroyed in battle with the Olympians. A being in folklore or myth similar to one of these beings.
Marked by exceptionally great size, magnitude, or power: a giant wave; a giant impact.
Beside “sons of God,” Moses wrote that there were giants or nephilim in the earth in those days. Many modernists, who reject the inspiration of Scripture, assume that belief in giants is a relic of past superstitious ages. The present age is supposedly free from superstition! Others, however, assume this historical record teaches that giants or nephilim were the progeny of angels and women. But let’s not assume. Let’s find the facts. Notice what Moses was inspired to write. Long before the flood occurred, giants existed on the earth “and also AFTER THAT, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men...” So the giants were not the progeny of those marriages. They lived before the marriages occurred.
The progeny of those marriages were not the giants, but “mighty men, which were of old, men of renown” (Gen. 6:4).
Because the Septuagint translates the word nephilim as "giant" -- and the King James Version of the Bible carried this definition through -- the majority of scholars are inclined to believe that these were indeed men of gigantic stature. This is consistent with the only other occurrence of the word in Numbers 13:33, where the returning spies describe
themselves as being "grasshoppers" by comparison with the nephilim. The word itself is generally considered to be derived from the verb naphal -- meaning "to fall." From this some so-called experts take a huge leap and interpret nephilim to mean "those fallen from heaven" -- in reference to their supposed angelic origins. Thus, according to this line of illogical thinking, the nephilim are thought to be a fantastic race of beings because they are assumed to be the offspring of the
mythological marriages described in verse 2 of Genesis 6!
Or, extrapolating in the reverse direction, it is argued that the "sons of God" must be angels because the word nephilim means fallen from heaven! In either case no one proposes that Goliath, or the sons of
Anak, had angelic forebears -- so WHY suggest it here? Note that
the "from heaven" part has to be provided artificially. In fact, the New
Hebrew and English Lexicon by Brown, Driver and Briggs provide
several definitions, including falling by accident -- by violent death; in prostration -- upon (attack), and others.
According to the Bible dictionary Insight on the Scriptures, the word nephilim is defined as follows
--"(Neph'i.lim) [Fellers; Those Who Cause [Others] to Fall Down]. This is a transliteration of the Hebrew word nephi.lim', plural in its three
occurrences in the Bible. (Ge 6:4; Nu 13:33 [twice]) It evidently stems from the causative form of the Hebrew word na.phal' (fall) as found, for example, in 2 Kings 3:19; 19:7" (Vol. 2, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of NY, Inc. 1988, page 491).
While it is clear that a tribe of tall people lived in those days, they were NOT the offspring of the marriages or liaisons mentioned in verses 2 and 4. The nephilim, as a people, were also violent attackers, invaders and the like -- based on the idea that naphal should be interpreted as "to fall upon." Moses noted that these men lived prior to the flood and also AFTERWARD in the land of Canaan -- which, in itself, indicates that Noah and his family weren't the only ones who made it through the flood. (Send for our article,
Did Noah's Flood Cover the Highest Mountains?).
In the antediluvian world the Sethites may well have become warlike as part of their assimilation into the Cainites through the marriages mentioned in Genesis 6:2 and 4 or, perhaps, they were subjugated by tyrants. So one should consider not so much the FACT of the nephilim -- but the EFFECT they may have had on the population. Moses, writing through YEHOVAH's inspiration, is more than likely making a comparison between the influence of the godless (which could include the nephilim) BEFORE the flood and their influence AFTER the flood when the Israelites were trying to occupy the Promised Land. The result in the case of the former was a flood that emptied the land and, in the latter case, YEHOVAH's people were condemned to forty years' wandering in the wilderness. On each of these occasions it seems evident that these fierce warriors of large stature caused the faithful to loose faith through lack of courage -- rather than trusting in YEHOVAH God and acting according to His will. It is preferable, we believe, to seek an explanation that takes into account MORE than the mere existence and physical attributes of the giants mentioned in Genesis 6:4. Just like the mere fact of the
marriages is NOT the key problem in verse 2 -- but rather the EFFECT of those marriages on those who desire to be faithful to YEHOVAH God -- so also the effect of the tyrannical warrior-type people should be given a SPIRITUAL, rather than wholly physical, interpretation.
This will come as a surprise -- yes, a shock, to most of you. The remains of those giants and mighty men have been found by
geologists and archeologists! Once and for all time, the accusation that Bible history is untrustworthy is disproved. It is religious superstition and evolutionary theory that are the fables!
Much of the evidence about pre-flood life can be found in an easy-to-read book entitled, Mankind So Far, by William Howells. Although written by an evolutionist, this book contains facts which substantiate the historical account in Genesis. The author did not understand the evidence he found, because he rejected the Bible revelation and invented his own theories.
Most every child has heard of the cave-men or the Neanderthals. Far from being sub-men,
they were the giants of old. Here is what Howells says of them:
“The Neanderthal brain was most positively and definitely not smaller than our own; indeed, and this is rather a bitter pill, it appears to have been perhaps a little
larger. The middle-aged
man of La Chapelle-aux-Saints had a brain whose volume was about 1,625 cubic centimeters, which is a figure that only a
fraction of modern
European men can match...” (pp. 165-166).
“A skull of the Neanderthals has a characteristic and striking form. It is
huge and thick. It considerably exceeds that of any modern type both
in length and in breadth..." (pp. 166).
Far from being “half-way up from the ape,” these giants who roamed the earth possessed a “squat, heavily built physique of great
strength”; their “teeth were robust and somewhat larger than ours, but not more primitive” (p. 168).
‘‘...the excellence of their stone working, which was as good as anything which had yet been achieved...” was amazing. Their
characteristic tool was the fist ax”so heavy as to be surprising, for the men of the age were surely not monsters.” (pp. 164, 118). Not
monsters?
But the facts prove it! The Bible says so. “There were giants in the earth in those days!”
They were divided into several races, being scattered over much of Europe, North Africa and parts of Russia. The Bible does not give their specific origin other than they must have been descendants of Adam, the first man (I Cor. 15:45). Genesis 1:9 disproves the possibility that they roamed before the creation of Adam. They appeared in the earth in the days soon after Adam and before the flood -- “in those days.” Undoubtedly they were biological mutations.
In Rhodesia, Africa, a skull has been found of the same general type which is “really colossal in size...” (p. 176).
The Heidelberg jaw is also immense.
The Wajak skulls of the Australian area also have a large brain and heavy bone construction. Few skulls of much the same sort (and date) have come to light in South Africa; the important ones being the
Florisbad, Fish, Hock, Boskop, and Springbok Flats crania. They are all old and big. “This is especially true of the enormous Boskop skull (with a capacity of perhaps 1,800 cubic centimeters)” (pp. 191-192). In old river gravels near Bathurst, NSW, Australia, huge stone artifacts -- clubs, pounders, adzes, chisels, knives and hand axes -- all of
tremendous weight, lie scattered over a wide area. These weigh
anything from 8, 10, 15, to 21 and 25 pounds, implements which only men of tremendous proportions could possibly have made and used. Estimates for the actual size of these men range from 10 to 12 feet tall and over, weighing from 500 to 600 lbs.
