Nephilim Nonsense

The Truth is not so profitable as adding brick and mortar to the Wall of False Prophecy.  Facts can be told in a few paragraphs and the evidence shown with few exhibits, but very profitable volumes can be constructed of conjecture, and irresistible imaginations may be invented and sold as fiction or truth to a world that is easily deceived.

I recently received this question in response to some comments I made on the Nephilim Theory:

Nicklas,  …you said … about the nephilim, that angels having those kinds of relations with women contradicts some things Jesus said.  My question is that Genesis 6:2 and 6:4 when read plainly, seem support the “hybrid theory”,  so is there something I’m not understanding here?  I’ve subscribed and have been listening for a few months now and love hearing all the things you have to say, so please any comments at all would be much appreciated.  Dan

Dan,  yes, those verses do “seem to support the “hybrid theory” only after the presumption has been accepted that the ‘sons of god’ are demons or fallen angels.  There is however nothing express or explicit  in the text or in the entire bible to support that presumption.  First of all when we read the first seven verses of Genesis Six we must determine what the subject is.  “And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.”

The subject: God is explaining the reason for the Flood judgement.

Only if we presume that ‘the sons of god’ in the text are demons or fallen angels could we conclude that God is judging mankind for what those demons have done.  Without this conjecture there are no hybrids involved in God’s announcement of the Flood judgment in the context.  The first question is, who does the bible say that the ‘sons of god’ are?  There are only eleven verses in the entire Bible where the phrase is used.  And I have to admit that the ‘sons of god’ can refer to any created being of God including angels, demons, men, even Satan, and finally those individuals regenerated in the Blood of the Messiah by faith, yes even us.

So we must look at the context, without presupposition, to determine who the ‘sons of god’ are in each instance.  The only word in the text that even allows this conjecture is the word that is translated ‘giants’ from the Hebrew: H5303 נפל    נפיל nephı̂yl  nephil, from which we get the word ‘nephilim’.  There is only one other place in the Bible where the word is used and there it is is used in reference to men who are tall in stature, and that after the Flood.  Giants and tyrants can also be synonymous for example, Goliath was a giant which used his great stature to bully others, he was a tyrant.  So whether the giants in the text were actually great in stature or only tyrants or both remains inconclusive.  But it is not express nor explicit in the text that these giants were hybrid demon/humans.   So we need to continue our investigation along other lines to rightly divide the text.

The next hypothesis to investigate is the question of whether demons or fallen angels can procreate with women?  What does the Bible say?  In the beginning of Genesis we find this phrase repeated through out the creation account, “after his kind“,  regarding the self-replicating plants and all of the “living creatures” which procreate.  So here we have a witness that God established some reproductive rules or natural law for His creation.  Does the witness of creation itself verify this?  While there seems to be a few exceptions (such as the jackass) they would be extremely limited and consistent so as to even be regarded as within the law established by our Creator.

If this established law were not in place we could reasonably expect the earth to be literally swimming in a genetic soup at this point in history.  But we are not.  Are there any instances that we can examine today where women have procreated with other animals?  No.  If it were true, it would absolutely be a common place occurrence by now,  it would be in your local news, perhaps so prevalent as to not even be news worthy.  But this is not the reality.  If women cannot procreate with the other living creatures of the earth, is it any more reasonable to believe that women can procreate with beings from the spiritual plane of angels and demons?   What does the Word have to say about that?

The bible indicates that all angels, demons, and other created beings on the spiritual plane are individually created by God and do not procreate.  Jesus himself verifies this explicitly at Mat 22:29-30  Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.  (30)  For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

If the angels procreated sexually in heaven, would they do this in fornication or marriage?  Seems to me that angelic orgies would not be in keeping with our Heavenly Father’s character.  Because they do not marry we can safely conclude that they do not sexually procreate with each other at all nor could they conjugate with women in any way.  Therefore, these alleged fallen angels would need the creative power only attributed to God’s Holy Spirit when he created the seed of our Messiah in the womb of Mary the young virgin.  Nowhere does the Word endow angels with this type of creation power.

