logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline shalom82  
#1 Posted : Sunday, February 10, 2008 2:36:11 PM(UTC)
shalom82
Joined: 9/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 735
Location: Penna

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Shalom Qodeshim,
I was just wondering if anybody had any reliable or pertinent information about giants. I am not trying to start another outlandish post and I don't offer any information of my own, but considering biblical figures like Goliath, Og the Amorite and king of Bashan who was called the last of the Rephaim, and of course the Rephaim which included Zamzummites, Anakites, and Emites I figured there might be some other evidence that there were indeed Giants at one point in history.

Deuteronomy 3:11 says that the iron bed/coffin of Og, king of Bashan, was 9 cubits by 4 cubits (approximately 13 ft long by 6 ft wide).

The word Rephaim means giant in Hebrew as it appears in Genesis 15:19 for example.
Here is another example:
Deu 2:10 (The Ěmites had dwelt there formerly, a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anaqim.
Deu 2:11 They were also reckoned as Repha’ites, like the Anaqim, but the Mo’aḇites call them Ěmites......

Deu 2:19 ‘And when you come near the children of Ammon, do not distress them nor stir yourself up against them, for I do not give you any of the land of the children of Ammon as a possession, because I have given it to the descendants of Lot as a possession.’
Deu 2:20 (That was also reckoned as a land of Repha’ites. Repha’ites formerly dwelt there. But the Ammonites call them Zamzummim, a people as great and numerous and tall as the Anaqim. But יהוה destroyed them before them, and they dispossessed them and dwelt in their place,....


There is a discrepancy as to whether Goliath was 9 foot 6 or if he was 6 foot 6. That is according to wikipedia. Earlier versions of the septuagint and the Qumran scroll have it at that height...in conflict with later renderings.

Still though...even with that debate...look at Goliath's spear:

I Samuel 17:7 "And the staff of his (Goliath's) spear was like a weaver's beam; and his spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron: and one bearing a shield went before him."

That is 15.079618733 pounds...according to http://www.unitconversio...-hebrew-conversion.html. That would take a very strong man to wield such a weapon. I am not saying that it would be impossible for a normal sized man to wield, but that was only the weight of the spear head. A lifting bar weighs usually 45 pounds nowadays. Imagine taking that and thrusting it around for what could be an hour or two in battle. Remember you have to be deft and agile too....strike, stab and block quickly and gracefully. Whatever his height was this was a man of tremendous strength.


This is not scriptual, but rather anecdotal... but who's to say it wasn't true.

"The wicked emperor Hadrian, who conquered Jerusalem, boasted, 'I have conquered Jerusalem with great power.' Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai said to him, 'Do not boast. Had it not been the will of Heaven, you would not have conquered it.' Rabbi Johanan then took Hadrian into a cave and showed him the bodies of Amorites who were buried there. One of them measured eighteen cubits [approximately 30 feet] in height. He said, 'When we were deserving, such men were defeated by us, but now, because of our sins, you have defeated us'" (quoted in Judaism, edited by Arthur Hertzberg, p.155-156, George Braziller, New York: 1962).


Looking forward to your wisdom and insights,

Shalom Aleichem




YHWH's ordinances are true, and righteous altogether.
Offline Noach  
#2 Posted : Sunday, February 10, 2008 6:32:27 PM(UTC)
Noach
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 127


Hi Shalom. the followig is from Yada Yahweh "Noah" chapter:

An errant rendering of naphylym in the next verse, is almost always translated to infer that "giants" were living on the earth. I can only assume that the Latin scholars who did so, missed the religious connotations and assumed that physical prowess would be the only reason to mention such people. "The Naphylym (naphylym - plural of naphal, meaning those who prostrate themselves, who have fallen away, who are oppressed, cast down, and die) existed (hayah) in the (ba ha) land ('erets - region) in that day (yowm - time), and also (gam) afterward ('ahar - at a later time)." (Genesis 6:4)
From the beginning, Satan's religions have all had his victims bowing down, prostrating themselves to a false god. As a result of having ignored Yahweh and His Word, out of apathy, ignorance, and/or convenience, they become victimized by religion and are oppressed in this life and cast down in the next.
Today (read 'ahar/at a later time), the people best known for their repetitive prostrates are Muslims. That's significant because Naphysh was also the second-to-last son of Ishmael, Islam's patriarch. And as you might suspect, the Naphysh were an "Arabian tribe." That is to say that Islam, the Arabic word for "submission," isn't new. Satan has been corrupting men for a long time. His favorite strategy remains to present himself as God. It is the essence of the terrorist chant of "Allahu Akbar!" Allah is the Greatest! - or so he wants fallen man to believe.