Even during David’s time the Bible speaks of giants such as Goliath, who may have measured 10 feet tall, and who carried armor weighing 180 pounds, as well as a spear whose head alone weighed 21 pounds. Goliath had several children who are mentioned in 2 Samuel 21, who were later slain by Abashai and Elhanan. Goliath’s brother had a "spear which was like the staff of a weaver’s beam," and one of his sons "was
a man of great stature, that had on every hand six
fingers, and on every foot six toes, four and twenty in
number" (2 Samuel 21:20). Near Braytown, on the
headwaters of the Tennessee river in the United States, were found some remarkable footprints impressed in what is now solid rock. The tracks included those of a human heel ball thirteen inches
wide! The marks clearly
showed that the fellow whose stride in that distant day turned to stone had six
toes on each foot (Source:
Stranger Than Science by
Frank Edwards).
In the late 1950’s, during road construction in the Euphrates Valley of south-east Turkey, many tombs containing the remains of giants were uncovered. At the sites the leg bones were measured to be 47.24 inches. Joe Taylor, Director of Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum, was
commissioned to sculpt the human femur. This giant stood some 14-16 ft tall. Deuteronomy 3:11 states that the bed of Og, king of Bashan, was 9 cubits by 4 cubits (approximately 14 ft long by 6 ft wide). In his book Fossils Facts & Fantasies Joe Taylor cites several accounts of giant human skeletons or depictions being discovered, from Egypt, Italy, Patagonia in Argentina, and the western US. The largest humans in recent history are like Robert Wadlow of Alton, IL (who was just under 9ft tall) who died in 1940.
In 1833, soldiers digging a pit for a powder magazine at Lompock Rancho, California, hacked their way through a layer of cemented gravel and came up with the skeleton of a giant man about twelve feet tall. The skeleton was surrounded by carved shells, huge stone axes, and blocks of porphyry covered with unintelligible symbols. The giant was also noteworthy in still another respect: He had a
double row of teeth, both upper and lower.
This particular giant, incidentally, bore marked similarity to another, that of a giant man with double rows of teeth whose skeletal remains were dug up on Santa Rosa Island, off the California coast. Subsequent research has shown that he, or his descendants,
feasted on the small elephants which once lived on that island and which have vanished like the giants who ate them, countless ages ago.
Near Crittenden, Arizona, in 1891, workmen excavating for a
commercial building came upon a huge stone sarcophagus eight feet below the surface. The contractor called in expert help, and the sarcophagus was opened to reveal a granite mummy case which had once held the body of a human being more than twelve feet tall -- a human with six toes, according to the carving of the case. But the body had been buried so many thousands of years that it had long since turned to dust. Just another silent witness to the truth of Genesis, which tells us that there were giants in the earth in those days.
Did Violence Fill the Earth?
The record in Genesis says that YEHOVAH God, in mercy, destroyed the land to save man from himself. Evil and violence filled the land. Archeologists have found proof of that violence. In the Ofnet cave of Bavaria, Germany, “were discovered thirty-three skulls all huddled together in a circle. Their owners had each been killed by a stone ax, and all the heads had been cut off and buried together in this fashion” (Mankind So Far, p. 226).
In China the bones of ancients were discovered to have been “split lengthwise in a fashion which no animal can manage, but which has been used by man to get at the marrow of a bone in other times and places” (p. 149). Cannibalism!
Many skulls of Neanderthal men show plain evidence of having been opened by chisel-type instruments; having obvious tool marks around the hole in the skull. Had the hole in the skull been caused by a dull instrument, such as a stone axe or bludgeon, it would have been broken and splintered, and crushed inward. But the skulls are intact
except for a fairly neat, round hole. This presents proof of cannibalism, where severed heads were thrown into a fire, and a hole cut into the skull to access the cooked brain inside. Many such skulls, along with other large bones of the human body, have been found in the remains of ancient fire circles.
Neanderthal violence is highlighted in a recent report by BBC News
Online
--"Evidence has emerged to suggest the Neanderthals had a
war-mongering nature. The early hunter-gatherers got into fights and used weapons, according to the results of a study of a skeleton uncovered in French caves. A crack in the skull of the 36,000-year-old Neanderthal was caused by a sharp tool, say anthropologists.
"Scientists are tracing back the origins of sophistication
They think another Neanderthal or an early modern human attacked the young adult.
The Neanderthal survived but would have had to be nursed by other members of the tribe.
The findings indicate that the contemporaries of early modern humans were more sophisticated than their popular "caveman" image
suggests.
They would have needed social skills and organised networks to take part in armed conflict.
It may have been a crucial factor in the evolution of Neanderthal and human behaviour, say scientists in Switzerland and France.
"Social skills
The evidence comes from a computer-aided reconstruction of the skull of a Neanderthal found near the village of St Cesaire in 1979.
Dr Christoph Zollikofer of the University of Zurich and colleagues say a healed cranial fracture shows the Neanderthal was hit by a sharp tool or weapon.
'These findings add to the evidence that Neanderthals used
implements not only for hunting and food processing, but also in other behavioural contexts,' they report in the journal Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences.
They say the potential for violence might have spurred the evolution of social behaviour.
Neanderthal social groups gave support to their members "Prof. Chris Stringer, Natural History Museum
Professor Chris Stringer at the Natural History Museum, London, UK, is an expert on the origins of humans.
He says several Neanderthal skeletons showing signs of injury have been uncovered in the past.
But to his knowledge injury by another 'person' can be implicated in only one other find -- a healed wound to a rib on a Neanderthal from Shanidar Cave, Iraq.
Professor Stringer told BBC News Online: 'In both these cases the individuals survived long enough for the wound to heal, suggesting that Neanderthal social groups gave support to their members. 'Given that this is one of the most recent Neanderthals known, it is even theoretically possible that the weapon used was wielded by a contemporary Cro-Magnon [earliest anatomically modern human],' he added.
'But it is much more likely that the injury was caused by another Neanderthal.'" (BBC News, April 22, 2002.)
Evidence of the Mighty Men of Old
In Genesis 6:5 (equivalent to 6:4 in other versions) of the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, we find the following:
"Now the giants were upon the earth in those days; and after that when the sons of God were wont to go in to the daughters of men, they bore children to them, those were the GIANTS of old, the men of
renown."
Unfortunately, the word "GIANTS" in the last part of the above verse is a translation from the original Greek which, in turn, was a BAD
translation from the Hebrew, and should read "mighty ones." There are TWO different Hebrew words involved here: The word "giants" in the first part of the verse is translated from the Hebrew word nephilim, while the word "GIANTS" in the last part of the verse comes from the Hebrew word gibbor -- meaning "mighty one," "valiant man," "warrior" or "tyrant."
Explains Kaiser, Davids, Bruce and Brauch
--"The word gibborim comes from gibbor, meaning 'a mighty man of valor, strength, wealth or power.' Nimrod, in Genesis 10:8, was such a gibbor. He also was clearly a king in the land of Shinar. Hence the meaning...is NOT 'giants,' but something more like 'princes,'
'aristocrats' or 'great men'" (Hard Sayings of the Bible, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL. 1996, p. 108).
With this in mind, the above verse from the Septuagint should read: "Now the giants [nephilim] were upon the earth in those days; and after that when the sons of God were wont to go in to the daughters of men, they bore children to them, those were the MIGHTY ONES
So the offspring from the union between the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" were the mighty ones or men of valor -- NOT the nephilim giants!
