Who were the Nephilim & Giants in the OT?

[JLB]

From an old thread:

Arba was a great man, possibly a contemporary of Abram, though I suspect a predecessor, who had not 'fallen' into depravity as his three 'nephilim' descendants had 400+yrs later.

I'm also considering another interpretation where Arba is not just one individual man.

---

Basically my idea is that because "arba" means fourth, and can also mean four, "Arba" is not one man, but four great men whose association set apart and gave name to the city Kirjath-arba(city of Arba)(city of Four), which later became Hebron(association).

The four men in association are the Hebrew Abram, and the Amorite brothers Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre. Their alliance kept the land from war until provoked by the war of four kings against five kings, at which point Abram, in league with the three Amorites, rose to pursue and defeat Chedorlaomer. Melchizedek, king of Salem, thought enough of their victory to come out to congratulate them. Abram refused tribute from Sodom, but allowed His colleagues to accept it, which probably contributed to the Amorites eventual downfall.

While Abrams descendant Israel left for Egypt to escape famine, the Amorite descendants stayed to fill their inequity. As the nation of Israel returned from captivity they found the descendants (Sheshai, Ahiman, Talmai) of the old allies of Abram (Mamre, Eshcol, Aner) intimidating in power, but fallen into depravity. Therefore the now fallen Amorites(nephilim) were to be judged by God through the Israelites for their transgressions.​

So Amorites are now Nephilim?

Any scripture to back up your statement?


JLB

 

[Deborah13]

From an old thread:

Arba was a great man, possibly a contemporary of Abram, though I suspect a predecessor, who had not 'fallen' into depravity as his three 'nephilim' descendants had 400+yrs later.​

I think Arba must have to be a predecessor to Abram. He has been identified in scripture as being Nephilim and a great man who maintained peace in the land which became Hebron. Then we see Abram with the Amorite.
Another connection may be the Amakites but I haven't put that together yet.

I'm also considering another interpretation where Arba is not just one individual man.

---

Basically my idea is that because "arba" means fourth, and can also mean four, "Arba" is not one man, but four great men whose association set apart and gave name to the city Kirjath-arba(city of Arba)(city of Four), which later became Hebron(association).

The four men in association are the Hebrew Abram, and the Amorite brothers Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre. Their alliance kept the land from war until provoked by the war of four kings against five kings, at which point Abram, in league with the three Amorites, rose to pursue and defeat Chedorlaomer. Melchizedek, king of Salem, thought enough of their victory to come out to congratulate them. Abram refused tribute from Sodom, but allowed His colleagues to accept it, which probably contributed to the Amorites eventual downfall.

While Abrams descendant Israel left for Egypt to escape famine, the Amorite descendants stayed to fill their inequity. As the nation of Israel returned from captivity they found the descendants (Sheshai, Ahiman, Talmai) of the old allies of Abram (Mamre, Eshcol, Aner) intimidating in power, but fallen into depravity. Therefore the now fallen Amorites(nephilim) were to be judged by God through the Israelites for their transgressions.

This is very interesting. It caused me to think about when it says the Nephilim are sons of Anak and Anak son of Arba. This could be referring to actual sons, grandsons, etc. But it could also be referring to a place and the people who live there.
We use descriptive language such as 'Sons of the Pioneers'.

 

[Michael74]

So first we have established that it is the exact same word, H5303 - nephil, used in both Gen.6:4 and in Num. 13:33.

The same word is used, but I would point out that the Genesis 6 nephil were not listed as being with Noah on the ark. The Numbers nephil may have been different somehow.

 

[JLB]

This is from the transliteration from the Hebrew.
It says the sons of Anak of the Nephilim
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/num13.pdf

What does the NKJV give for a reason that they put it in parenthesis?

I don't build doctrine I just try to sort things out. Especially things in the OT I always learn a bunch. When I'm studying a particular topic things jump out that I didn't really think about before or didn't have a reference point to tie
them to.

A son of man can not begat a son of God.

Only God can beget a son of God.

JLB

 

[Deborah13]

The same word is used, but I would point out that the Genesis 6 nephil were not listed as being with Noah on the ark. The Numbers nephil may have been different somehow.

That is a good point and one that we may be able to determine. The word nephilim, does not always mean the same thing either. Would you say that in the Bible terms used and names of tribes and people as individuals often have meaning?
For those who support the angel view of 'sons of God' they are doing just that because in Job the angels are called 'sons of God'. So I understand why they see this.
I see that nephilim may have been a descriptive term which even Genesis 6 supports.

We see Arba described as both Nephilim and a great man, keeping peace.
We see Goliath and Og as both having large physical stature and stature with the people of Cannon for being a warrior and a king respectively. But not called Nephilim but Rephaim. Is there a connection? And if so what is it?