Because of these facts, the scriptural and natural evidence present I have no choice but to conclude that the Giants of scripture, the Nephilim,  were only men who were great in stature or renowned as powerful tyrants or both, but they certainly were not demon/human hybrids.  The scripture simply does not support this type of imagination!

For an account of what I believe the true interpretation of this Bible passage means please refer to my Study in the Book of Genesis here.

peace be with you all, Nicklas

15 thoughts on “Nephilim Nonsense”

  1. I have a rather different theory than all of this. the angels are non reproducing species and essentially immaterial, though capable of materialization. They got no DNA to provide. the motive stated in Enoch is strictly lust, not “corruption of the lineage.” They could materialize and being shape shifters could grow equipment to allow them to mate with women and experience the pleasures they had observed.

    The children however were not theirs. I’m not a big fan of Enoch, but notice there was an explosion of knowledge in Genesis and might have gone farther than most would think. The angels in Enoch taught the women all manner of tricks and seduction and probably were not monogamous but sent them off to seduce leaders to gain more social influence through their wives. What did these men want? super soldiers. Giants were in the earth already AND AFTER WHEN THE SONS OF GOD etc. (the term is used for angels in heaven and for Adam as referring to direct creations of God). So genetic engineering was already being tried, and the angels improved the technology. The results were not just more giants but beings with a mix of human and reptile, amphibian, insect, etc. DNA for various purposes and just to do it.

    As for incapacity of anything to breed outside its kind, there are some weird examples that indicate otherwise, or else that the “kinds” were far more amorphous than we think. Genetic engineering bypasses the sex act, by passes vitro sperm and egg meeting, and cuts and pastes.

    The aliens we see or hear about now, are modified humans whose ancestors were offworld when the Flood hit.

    A Possible History of Life on Mars by Christine Erikson on amazon kindle deals with all this and issues about hybrid souls, etc. The Redemption applied actually to all creation, Rev. 5:13 and the idea of “kinsman redeemer” is a misnomer. that is a legal issue of responsibility of relatives and nothing to do with The Redemption and redemption can be done by payoff or by just grabbing and rescuing.


  2. Ive got another question. Have you ever heard of author Zechariah Sitchin and his books on the ancient sumarians and the Annunaki? He was one of the few to decipher sumarian tablets.He speaks about the planet Nibiru. He believes in God the creator of all and uses the bible and believes it to be true. God Bless Joe


    1. Greetings Joe, you may want to become aware that Stitchin has been found a fraud when it comes to his ability to read the Sumarian text, and of this there is no doubt. i highly recommend (a brother in Christ) Mike Heiser’s website containing an abundance of evidence throughly debunking Stitchin. Glory to Yah, and peace on your house.


  3. I able to separteapologize yourir. The reason I believe in ufos is because i have seen them. Also shadow people,which are associated with ufos, Both me and my son saw these entities, I called my pastor some brothers came over and in the name of JESUS ordered them out! There was 4 of them 1 tall one and 3 little ones. Demons I believe they are associated with the ufo phenomena. But just like Tom Horn another author who believes because of his families experience with ufos they fled at the name of JESUS. Thats why I believe the fallen ones are demons thats what I theorize from my experience. Romans 8:38 I can apply this verse : ” For I am persuaded,that neither death,nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, God Bless Joseph


    1. Notwithstanding the fact that the bible excludes demon-human hybrids through sexual procreation, I do believe in demonic activity, that demons do masquerade as aliens, taking advantage of the overwhelming amount of fiction to deceive their victims. Demons take advantage of those who believe in the fiction to delude them and invoke fear. I also believe that the Name of Jesus will drive them away because I have experienced and witnessed these types of attacks or encounters.