The remains of the mighty men of renown -- men of great ability and exploits -- are quite different from the giants. Here is what Howells has found:
“Over such a large population rose rulers of yet unheard-of power, able to construct temples and palaces. And through all this ran knowledge, writing, and mathematics. That was the Bronze Age. Before 3,000 B.C. there arose the Indian cities, Mohenjodaro, Harappa, and others in the Indus Valley, and Kish and the Sumerian Ur in Mesopotamia”
(Mankind So Far, p. 230). It is significant that these cities perished by water according to archeologists!
But why should people today be so much smaller and less powerful? The answer is found in a statement by Howells on page 226, “There were some groups of people in Egypt and the Near East who were long headed but had the lighter-boned, smaller skulls of men of today.” Noah lived in the Near East. He was the progenitor of some of the nations that exist today. He undoubtedly came from this stock -- the group that did not have the greatest physical strength and stature! YEHOVAH God could use him in His ministry because he was willing to humble himself -- there was nothing humanly great of which he could be proud.
The same today. Not many great and mighty in this world are called. They do not yield themselves to the great power of YEHOVAH God. They rely, like the ancients, on their own strength -- never
acknowledging that even such strength was given to them by YEHOVAH at birth. Let us take this lesson to heart!
Since we have the historical facts in mind, let’s look at the record Moses gave. Who were those “sons of God” who married and reproduced the mighty men?
Were those “Sons of God” Angels?
People often quote II Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 as proof that the pre-flood sons of YEHOVAH God were angels. Let’s notice what Peter said: “God spared not the angels that sinned, but...delivered them into chains of darkness...AND spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; AND turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes (II Peter 2 : 4-6).
Notice that there are three distinct, three different punishments. YEHOVAH God cast down the angels and degraded them to chains of spiritual darkness before He destroyed the antediluvian world. The punishment of the angels was not at the flood. It was at a prior, a DIFFERENT time.
The sin of the angels was not descending to the earth to marry women. They sinned by leaving the earth which was their estate, to rival
YEHOVAH God in heaven.
They were cast back to the earth (Jude. 6; Isaiah 14:13-14).
The interpretation that the "sons of God" were angels is inconsistent both contextually and doctrinally, and the definition is totally
unnecessary. The KEY to this passage in Genesis is to determine its relationship to the characteristics of the antediluvian generations described in preceding chapters -- and the ensuing judgment in the form of Noah's flood.
As the authors of Hard Sayings of the Bible point out,
"Some, however, will appeal to the New Testament passages of 1 Peter 3:18-20, 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6-7 for further support of the angel
theory. But these passages DO NOT say anything about angelic marriages. To argue from the phrase 'in a similar way' in Jude 7 that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is the same as the sin of Genesis 6:1-4 CLAIMS TOO MUCH, for the sin of sodomy is not the same thing as marrying a wife from another part of the universe! In fact, 'in a similar way' does not compare the sin of the angels with the sin of the men of Sodom and Gomorrah; instead, it compares the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah with the sins of 'the cities about them' (that is, Admah and Zeboiim; see Deut. 29:23 and Hos. 11:8). Thus the sins of Jude's angels (Jude 6) and the sins of the five cities of the plain (Jude 7) are held up as warnings of the judgment that could come to others" (page 107). Notice, now, the CONTRAST between the descendants of Cain and the descendants of Seth. It can be perceived from their activities that the Cainites possessed the characteristics of cleverness, culture and civilization. Also, by the ungodly behavior of Lamech, they are generally portrayed as earthly, selfish, sensual and not willing to be under YEHOVAH's authority. While there is nothing necessarily wrong with the professions associated with the Cainites, nothing positive is said of them in a spiritual sense.
On the other hand, one cannot help but notice the CONTRAST given in Genesis 4 and 5 in regard to Seth. The Sethites were known for their devotion (4:25), consecration (4:26), fellowship (5:22), testimony
(Hebrews 9:5), service (5:29) and RIGHTEOUSNESS (6:8) in the eyes of YEHOVAH God.
Therefore, after the generations of Cain and Seth have been outlined in chapters 4 and 5 -- and Genesis 6:2 then speaks of TWO GROUPS OF PEOPLE -- is it not reasonable to conclude that the earlier familial division is being carried on into the later discussion? This being the case, the "sons of God" expression is used in a SPIRITUAL or
COVENANTAL sense -- that is, referring to those who possessed
characteristics of faithful service to YEHOVAH God. The "daughters of men" however, would then be those of a WORLDLY disposition. Given the CONTRASTING NATURE of the two lines of descendants described above, the "sons of God" were clearly the godly Sethites -- while the "daughters of men" were the worldly, ungodly Cainites. Such a distinction also parallels the Israelites of the Old Covenant and the Christians in the New. The events of the antediluvian world now fall logically into place.
While interpreting "sons of God" as angelic beings may at first seem an obvious and attractive option, this view CANNOT be substantiated with regard to the TOTAL biblical teaching on angels. Neither does it provide a satisfactory explanation in the context of the first few chapters of Genesis.
Angels Not at Liberty to Marry
The wicked angels who followed Satan were in chains of darkness imprisoned by their own folly (Jude 6). Remember, the Bible reveals that angels are created spirits (Hebrews 1:14). They are not mortal flesh like humans. In I Peter 3:19, 20 we read of spirits -- angels -- not human beings, but angels who were imprisoned, bound -- when?
“When once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing.”
Notice it! Before the flood destroyed the land, while the ark was still under construction, the angels who are spirits, were already
imprisoned, “in hell“-- tartaroo -- not at liberty to co-habit with human women!
It is a fable that angels were imprisoned as a result of the flood. Not only does Peter disprove the theory that fallen angels were at liberty to marry women, but the Messiah also disproves it. Yeshua said in three places that angels do NOT MARRY. Angels are created spirits and do not reproduce by sexual intercourse or any other means (Luke 20:36; Matthew 22:30; Mark 12:35).
--"Nowhere else in Scripture are we told that angels married humans. In fact, our Lord specifically stated that angels DO NOT marry (Mk 12:25). And though the Septuagint translated the expression as being equivalent to 'angels,' it is in fact only the Alexandrian manuscript that does so. The critical edition by Alfred Rahlfs does not reflect the
angelic interpretation" (Hard Sayings of the Bible, pages 106-107). Angels cannot co-habit with women and reproduce because angels and humans are two different kinds of beings.
YEHOVAH God set laws in motion that each produces after its own kind (Genesis 1).
Two different Biblical kinds cannot gender sexually. This is one of the most thoroughly established laws of science. YEHOVAH God did not make it possible for angels to reproduce with human beings.
He did not intend to beget angels as His sons (Hebrews 1:5). Beside, nowhere in the Bible do we find that degraded angels have the power to manifest themselves in the form of human beings -- a power now possessed only by righteous angels who serve YEHOVAH God.
Originated in Paganism
The doctrine that angels married women is not new. It came from garbled heathen traditions. Jewish fables which Paul condemned also contain the same superstitions. Where did they acquire them? From the Babylonians!