 

[Michael74]

Consider who it was that claimed to have seen the Nephilim in Numbers 22, and the circumstances:

But the other men replied, “Those people are much too strong for us.” Then they started spreading rumors and saying, “We won’t be able to grow anything in that soil. And the people are like giants. In fact, we saw the Nephilim who are the ancestors of the Anakim. They were so big that we felt as small as grasshoppers." Numbers 13:31-33 CEV

Consider what they said about crops in the land of milk and honey. Consider that they were punished for what they said shortly after.

Joshua and Caleb did not make the claim about Nephilim. It was the others. Instead, Caleb said:

And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it. Numbers 13:30 KJV

 

[Michael74]

We see Arba described as both Nephilim and a great man, keeping peace.

Arba was an Anakim, not a Nephilim.

And the name of Hebron before was Kirjatharba; which Arba was a great man among the Anakims. And the land had rest from war. Joshua 14:15 KJV

 

[Deborah13]

Arba was an Anakim, not a Nephilim.

And the name of Hebron before was Kirjatharba; which Arba was a great man among the Anakims. And the land had rest from war. Joshua 14:15 KJV

Post #2
Num 13:33 and there we saw the Nephilim, sons of Anak, of the Nephilim; and we are in our own eyes as grasshoppers; and so we were in their eyes.'

Post #3
Jos 15:13 And unto Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a part among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of the LORD to Joshua, even the city of Arba the father of Anak, which city is Hebron.
Jos 14:15 And the name of Hebron before was Kirjatharba; which Arba was a great man among the Anakims. And the land had rest from war.

They saw the Nephilim?
The Nephilim were the sons of Anak?
Anak was of the Nephilim?
Arba was the father of Anak?
Arba was a great man among the Anakims?

We've been looking at these scriptures to together and answering the questions.
If any of your answers to the questions above are no, please explain why.
If you have questions for us please share them. Please share whatever you see in the scriptures as we go along. And please share any other scriptures that you know or find that have not only ready been covered.
Thanks for your input, Michael.

 

[Deborah13]

A son of man can not begat a son of God.

Only God can beget a son of God.

JLB

Sorry JLB, I don't understand what this post has to do with my post about what is written in the Hebrew, in KJV, and in YLT.

I asked you if the NKJV explains why they put that in parenthesis.

So I don't understand your post?

 

[Michael74]

They saw the Nephilim?

Consider who it was that claimed to have seen the Nephilim in Numbers 13, and the circumstances:

But the other men replied, “Those people are much too strong for us.” Then they started spreading rumors and saying, “We won’t be able to grow anything in that soil. And the people are like giants. In fact, we saw the Nephilim who are the ancestors of the Anakim. They were so big that we felt as small as grasshoppers." Numbers 13:31-33 CEV

Consider what they said about crops in the land of milk and honey. Consider that they were punished for what they said shortly after.

Joshua and Caleb did not make the claim about Nephilim. It was the others. Instead, Caleb said:

And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it. Numbers 13:30 KJV

 

[Deborah13]

Deu 9:1 Hear, O Israel: Thou art to pass over Jordan this day, to go in to possess nations greater and mightier than thyself, cities great and fenced up to heaven,
Deu 9:2 A people great and tall, the children of the Anakims, whom thou knowest, and of whom thou hast heard say, Who can stand before the children of Anak!

Jos 11:21 And at that time came Joshua, and cut off the Anakims from the mountains, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel: Joshua destroyed them utterly with their cities.
Jos 11:22 There was none of the Anakims left in the land of the children of Israel: only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod, there remained.

They weren't lying they saw the sons of Anak of the Nephilim, who's father was Arba, the Anakim.
So Numbers 13:33 says Anak was of the nephilim and Deut. 9:2 says Anak was an Anakim.
The first posts in this thread quotes Joshua 11:22.

 

[agua.]

Hey Deb I haven't dug into your expose fully yet but I'm starting to get an inclination that Nephilim and Rephaim may have been tribes/peoples rather than individual entities like you've hinted. What things group these people together aside from size ? I'm hoping you find more links here.

 

[JLB]

Sorry JLB, I don't understand what this post has to do with my post about what is written in the Hebrew, in KJV, and in YLT.

I asked you if the NKJV explains why they put that in parenthesis.

So I don't understand your post?

Things is parenthesis were added by the translators for clarification.

In your study of who the sons and fathers were of these various tribes,
Please consider and show who the Father is of the sons of God.


The sons of God and daughters of men shows a clear and distinct contrast of species.

JLB

 

[Deborah13]

Hey Deb I haven't dug into your expose fully yet but I'm starting to get an inclination that Nephilim and Rephaim may have been tribes/peoples rather than individual entities like you've hinted. What things group these people together aside from size ? I'm hoping you find more links here.

I hope so too. We may just find that we can't make any direct tie at all or that they are linked only by where they lived and physical description. But Genesis 6 also says they were mighty men, heroes of old. Maybe we can find a link from that description as well such as what it appears to say about Arba.