      Demons don’t need sexual procreation to inhabit-possess a body. Jesus cast out numerous demons, even sent them into the swine. And He said to the Pharisees/hypocrites “Ye are of your father the devil”, He was not saying that their mothers has sex with Satan and they were the resultant offspring. There were, and there still are multitudes of demon possessed who’s father is the devil out there even today, but they are not sexually procreated demon-human hybrids.


  4. In the book of Jude it mentions a prophecy from the book of Enoch. My first question is : Have you ever read the book of Enoch? Second question : God does everything for a reason. Do you think, that what was mentioned in Jude, about the book of Enoch, is all God wanted us to know about this book? Or do you think he wanted us to do some digging? What L.A. Marzulli states about his position is theory. He is still investigating. He makes that clear. The most important thing is salvation. Another question I have is from your sethite position how do you explain the ufo phenomena to your congregation? Do you believe in ufos? How do you know that after the fall God didn’t remove the sex organs of the other angels? If you say that’s not possible then you are limiting God. Like Carl Segan your putting God in a box. THESE ARE MY QUESTIONS.Were to agree to disagree . Love you brother, their both theory to me, but I lean more towards L,A s theory about the sons of god being fallen angels. GOD BLESS and remember JESUS IS LORD. Nothing can ever change that! JOSEPH


    1. 1. read a Book Of Enoch? yes.
      2. is all God wanted us to know…? I don’t presume to know.
      I’m glad that “L.A. Marzulli states … his position is theory” that’s honest.
      3. Another Question… I don’t know what Seth has to do with UFO’s, therefore cannot understand or answer this one.
      4. UFO’s? I believe they’re Unidentified, and being that, I choose not to waste my time in speculation.
      5. speaking of speculation, you ask me to answer a question about Angels that speculates that Angels once had “sex organs”. I choose not to engage in such folly.

      Speaking of folly, it would be folly to think that any man could put God in a box. To the contrary it is God who has put limits on man and His creation. Those limits are His Laws both natural (fixed) and moral (voluntary), the former (like gravity) we learn to work with or are broken and the later (like Idolatry), we ignore at our own peril. Because I point to those limits as excluding the vain imaginings of men you bring a false accusation to bear.

      I have proffered no “theory”. I have only told you what God’s Word says concerning this topic. God’s Word is my final authority for doctrine, faith and practice. If it is not yours, then you are reading the wrong blog.

      peace be with you brother 🙂


  5. Awesome Nicklas, keep it up. The Nephilim and other bogus conspiracies theories can serve what time machines and aliens serve to sciene: science fiction. We can have our own religious fiction where we write books, magazines, and make movies on these narratives. In this way, we can have great entertainment without accepting (and hence fearing) ‘hybrid’ ‘demonic’ beings living in the world!
    God Bless


  6. 1. why did the ancients in the Septuagint write Gigantes “earthborn” in place of nephilim? Because there was something else born not of this earth, but upon the earth.
    2. Why would “godly” Sethites take sinful Cainites as wives or vice-versa? Were their no daughters of Seth and no sons of man? And why daughters of “Adam” not daughters of “ish”? Because there was something else happening. Why would this union be so significant as to produce Giborim or tall people (or hybrid animalistic creatures as many cultures agree) when unions today of such do not do this? There’s natural evidence for you brother. Perhaps you forget that not only does nearly every culture in the world have great flood legends, but inall these they also have accounts of their ‘gods’ coming down from heaven and taking human wives.
    3. donkeys, horses, zebras, all the same ‘kind’, same as wolf beagle great dane and shiatsu… my point is, define kinds. a jackass is no exception as he says. its adherence to the rule.
    4. Yehushuah said angels “in heaven” not ‘earthborn’ or ‘fallen ones’, which is the exact meaning of. Nephilim…
    5. If demons are fallen angels, why are they not locked up in chains of darkness like their brothers, and why. is Helel still wandering in the earth? Because Satan doesn’t do his own dirty work, and demons are not angels. How is it that an angel can destroy hundreds of thousands but a demon can only possess and manipulate?
    6. The most obvious, and reported in the news that Nick seems to think is so credible. Transgenics! Just because the ability ‘may’ not be possible today doesn’t make it impossible tomorrow. You WILL see women giving birth to not humans if Yah doesn’t step in first. What made the days of Noah so special that the Messiah uses it as a sign of his return. If the usual sinfulness was the trouble, why did the animals “all flesh” have to be drowned. also? Why is it only today that humans now are mixing fish DNA into tomatoes?
    7. Okaterian in the Greek means a dwelling or a body. In the Messianic Scriptures it says angels left their own okatarian for another. This sin of angels goes way beyond ‘relocating’. and both Peter and Jude. equate this with ‘unnatural unions” that happened in Sodom and Gomorrah. Hence the Canaanite giants…
    And one more thing… if a demon possessed person rapes someone, is it not a demon also committing fornication?
    And think about how only Muslim nations occupy all the lands mentioned with the end times, and that the Ottoman empire existed just as long as the Catholic dominion. They were wounded, separated like being sliced with a sword, the Muslims are healing that wound now. Sorry bro, trying to refute the plain truth is nonsence…