The Gentiles who once knew the truth, turned it into a lie (Rom. 1:25). They confused the sins of angels, which occurred before Adam’s
creation, with the sins of men during the days of Noah, thus producing the garbled tradition that the “gods” had intercourse with women. It was from contact with such Babylonian traditions that the Jews received their fables. See any Biblical encyclopedia for this
information. It is time that Christians come out of this Babylonian superstition and believe what the Bible really teaches.
The Book of Enoch is given credit by misguided religious "prophets" as the "earliest interpretation" of Genesis 6:1 through 6:5, and the early "Christians" such as Tertullian, Irenaeus, Origen and Clement of Alexandria are supposed to have been influenced by these writings. Even the apostles Jude and Peter are purported to refer to the Book of Enoch as if it was inspired Scripture.
Relates Kaiser, Davids, Bruce and Brauch in Hard Sayings of the
--"The pseudepigraphal and noncanonical 1 Enoch, dating from around 200 B.C., claims in 6:1-7:6 that two hundred angels in heaven, under the leadership of Semayaz, noticed that the humans had unusually beautiful daughters. These they desired for themselves, so they took a mutual oath to go down to earth together, and each took a wife. They taught these wives magical medicine, incantations, the cutting of roots and the care of plants. When the women became pregnant, they gave birth to giants that reached three hundred cubits [450 feet!!!]. The giants in turn consumed all the food, thereby arousing the deep hatred of the earthlings. The giants turned to devouring the people along with the birds, wild beasts, reptiles and fish. Then it was that the earth, having had enough of these huge bullies, brought an accusation
against them" (InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL. 1996, page 106). However, the validity of Enoch is HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE -- and its interpretation obviously CANNOT be given credence as the inspired Word of YEHOVAH God for the following reasons:
1). While the book may be named after Enoch, it was NOT written by
him! In fact, it was probably written by a NUMBER OF PEOPLE in early-Maccabean to late pre-Christian times. The Book of Enoch is believed to reflect events surrounding the Maccabean revolt -- and was used extensively by the Essenes, as evidenced by the findings at Qumran.
2). Because of the inconsistencies and contradictions that fill the Book
of Enoch -- and other pseudepigraphal books -- their canonicity was neither accepted by the New Testament authors nor the early Church Fathers. Jude 14-15 may be a reference to the Book of Enoch and the
Assumption of Moses, but the latter cannot be checked because the
book no longer exists and its origin is unknown. However, such usage by inspired authors DOES NOT prove the inspiration of non-biblical sources! Some New Testament scholars have noted that Paul quoted from the Greek poets Aratus, Menander and Epimenides -- but this was obviously done for preaching purposes in order to increase his
outreach to his audience. It should be noted that neither Paul nor Jude uses the quotes in the manner of "it is written" or "the Scriptures say." In further support of the "angel" explanation, writers who claim to have scholarly expertise quote Jude 6-7 and II Peter 4-5 -- both of which discuss rebellious angels and their consignment to a dark prison until the day of judgment. It is apparent, however, that if Jude and Peter are referring to Genesis 6, it is ONLY on the prior assumption that the latter passage is, in fact, about fallen angels. It is a FACT that these New Testament scriptures NOWHERE refer to angels being involved in earthly marriages and having children. Even if one should suggest that the word "these" in Jude 7 has its precedent in verse 6 (which may not
be a correct interpretation), the passage CLEARLY refers to fornication and homosexuality, whereas Genesis 6:2 refers to PROPER MARRIAGE. Not only that, but other parts of the Book of Enoch DO NOT include the marriage element in the stories surrounding the fall of angels. It is, therefore, INCONSISTENT to say that Jude is attempting to teach doctrine from one part of Enoch while ignoring contradictions in other parts. Peter and Jude are NOT condoning the stories in the Book of Enoch, and "give no credence to these fables of a Jewish Gnosticizing tradition" (Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary On the Old
Testament, 1:131).
Note the authors of Hard Sayings of the Bible
--"The famous Jewish historian Josephus (born 37 B.C.) also appears to follow this angel theory. He wrote, 'Many angels accompanied with women, and begat sons that proved unjust' (Antiquities 1.3.1). Likewise, the Greek translation of the Bible of the third century B.C. reads 'angels of God' in Genesis 6:2. In spite of the antiquity of the cosmologically mixed races view, there are such OVERWHELMING PROBLEMS with it that it is NOT recommended as the solution to this problem" (page 106).
"To allege that 'giants' were the result of such sexual unions," argue Kaiser, Davids, Bruce and Brauch, "is ONCE AGAIN to go beyond any data we possess in Scripture. Did the angels procreate without the use of natural bodies? Or did they already possess natural bodies? Or did they create for themselves natural bodies by the use of some
mysterious, intrinsic, but rebellious power? Any and all answers to such questions would be purely speculative. To use extracanonical
evidence," they conclude, "such as 1 Enoch as a witness against or even for Scripture would be UNPRECEDENTED" (ibid., p. 107).
The True Answer
Years after the flood there was recorded for us in the book of Job a description of antediluvian life (Job 22:15-18). Notice what the narrator says! “Hast thou marked the old way which wicked MEN have
trodden?” Did you notice it! The scripture says “men,” not angels. Men, human beings, say to YEHOVAH God “Depart from us: and what can the Almighty do for them? Yet he filled their houses with good things.” They were self-sufficient, unregenerate human sinners who had no fear of YEHOVAH God. They were like human beings today. They didn’t believe in a flood. But fallen angels fear YEHOVAH God and tremble. They know the just judgment of YEHOVAH against their evil deeds (James 2:29). The angels knew YEHOVAH God would bring a flood.
Now read Genesis 6:3. The “sons of God” took wives, “The ETERNAL said, My spirit shall not always strive with man.” Here again the sons of YEHOVAH God are called “men.” Because the sons of YEHOVAH God lusted after women, YEHOVAH said, “I will destroy man whom I have made from the face of the earth [land]” (verse 7).
Not one word about angels!
With the outpouring of the flood “all flesh [in the land] died . . . AND EVERY MAN” (Gen. 7:21-23).
Attempts to equate Genesis 6:2 with the fall of angels VIOLATES
Scripture in every possible way -- apart from the violence done to Jude and Peter! An explanation can be acceptable ONLY if it is logically consistent with the biblical teaching on angels. This is summed up by the following
--1). Prior to Genesis 6:1-4, no mention is made of angels -- not even
their creation (although this does not mean to say they were not included in the acts of creation in Genesis 1).
2). The Messiah taught (Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25 and Luke 20:34)
that angels NEITHER MARRY NOR ARE GIVEN IN MARRIAGE. Now while they often take on a male form while acting as messengers of
YEHOVAH God on Earth, they do NOT function as physical or sexual beings. Angels have been observed to eat (Genesis 18:8 and 19:3), but this is a FAR CRY from breeding! This was obviously for purposes of courtesy rather than for sustenance. It is impossible to imagine how angels could have acquired TOTALLY NEW characteristics merely by virtue of their fall. Interpretations of Genesis 6 aside, there is NO instance of angel/human interbreeding in the Bible.