I think Arba was an individual and he had a son named Anak but we know from the way the Bible describes tribes they were named after their founders and where the lived sometimes was as well.
I think that Sinthesis is thinking along the lines of Arba representing a people rather than an individual man. I'm thinking maybe both.

In this thread I really haven't moved ahead so far. I just brought the old over here and we had all agreed on what scriptures had been posted so far.

I think Michael post and my post back to him was important in understanding some of this.
In that Anak is described as both Nephilim and Anakim. Which would mean Arba would also be both Nephilim and Anakim if we are talking lineage.

 

[Deborah13]

Things is parenthesis were added by the translators for clarification.

In your study of who the sons and fathers were of these various tribes,
Please consider and show who the Father is of the sons of God.


The sons of God and daughters of men shows a clear and distinct contrast of species.

JLB

I'm trying to find out who the Nephilim are identified as if at all possible whether they lead to angels or men.
I think there are people who are teaching things about the description of these people that is not justified by scripture, that goes beyond what you are stating about the 'sons of God'. I understand your position and why you hold it. If we find that this study supports that in anyway, so be it. It says what it says. I am not trying to disprove your position or support it just get down to what the Bible says about the Nephilim.
So far we have debunked one of the things that some people are out there saying and implying. People such as Steve Quayle.
Scripture clearly says that there was 'one man' with six fingers and toes. So for them to be espousing that Nephilim in this day and age can be identified by having these extra appendages is just not true.
That is clearly a false teaching.
I do not see that what you are saying is a false teaching because the idea that the 'sons of God' could be angels is clearly stated in Job.
Please stick with this if you can. The more eyes the better. I hope that you will search the scripture as well and provide scriptures too.
I'm hoping Edward will be able to as well seeing it appears that he has studied this more than anyone else.

 

[Michael74]

I'm trying to find out who the Nephilim are identified as if at all possible whether they lead to angels or men.

People have debated this for a long time, and neither group has been able to convince the other that its interpretation is the correct one. The ancient Hebrews may have understood who the people mentioned in Genesis 6 were, but today we can only take our best guess.

In any case, the Israelites seem to have eliminated the giants when they moved into the promised land. Giants are not mentioned in the Bible after that time. There don't seem to be any 10 foot giants around today. CNN would have reported on it by now, and the NBA would have signed them up.

 

[Deborah13]

People have debated this for a long time, and neither group has been able to convince the other that its interpretation is the correct one. The ancient Hebrews may have understood who the people mentioned in Genesis 6 were, but today we can only take our best guess.

In any case, the Israelites seem to have eliminated the giants when they moved into the promised land. Giants are not mentioned in the Bible after that time. There don't seem to be any 10 foot giants around today. CNN would have reported on it by now, and the NBA would have signed them up.

I tended to agree with you. We are not going to be able to prove who the 'sons of God, gods' were in Genesis 6.
But we all knew that. It was just an attempt to trace back as far as we could those that were known to be Nephilim where ever that lead. And to find anything else that distinguish them from others, other than size and they were mighty men of old. Or things that were said to distinguish them from others but did not.
I think this has been at least partially accomplished.

 

[agua.]

I tended to agree with you. We are not going to be able to prove who the 'sons of God, gods' were in Genesis 6.
But we all knew that. It was just an attempt to trace back as far as we could those that were known to be Nephilim where ever that lead. And to find anything else that distinguish them from others, other than size and they were mighty men of old. Or things that were said to distinguish them from others but did not.
I think this has been at least partially accomplished.

Deb is there any indication so far that these mighty men were more technologically advanced in construction or weaponry ?

 

[Deborah13]

Deb is there any indication so far that these mighty men were more technologically advanced in construction or weaponry ?

I haven't seen anything in the Bible about that. Have you?
It does say that they had great cities with high walls when Joshua went in to conquer.

 

[chessman]

Deb is there any indication so far that these mighty men were more technologically advanced in construction or weaponry ?

I haven't seen anything in the Bible about that. Have you?
It does say that they had great cities with high walls when Joshua went in to conquer.

Evidently they had the technology to construct a firm bed:

Deuteronomy 3:11 For only Og, king of Bashan, was left from the remnant of the Rephaim. Indeed, his bedstead—it was a bedstead of iron. It is in Rabbah of the Ammonites. Nine cubits is its length, and four cubits is its width according to the cubit of a man.

As for weaponry, they evidently were not that skilled at making a helmet.

1 Samuel 17:49 Then David put his hand into the bag and took a stone from it and slung it. He struck the Philistine on his forehead, and the stone sank into his forehead, and he fell on his face to the ground.

1 Samuel 17:5 A bronze helmet was on his head, and he was clothed with scale body armor; the weight of the body armor was five thousand bronze shekels.