I think the answer to your question is a combination of a literal giant and one who prostrates. Hope this helps

Noach
Offline J&M  
#3 Posted : Monday, February 11, 2008 4:29:19 AM(UTC)
J&M
Joined: 9/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 234
Location: Eretz Ha'Quodesh

Have a look at this:-

Giants etc
Offline jojocc  
#4 Posted : Monday, February 11, 2008 4:36:04 AM(UTC)
jojocc
Joined: 12/1/2007(UTC)
Posts: 97

Hmmmm...

According to archealogical evidence, there certainly were and are giants around. The tallest man in the world at the moment is 8'5" one Leonid Stadnik from Ukraine. I'm sure some of you guys might not find him so tall, but he is a full 3 feet taller than me, which makes him a giant in my book. The tallest recorded man was 8'11", Robert Padlow - sounds pretty gigantic.

נפל (nefel) is commonly used in modern Hebrew to mean giant, as is ענק (anak) - Just a note, nafal indeed means to prostrate oneselve/fall down/cast down/die. Please note the different voweling, nefel with the e sound means giant. Nafal is a verb, nefel is a noun.

In my Hebrew copy of the Tanakh, the word used is הנפלים (hanfelim) which follows the same pattern as for example 'book', ספר(sefer) singular, ספרים (sferim) in the plural. I am not trying to say that the translation in YY is wrong, only that it is likely that the nfelim really were giants/tall people.

What is very interesting while I was looking up the names of the tallest men on earth, is that many of the names do happen to be Muslim names. Here is one of the sites I looked up, have a look for yourselves.... http://www.heightsite.co...4_tallest-contenders.htm

It is likely that many of the decendents of hanfelim are Arabs and/or Muslims, for they will have come from the tribes that hanfelim are associated with.

This also makes me think of the spies that were sent into the land, they came back and said, ושׁם ראינו את־הנפילים בני ענק מן־הנפלים ונהי בעינינו כחגבים וכן היינו בעיניהם׃ Num 13:33

Here both words are used, "and there ושׁם we saw ראינו the nfelim את־הנפילים the sons of Anak (Anak literally meaning giant) בני ענק from/from among/out of the nfelim מן־הנפלים and we will be ונהי in our eyes בעינינו like locusts כחגבים like we were וכן היינו in their eyes.

I get the impression from this that hanfelim were big lads. To be like a locust makes you small.

I do not doubt that hanfelim were indeed prostrating themselves all over the place to baal, but I do beleive that they were, and that their decendents today are as giants to your average man on the street.

שלום יהוה לכל עם וגם אהבה אבאנו
Offline Icy  
#5 Posted : Monday, February 11, 2008 5:08:42 AM(UTC)
Icy
Joined: 9/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 641
Man
Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
J&M, your link was blocked at my work. It was cited as "Racisim and Hate".
Offline jojocc  
#6 Posted : Monday, February 11, 2008 6:23:29 AM(UTC)
jojocc
Joined: 12/1/2007(UTC)
Posts: 97

That's really rather amusing Icy, I'm not quite sure what is racist about it. I'll paste it for you (hope you don't mind J&M)

Here is the website: http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/giants.htm

Quote:

Giant Humans and Dinosaurs
This petrified finger found in cretaceous limestone, belonged to a "prehistoric" human. Broken short of the middle joint, it measures 7.6 cm (3 inches). At full length it would measure about 15 cm (6 inches). In the photo, it is compared to a regular full-length finger. Excavations of this limestone has also revealed a child's tooth and human hair.


Sectioning reveals the typical porous bone structure expected in a human finger. Cat-scan and MRI identified joints and traced tendons throughout the length of the fossil.

Cat-scan shows dark areas interpreted as the interior of the bones and bone marrow. These areas are less dense than surrounding stones, and easily pass X-rays, causing darkening of the image. Black area is caused by sectioning.

This dinosaur footprint in cretaceous limestone on the banks of the Paluxy River is approximately 30 cm (one foot) across, and located with similar tracks. Early excavations in this area revealed human footprints inside the dinosaur tracks leading to rumors that the human prints had claws -- later excavations uncovered human footprints up to 64 cm long (25 inches) next to the dinosaur prints -- this discounted the doubters. A human handprint was also found.

This means that dinosaurs occupied the arbitrary and spurious "cretaceous" period of geological history. Human prints contemporary with dinosaurs contradict modern evolution theories because mankind was not to evolve for another 75 to 100 million years.

One of many human footprints contemporary with dinosaurs taken from the Paluxy River located in Dinosaur Park near Glen Rose, Texas. Pictured with my foot, it exceeds 45 cm (18 inches) in length. The cross-sectional cuts determined through compression studies that it was a woman's footprint. Estimates indicate her stature approximately 305 cm (10 feet) and 454 kg (1,000 lbs). Several strata of human prints with dinosaur prints have been excavated in this park. According to Dr. Carl Baugh, the archeologist who coordinated the excavations, these strata were laid down during the first few days of Noah's flood when water levels were low enough to allow daily tidal changes to form layers of mud so fleeing creatures could seek higher ground -- the upper strata showed no prints.