3). The judgment in Genesis 6:3 refers specifically to MEN -- NOT "sons
of God" or angels. It is inconsistent to argue that YEHOVAH God would punish the tempted and not the tempters! If Genesis 6:1-4 is paralleled to chapter 3, one can see that Satan (the tempter) is judged or cursed FIRST, and THEN Adam and Eve (the tempted). For the sentence to be universal, those who are judged must refer to ALL humanity ('adham) in the land -- thereby incorporating BOTH the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men."
4). Angels are NEVER called "sons of God" in Genesis -- or anywhere
else in the Pentateuch.
5). The reference to angels as "sons of God" in Job 1:6 is CONTRASTED
with Satan. GOOD spiritual beings are thereby contrasted with EVIL spiritual beings -- NOT with earthly beings. Also, it is incongruent to suggest that Satan's minions -- the demons -- should be described as
sons of YEHOVAH God in the same manner as angels are described in Job. As a result, the "sons of 'elohim" comparison between Job and Genesis should NOT be viewed as a direct analogy.
6). The Alexandrine text of the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint)
translates bene-ha'elohim as "angels of God" -- which certainly demonstrates the pervading view of Jews (Judahites) in Alexandria during the third century B.C. However -- and note this carefully -- OTHER VERSIONS read "sons of God" in Genesis 6:1-2 while NEARLY ALL versions read "angels of God" in Job 1:6, 2:1 and 38:7. So if any power of definition is ascribed to the Septuagint at all, it would seem to CONTRADICT the claims concerning the consensus of Jewish opinion -- some of whom obviously thought that Genesis 6 did NOT refer to angels.
7). Even more serious is the problem of WHY judgment should fall on
the humans and on the earth IF the angels of heaven were the cause of the trouble. YEHOVAH God should have flooded heaven -- not earth! The culprits came from above; the women seem to have been doing nothing except being beautiful!
Why Called “Sons of God”
If you will examine the sixth chapter of Genesis more closely, you will notice that DAUGHTERS were born when the human race began to multiply rapidly (verse 1). Why the mention of daughters ONLY? What about the sons that must have been born? The human race reproduces at least as many males as females. The answer is that the sons are spoken of, but most readers overlook it.
Turn to the last verse of Genesis 4 and pick up the real beginning of the account. Over two and one-half centuries had passed since the creation of Adam. What happened? “Then began men to call upon the name of the ETERNAL.” The marginal reading is “then began men to call themselves by the name of the ETERNAL” (Gen. 4: 26).
Like people today who profess the Messiah and call themselves
Christians, those men of old gave lip service to the ways of YEHOVAH God even though they called themselves by the name of YEHOVAH God! They were the men born before the flood. They were rebellious and unrepentant. What had they done that was evil in YEHOVAH’s sight? Notice it, the males who professed YEHOVAH God, but with whom YEHOVAH would not continue to strive, were the ones who married the “daughters of men.”
They persisted in having their own way and married their neighbor’s daughters -- beautiful, but unconverted women -- who led them further astray and into the cares of this world.
Conclusion
While Genesis 6:1-4 contains a number of topics that have proved difficult to interpret for many -- and have been outright abused by some -- the TRUE meaning of these verses can be determined by examining the peripheral context and doctrinal principles in both the Old and New Testaments. The latter procedure COMPLETELY
ELIMINATES a popular interpretation that claims the "sons of God" were angels -- and refutes another idea that touts the "sons of God" as a class of nobility. Instead, the overall context CLEARLY shows that the "sons of God" and "daughters of men" existed together in the land as opposites, and refer to the righteous Sethites (Genesis 4:26) and the unrighteous and worldly Cainites (4:11) respectively.
The unapproved and ill-conceived liaisons or marriages between these two groups (6:2) inevitably led to the total moral breakdown of the existing order in the land (6:5). The exception to this was Noah and his family (6:8).
The nephilim were NOT the strange, mythological offspring of these unions, but rather a group or class of large, tyrannical warriors who maintained a faith-breaking reign of terror against the righteous Sethites in particular -- and the unrighteous Cainites in general. The nephilim of the antediluvian world served as a deliberate parallel to the nephilim of Numbers 33, who also caused YEHOVAH's people to
stumble as they approached the Promised Land.
This also indicates that Noah and his family weren't the only ones to survive the flood.
Problems in the interpretation of the phrase "sons of God and daughters of men" -- and difficulties in defining the nature of the nephilim in verse 4 -- can easily be overcome when we consider the effects of an overwhelming majority of the ungodly on the spiritual integrity of a lesser group of righteous people. So rather than focusing merely on the act of marriage, or the presence of the nephilim, we should take into account the effect of these evil influences in order to understand YEHOVAH's judgment on the land and its inhabitants.
Giants on the Earth
By Boyd Rice
Since the offspring of the
Nephilim were said to be giants, and because virtually every tradition relating to the Flood and the subsequent arrival of the tutelary gods also has to do with giants, I have spent several years making note of giant lore, both mythological and purportedly historical. I’ve even
taken to the road in an attempt to verify reported discoveries of gigantic skeletons in parts of the United States and UK (without luck, unfortunately.) Though such discoveries were widely reported in the mainstream press at the times in which they were made, whatever became of the skeletons remains a mystery. Some maintain that the orthodoxy of the scientific/archeological community has created a conspiracy of silence around such anomalous finds because they can’t be adequately explained, and thus constitute some sort of threat to the prevailing paradigm. Of course, such finds can only be viewed as
anomalies if taken singly. Many such discoveries would constitute the emergence of a pattern - a pattern possibly indicative of the need to rethink the prevailing wisdom.
Fortunately, the ancients charged with the transmission of their people’s history, myth, and folklore felt no need to alter it for public consumption. They simply retold the stories that had been passed down to them by their ancestors. And here too, a pattern emerges, because the creation myths central to so many ancient cultures
contain nearly identical themes concerning a race of giants. Often the giants were father gods, tutelary deities, or mythic kings. Often there was a race of giants, frequently said to be the offspring of
intermarriage between gods and mortals. Repeatedly, such figures are connected with the legend of a global deluge. What follows is a brief overview of some figures or groups central to giant lore.
The Nephilim: These were the Sons of God who in Genesis interbred with humans, creating a race of giants. They were called “The
Watchers” in The Book of Enoch.
The Cainites: This was a race of giants descended from Cain who lived in an underworld kingdom called “Arka.” Note that the well-known statement in Genesis that “in those days, and after that, there were giants on the earth” is in fact not what the original text stated. What it really said was “giants in the earth.”
The Anakim: This was another name for the Watchers. It means “the descendants of Anak”, or Enoch, Cain’s son. Though it was said that a flood had been sent to destroy them, there were still entire cities of Anakim in Canaan as late as the time of Moses. And Jewish chronicler Josephus states that even in his own day it was not uncommon for people to dig up gigantic skeletal remains. Spies sent by Moses to scout Anakim strongholds reported back that the Anakim were so large that the Hebrews seemed “like grasshoppers” in comparison.
interbreeding of Poseidon with a mortal woman named Cleito. In some versions of the story they are part-fish. Some are said to have escaped the flood that destroyed Atlantis.
The Titans: These were a Greek race of giants born to Ouranos and Gaia. It is undoubtedly a later retelling of the Triton saga.
Atlas: He was the King of Atlantis, and a Triton/giant. He was so large and so strong that he often represented holding the Earth upon his shoulders.