    1. not withstanding the opening (deleted) ad hominim attack, all you are presenting here is conjecture and unrelated questions. I think you make the point of my opening paragraph. peace Nicklas


  7. As to ‘Jesus himself verifies this explicitly at Mat 22:29-30’
    Animals do not marry [tho a few live together for life] and yet the procreate.
    So then, perhaps wedlock is only required of men, but neither animals or angels…
    There is a command for women not to lie with animals, perhaps this is the commnd not to lie with angels. [Yet would lucifer obey that particular command?]
    Jesus himself verifies this explicitly at Mat 22:29-30, hmmmm.

    Lastly, ‘they certainly were not demon/human hybrids’.
    without scriptural Proof, please change that to ‘they most probably…..

    Finding your show the most scripturally edifying available, I remain
    your fellow humble bondservant,


    1. Because I cannot prove a negative – I believe the burden of proof is not mine. Conjecture is not proof – and that is all the theory has. and “volumes can be constructed of conjecture”. and those volumes are too hard for most to resist… just like the left behind pre-tribulation theory, also built on complete conjecture, now a whole industry needs to defend it and whole volumes of conjecture have been developed to support it.


  8. Regarding your point about

    נפל נפיל
    nephı̂yl nephil
    From H5307; properly, a feller, that is, a bully or tyrant: – giant.

    I believe that strong doth err here. He’s right to say it is from H5307, but 5307,8,9 are all the same hebrew word נפל & נפל & נפל
    and if you looik at 5307 strongs says;
    A primitive root; to fall, in a great variety of applications (intransitively or causatively, literally or figuratively): – be accepted, cast (down, self, [lots], out), cease, die, divide (by lot), (let) fail, (cause to, let, make, ready to) fall (away, down, -en, -ing), fell (-ing), fugitive, have [inheritamce], inferior, be judged [by mistake for H6419], lay (along), (cause to) lie down, light (down), be (X hast) lost, lying, overthrow, overwhelm, perish, present (-ed, -ing), (make to) rot, slay, smite out, X surely, throw down.

    and in the kjconcordance it shows the following translations in the kjbible
    Total KJV Occurrences: 439
    fall, 151
    fell, 122
    fallen, 55
    cast, 24
    falleth, 15
    down, 9
    and H5308 the same word נפל as ‘fell, fall and fallen [and occasion]’
    fall, fell, fallen, cast, down
    I sense a pattern…
    H5309 the same word נפל
    untimely birth, or abortion or still birth
    who has not heard of a dead baby being called a fallen angel?
    or ‘whoever hurts one of these little ones’ it ain’t good
    That’s not precisely scriptural. but a pattern is developing.
    I contend that strong is [as is not quite often yet regularly] misleading. So that;
    “properly, a feller, that is, a bully or tyrant: – giant.”
    should read ‘properly, a fallen, that is an unseemly birth, an abomination that only a flood can cure.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.