Quetzlcoatl: This was the giant white god who appeared to native South Americans and founded their civilizations, according to their folktales. He too is depicted supporting the Earth on his shoulders, and he told the natives that the civilization from which he originated was destroyed by a flood
which he escaped by building a ship.
Hercules: He is also a giant, and is said to have piloted an ark.
Cuculainn: He is called the Irish Hercules, and came to Ireland in a ship when his homeland was destroyed by a flood. Interestingly, he seems to equate with the South American white god Kukulcan, a figure of
“very tall stature” who arrived on a boat telling much the same story. Votan: This is yet another tall white tutelary deity of South America. Once again we see the strange circumstance that his name sounds exactly like that of the Northern European god Wotan, a deity worshipped on the in an altogether different hemisphere.
The Ari: These were a race of Sumerian deified kings. “Ari” is a royal title meaning “the Shining Ones.” They were obviously the prototypes of The Book of Enoch’s Watchers. Numerous Sumerian seals depict
them as men of gigantic stature. They are often taller than members of their courts, even when depicted seated on thrones. In the numerous seals that show them standing, they tower above those standing next to them.
The Tuatha de Danaan: This was a race of Celtic giants and father gods. Like the Cainites and other giants, they were said to dwell in underground kingdoms or inside hollow mountains. One of the chief deities was Lugus, a name that translates to “Shining One”, revealing an astonishing connection to Sumer’s deified giant kings.
The Ellu: This was a race of Mesopotamian kings said to be
descendants of the gods. Yet again, “Ellu” is a royal court title which translates to “the Shining Ones.” It is thought that “Ellu” was the basis of the word “Elohim”, a term translated generally as “the Sons of God.” The Elohim are considered by some to be synonymous with the
Nephilim of Genesis.
Albion: He was one of the Titan giants fathered by Poseidon. He came to England after the Flood and was for many years the island’s
principle god. In those times England was actually called “Albion”, after their Titan god/king. In fact, many British places place-names retain the words “Albion” or “Albany” to this very day.
Iberius: A Titan and brother of Albion, he went to Spain after the Flood. And likewise, Spain was for centuries named Iberia in his honor.
King Arthur: There is some Arthurian lore which claims that he piloted an ark during the Deluge, and this legend also relates that he stood just over nine feet tall. King Henry II, inspired by stories that Arthur was buried at Glastonbury, dispatched a team there to excavate the area. At a depth of nine feet they found a lead cross inscribed with the words: “Here lies the body of King Arthur.” Sixteen feet below that was a stone sarcophagus containing the bones of a man nine feet tall. Skeptics put forth the argument that the lead cross could have been forged by local abbots wishing to draw attention (and donations) to their abbey. Such an argument, however, fails to address the fact that the nine-foot skeleton discovered beneath the cross would tend to negate the notion that this could have been a mere hoax. Later, in the early 1500s, another gigantic coffin was disinterred, and found to contain a skeleton 8’3” tall. History fails to record what became of these later bones, although those of Arthur were respectfully re-interred.
mythology. It was said that they built the city of Mycenae in Greece out of massive blocks weighing many tons each. This is why similar
constructions found at Baalbek, Lake Titicaca and elsewhere are referred to as having “Cyclopean” architecture.
The Cabiri: This was a race of giant blacksmith gods said to live in hollowed-out volcanoes. They had tattoos on their foreheads of a large solar disc, leading to speculation that the myth of the one-eyed
Cyclopses may have originated with them.
The Cimbri: These were giants living in Celtic Gaul. They had long manes of blond hair and a fierce, warlike demeanor, all of which lead them to be compared to lions. They were also known as the
“Cimmerians”, which may be suggestive of a Sumerian connection. It was difficult in writing the foregoing descriptions not to make them all sound incredibly redundant. But in order to state the basic facts in their simplest form, redundancy was a necessity, because all of these legends involve essentially the same story told over and over again. In some instances, not only were the stories identical, but so too were the names of the protagonists, such as Kukulcan/Cuculainn, and
Votan/Wotan. It is astounding enough that we should see identical myths in places as widely removed from one another as South America and the British Isles, but that the names of the respective flood heroes so echo one another is utterly remarkable. It would seem an altogether reasonable conclusion to draw from such evidence that perhaps these myths might have some basis in truth. Perhaps the figures were indeed real men, and perhaps those men were giants.
But if a real race of giants once inhabited the Earth, why haven’t people in recent centuries been digging up gigantic skeletons? According to author Stephen Quayle, they have. Quayle recently
published Genesis 6 Giants, the result of over 30 years of research into Grail lore. The book is replete with Biblical and extra-Biblical accounts of giants, mythological accounts of giants, profiles on famous giants in history, and countless reports of people across the globe digging up the remains of giants. What follows are a few accounts of such excavations.
Item: In 1891, at Crittenden, Arizona, some workers digging the foundation of a new building at a depth of eight feet struck a huge stone sarcophagus. When they were able to open the lid, inside were the remains of a nine-foot tall giant which time had reduced mostly to a pile of dust.
Item: While searching in a cave near the great canyon of Barranc de Cobre in northern Mexico in the early 1930s, explorer Paxton Hayes came across 34 mummified men and women. All had blond hair. All rose to heights between seven and eight feet.
Item: In 1833, soldiers digging a pit at Lompock Rancho, California unearthed a 12-foot tall giant with double rows of teeth, both on top and on the bottom. The Lompock giant’s teeth, while unusual, were not unique. Another ancient skeleton later found on Santa Rosa island off the coast of California showed the same dental peculiarity.
Item: In 1879, some Indiana archeologists dug into an ancient burial mound in Brewersville, Indiana and unearthed a human skeleton that measured 9’8” in length. The bones, which were stored in a grain mill, were swept away in the 1937 Flood.
Item: In the 1880s, while digging in a mound at Sayre in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, a reputable group of antiquarians found skeletons of humans measuring not only above seven feet tall, but having skulls with horns ( located about two inches above the
eyebrows.) The diggers, including two professors and a Pennsylvania state historian, turned what they found over to the American
Investigating Museum in Philadelphia, but the bones were afterwards either misplaced, stolen, or lost.
Item: In 1903, on an archeological outing at Fish Creek, Montana, Professor S. Farr and his group of Princeton University students came across several burial mounds. Choosing one to dig into, they unearthed the skeleton of a man about nine feet tall. Next to him were the bones of a woman who had been almost as tall.
Item: Nature, in its December 17, 1891 issue, reported that at a depth of fourteen feet into a large Ohio burial mound, excavators found the skeleton of a massive man in copper armor. He wore a copper cap, while copper moldings encased his jaws. Copper armor also protected his arms, chest and stomach. At his side lay the skeleton of a woman, probably his wife.
Item: In the 1860s, some excavators digging up a hill in Marion, Ohio uncovered thirty skeletons who ranged in height from seven to eight feet.
Item: In the early years of the 20th century, a team clearing out bat guano from a cavern near Lovelock, Nevada discovered several giant cadavers measuring well over eight feet in height. Their hair, still
intact, was said to have been long and “reddish” in color.
The foregoing accounts, taken almost in their entirety from Quayle’s Genesis 6 Giants, have been culled from a wide variety of sources, and represent only a small sample of those documented. They are largely reports from the United States, but reveal striking similarities to
kindred finds in Europe, South America, the British Isles, Africa, China, the Middle and Near-East, Australia, and New Zealand - that is to say, virtually every corner of the earth.
Though the tales vary in detail, the fundamentals of the stories are often quite cohesive: giants corpses, frequently with light-colored hair, generally buried at a depth of between nine and twelve feet, and often interred with artifacts made of copper. Some accounts report the
presence of items bearing strange hieroglyphs or symbols. That several of these finds were excavated from burial mounds seems to lend credence to the stories told to early settlers by Native Americans, i.e., that they didn’t know who built the mounds, because they were already there at the time that the “natives” arrived. A number of Native American tribes (such as those in Colorado) have folk tales relating that a race of giants lived in America at a time prior to when their ancestors came there. Still others tell the story that a group of giant white gods came to live among them, after their own homeland (called the “White Man’s Island”) was destroyed by a flood.
It is almost a certainty that some Native American tribes not only coexisted with the giants, but also interbred with them, because the earliest explorers to the New World repeatedly documented coming into contact with Indian tribes of gigantic stature. Such episodes are noted in the chronicles of Amerigo Vespucci, Magellan, Coronado, De Soto, and Sir Francis Drake, both in North and South America. Though the numerous accounts sited earlier are compelling, and are certainly supported by the eyewitness accounts of some of the world’s most esteemed and illustrious explorers, the sad fact remains that the most persistent commonality between all of these tales seems to be that the bones - the physical evidence - have all somehow gone missing. In some instances, this can be explained by the fact that local authorities, presuming the remains to be the property of indigenous peoples
(Native Americans, Aborigines, Maoris, etc.) simply turned them over to tribal chieftains for reburial, and this without taking a single
photograph, X-Ray, or DNA sample for testing (so as not to profane the relics.)
Of course, the lion’s share of these discoveries were made in the
peoples and regard for their religious institutions constituted a matter of far less circumspection than in recent years. If, as Stephen Quayle seems convinced, there is a concerted conspiracy of silence
surrounding this archeological evidence, then it is a conspiracy of, well, gigantic proportions. The accounts of these giant remains are too
numerous and too far-flung for all of them to have been lost, stolen, or secreted away. And yet, I truly believe the accounts. They are
supported not only by an overwhelming body of evidence found in mythology, but an equally overwhelming body of archeological evidence. Witness the ruins of the many cyclopean cities referred to earlier. No one knows with any certainty either who built them or
(more importantly) how they were built. Witness the vast complexes of tunnels and underground cities associated with the fallen angels (1), and recall that many of their myths include the detail that they dwelt in underground kingdoms. Again, no one knows who built these cities or how they were built. But an interesting fact to keep in mind is that the tunnels associated with them were generally nine, ten, or even twelve feet in ceiling height (the same average heights as those of the giant skeletons found.) Such tunnels can be found in South America, the Middle East, and even the Pacific Northwest of the United States. They are reputed to exist still undiscovered in Europe, Egypt, and the British Isles.
Regular readers of this magazine will already be aware of what a pivotal role the story of the Watchers plays in regards to our own research into the Grail mythos and the bloodline connected to it. So many avenues of inquiry central to our own basic thesis seem to have a direct relationship to the Giant lore connected with the Watchers. The kings of Atlantis? Giants. The Shining Ones? Giants. King Arthur, a figure central to the Grail lore? Also a giant. One of the first well-known paintings on the theme of Arcadia, Et in
Arcadia Ego by Guercino, depicts a fairly straightforward and seemingly insignificant scene of a man gazing upon an apparently trepanned skull. When I looked at it, there seemed to be no hidden symbolism discernable. Until, that is, I noticed what appeared to be an odd disparity in proportion. The skull, for as close as it was relative to the onlooker, seemed far larger than it should have been. Since the painter’s execution of this painting seemed masterly in every other respect, I concluded that perhaps his intent was to portray an
oversized skull. Perhaps it represented the skeletal head of one of the primordial patriarchs of the Grail bloodline. If, as has been said, the grave of an ancient sacred king were somehow at Rennes-le-Chateau, perhaps those discovering it would open the tomb of a giant, a
descendant of the Nephilim.
As time passed, and our research progressed, this initially abstract idea seemed increasingly possible. After reading ancient apocryphal texts which indicated that a number of Biblical patriarchs were giants, it seemed altogether probable. Ultimately, reading about Abraham’s burial in the Cave of Treasures, I came to suspect that something far more profound might lie in wait at Rennes-le-Chateau. Abraham was an astrologer and magician who was said to have “traced his ancestry back to the Giants.” Upon his death, his body was carried to the Cave of Treasures, an underground necropolis where the bodies of all
previous patriarchs were also interred, down to and including Adam and Eve.
In addition, the Cave included treasures, relics, and a sacred archive of his progenitors. While treasures and relics are of interest to
archeologists and museum-going looky-loos, and sacred archives can be dismissed by academics as mere superstitious hyperbole, such items found in the context of a necropolis of gigantic skeletons might well constitute the basis for a rethinking of world history. These people constituted a living remnant of the antediluvian world, the
mythological “First Time.” And since myth and history record that their final resting place was together, in a single location, I can only assume that they are still there.
Endnotes:
(1) These are discussed at length in my article Omega and Genesis in Dagobert’s Revenge Vol. 4#2.
Source:
http://www.ordolapsitexillis.org/articles/Dagobert/VOL5_N01/page4.htm l
Alien Nation
After the flood many races of giants appeared on the land once again. Here is a list of a few.
Rephaim - from the root rapha = spirits, shades Gen. 14:5
Anakim - race of giants Num. 13:33 descendents of Nephilim Emim - the proud deserters, terrors, race of giants Gen. 14:5
Zuzim- the evil ones, roaming things Gen. 14:5 Zamzummims - the evil plotters, Deut. 2:20 Zophim - watchers, angels who descended Num. 23
Sepherim - the many.
According to Micah 3 God used the Nephilim giants to punish Israel. They are hidden now but they will soon return during the Tribulation to lead the nations against Israel. This will be the taller ones.
According to the Cocopa Indian tribe, giants of the past were able to carry logs that six of the humans failed to budge. Humans can roughly carry twice their body. The average human weighs 150 pounds
the ability to carry 1,800 pounds. Now let us take into account that these six humans could not move the logs, and then they would have weighed well over 1,800 lbs. These giants were carrying 1,800 pound logs with ease. Super human strength is often attributed to the
Nephilim.
So has there been any hard evidence that the Bible is correct concerning Nephilim giants?
Here are a few example of physical evidence found. -In Montana in 1903, Montana, Professor S. Farr unearthed the skeleton of a man about nine feet long. Next to him laid the bones of a woman, who had been almost as tall. Long-haired giants called the Karankawas who occupied territory around Matagorda Bay on the Texas gulf coast, engraved their bodies’ tattoos and ate human flesh. The tribe did well until Stephen Austin built a settlement on the Brazos in 1823. Conflicts between the settlers and the Indians then became frequent.
John R. Swanton stated,
"Finally a battle was fought in which about half the tribe was slain, the other portion fleeing for refuge to La Bahia."
Following information is found at:
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/Lagoon/1345/giants.html -George W. Hill, M.D., dug out a skeleton
"of unusual size" in a mound of Ashland County, Ohio. In 1879, a nine-foot, eight-inch skeleton was excavated from a mound near
Brewersville, Indiana. -A skeleton which is reported to have been of enormous dimensions" was found in a clay coffin, with a sandstone slab containing hieroglyphics, during mound explorations by a Dr everhart near Zanesville, Ohio.(American Antiquarian, v3, 1880, pg61) -Ten skeletons "of both sexes and of gigantic size" were taken from a mound at Warren, Minnesota, 1883. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 23, 1883) -A skeleton 7 feet 6 inches long was found in a massive stone structure that was likened to a temple chamber within a mound in Kanawha County, West Virginia, in 1884.
-A large mound near Gasterville, Pennsylvania, contained a vault in which was found a skeleton measuring 7 feet 2 inches. Inscriptions were carved on the vault.
-In 1885, miners discovered the mummified remains of woman measuring 6 feet 8 inches tall holding an infant. The mummies were
found in a cave behind a wall of rock in the Yosemite Valley.
-In Minnesota, 1888 were discovered remains of seven skeletons 7 to 8 feet tall.
-In 1911, several red-haired mummies ranging from 6 and a half feet to 8 feet tall were discovered in a cave in Lovelock, Nevada.
-In February and June of 1931, large skeletons were found in the Humboldt lake bed near Lovelock, Nevada. The first of these two skeletons found measured 8 1/2 feet tall and appeared to have been wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similar to the Egyptian manner. The second skeleton was almost 10 feet long -In 1965, a skeleton
measuring 8 feet 9 inches was found buried under a rock ledge along the Holly Creek in east-central Kentucky.
-End of quotations- There have been many discoveries but the public is only allowed to see about 3% of all the finds. In the 1880's human skulls with horns were discovered in a burial mound at Sayre, Bradford County, Pennsylvania. The horns extended two inches just above the eyebrows. The skeletons were seven feet tall and it was estimated they were buried around AD 1200. When some of the bones were sent to the American Investigating Museum in Philadelphia, they
disappeared!
- A large skull was recovered in Lovelock cave In 1911 miners digging for guano from a cave which was 22 miles southwest of Lovelock, Nevada. A 6 1/2 foot tall mummy was found "distinctly red" hair. Ancient legends of the local Paiute Indians tell of a tribe of red-haired giants called the Si-te-cahs, who were once the mortal enemy of the Indians in the area. Soon the Indians joined forces to drive the
redheads out. The giants were between 6 to 10 feet tall. For some reason scientists did not seem to want to investigate these finds further so many of the bones were lost. One amazing thing to note is that the Paiute Indians formed unheard of alliances with the other tribes in order drive the giants out. That is how much of a threat the giants were to their existence! Alien Nation
The purest bloodline of Satan is the Illuminati. They are the ones that control the world through witchcraft and use their front group the Masonsto control every aspect of your life. They control what you see, hear, and even the way you think. Their worship of Lucifer is nothing more than pure Satanism in its purest form. Over the years they have through manipulation of the masses lowered are moral values down to hell. Sex is rampant in all the media. The Churches are now holding
hands with the homosexuals as they indoctrinate our children to their perversion through TV, movies, comics, games, fashion, and now the schools. What is a real sign of the time is that parents do not even see it as a problem! Parents that do speak out against it are seen as gay bashers. If you believe that it is all nonsense that the world is
controlled by the Illuminated Masons, then go to your local library or the Internet, and look up occult symbols. It will not take long before you start seeing them all over and mostly in corporations and
government symbols. If you still have any doubts about who runs America, look at the back of an American one-dollar bill and see the Masonic symbol of a pyramid with the all seeing eye of Horus on it. If the Masons are just a non-powerful charity group, then how in the world did they get their symbol on the nation's currency?
As I have said the Masons are just a front group for the Illuminati, which in turn are a front, group for Satanism. According to Tim Cohen author of the book Antichrist and a Cup of Tea, Prince Charles is the leader of the Illuminati. People laugh at him and think that he is a buffoon, but he is one of the most powerful men on earth. I strongly recommend this book to everyone. Interviews discussing Prince Charles with Tim Cohen can be found at:
http://prophecyhouse.com/audio/ These interviews are not only eye opening, but they show us the public how little we know about the man.
Irenaeus an early church father had stated that the not only could the antichrist be Jewish but could also be a Nephilim. For me this makes perfect sense. The end time empire will be a coming together of the spiritual and military force. This empire is called Babylon the Great in the book of Revelation. It's interesting to note that the founder of Babylon was Nimrod. About Nimrod Gen 10:8-9 says,
"And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD."
The word "mighty" is the gibowr, the same word used for the Nephilim. Interesting to note too that Esau was born with red fur all over his body and he too was a skilled hunter. Many feel that Nimrod was a righteous man because where it says he was a mighty hunter before the Lord. This simply means that the Lord knew Nimrod. It also says in scripture that he "began" to be a mighty hunter before the Lord. The word
began means: to profane, to defile, to pollute, to desecrate, to begin… to profane oneself, to defile oneself, to pollute oneself… to violate (a covenant)…(Pual) to profane (name of God) -Brown-Driver-Briggs' Definition. In other words this was one evil beast.
"We weren't always like this… after the moon fell from the sky, the earth could no longer sustain a species. Some managed to stay above, the rest of us escaped underground. Then centuries later when we tried to emerge in to the sun again we couldn't. So we bred ourselves in to casts. Some to be our eyes and ears, some to be to be our
muscles and sinews."
-The movie Time Machine 2002
Giants found have come with double rows of teeth, red hair, horns, six toes, and six fingers. So what happed to all these giants? I believe that because there were too many conflicts with humans, the giants then migrated into the caves and caverns of the earth. The rest were modified and have lived with humans for centuries. They were self-bred to be shorter and to lose all the telltale physical signs such as double rows of teeth and such. The bottom line is that they are the ones that live among us. They are the New World Order. "And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay." Dan 2:43
We can clearly see here that the Nephilim are the ones among us that are the iron. We are the clay because God created us from the
minerals of the earth. The iron comes from the tyrants. They are the star children of the stargod angels. The Nephilim are without any
compassion for humans and have only a distain for them. They are the great leaders of war and bloodshed. They are the ones that exploit mankind through a hidden secret government of iron. The Nephilim make sure that we are the slaves that are kept in poverty, disease, ignorance. In the Bible they are called the Tares, Beasts, and the Iron as outlined earlier. One of the greatest world empires they produced was Rome. The Fallen Angels brought culture and new age concepts while the Nephilim brought military supremacy to the world. The Nazi party was a proto type of their new end time world empire, which is rising from the ashes as we speak. The purpose of the Nephilim is to destroy all God's children. Gen 3:15 states, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." The word emity means hatred.
The Nephilim have an intense hatred for humans. All through the Old Testament the Nephilim tribes were at war with Israel and Israel was instructed to exterminate every Nephilim man, woman, and child. Some of the names of Nephilim in the Old Testament are, Rephaim, Anakim, Emim, Zuzim, Zamzummims, and Zophim. In the Old