Obviously the people who lived contemporary with dinosaurs were intelligent, and the footprints indicate that they were quite human, as the large toe on primates is located close to the heel to facilitate clinging to branches.


Doctor Hilton Hinderliter of Apollo Campus, Pennsylvania State University studied the evidence presented at the Glen Rose, Texas excavations and stated: "I would have to say that the belief in evolution is in a state of terminal illness but its death will only be admitted by a new generation of scientists whose minds have not been prejudiced by the type of education now prevalent in the nation's public schools, an education which starts with the belief that evolution has happened, which interprets all evidence according to that faith and which simply discards any evidence which cannot be fitted into the evolutionary framework" (Quoted from "Dinosaurs" by Dr. Carl E. Baugh, 1987. Promise Publishing Co., Orange, CA 92667.

This interesting photograph is of a hammer found in similar strata. It's iron head and wooden handle are solidified in sandstone. Metallurgical studies show that it was constructed of a type of iron that could not have been made under present atmospheric conditions. It is believed that before the flood our atmosphere was compressed to approximately twice its current density, and no ultraviolet radiation.

In June of 1934, members of the Hahn family discovered a rock, sitting loose on a rock ledge beside a waterfall outside London, Texas. The site primarily consists of Cretaceous rock (75 to 100 million years old). Noticing that this weathered rock had wood protruding from it, they cracked it open, exposing the hammer head. To verify that the hammer was made of metal, they cut into one of the beveled sides with a file. The bright metal in the nick is still there, with no detectable corrosion. The unusual metallurgy is 96% iron, 2.6% chlorine and 0.74% sulfur (no carbon). Density tests indicate casting exceptional quality.
The density of the iron in a central, cross-sectional plane shows the interior metal to be very pure, with no bubbles. Modern industry cannot consistently produce iron castings with this quality, as evidenced by test results that show bubbles and density variations that have caused pump and valve bodies to break. The handle eye is partially coalifed with quartz and calcite crystalline inclusions, oval shaped, and roughly 1" x 1/2".

A Personal Testimony
Several years ago, I heard about human footprints being found alongside dinosaur tracks in a Cretaceous limestone in the vicinity of Glen Rose, Texas. There were newspaper accounts in both the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (June 17, 1982) and The Dallas Morning News. Also, Dallas area television stations Channel 5 and Channel 8 reported on the finds. I did not think much about this at the time but later, because of my extensive reading on the subject of evolution, I was reminded of it. In January, 1995, I made a trip to Glen Rose specifically to visit the Creation Evidences Museum and find out all I could about these footprints.

I discovered that the excavation work there is done for about two weeks in summer each year as the Paluxy River is too high in the other seasons. Also, the landowner allows the digging to proceed for only this limited time.

I visited the area of the river bank and observed for myself the large and clear left-right trails of dinosaur prints. Many are 6-10 inches deep, 2-3 feet across, and show a three-toed foot. I decided to visit the museum and find out all I could about these footprints.

During a long conversation that afternoon at the museum, I learned that human tracks had been uncovered in this area since at least 1910. Geologist Clifford Burdick, Ph.D., verified human tracks here in the 1940's. The work of the individuals connected now with the museum began about 1982. Since then, 57 footprints of man have been found in excavations along the Paluxy River and in at least one other site in the same general area. During my visit, I was shown casts of some of the footprints found previously. One section of rock is displayed which was cut out of the river bed because it contains one of the clearest footprints found to date. A cross-sectioning of one of the best finds is also displayed. Pressure laminations consistent with a human footprint in mud are clearly shown.

During our visit, I was shown casts of some of the footprints found previously. One section of rock is displayed which was cut out of the river bed because it contains one of the clearest footprints found to date. A cross-sectioning of one of the best finds is also displayed. Pressure laminations consistent with a human footprint in mud are clearly shown.

Several well credentialed scientists had witnessed and testified to the genuineness of the discoveries. Media from around the country had witnessed at least some of the discoveries. Evolutionists, however, had dismissed the human footprints as the carvings of Indians, the tracks of a sick dolphin, a case of misidentification, or an outright fraud. One gentleman was so threatened by the discoveries that he actually took a hammer, went to the river, and broke up some of the footprints to make them useless for study.

Some of the human footprints have been found right next to those of a dinosaur. One was even found inside the animal track! The relatively soft limestone rock is subject to rapid weathering from exposure. The human tracks are shallow and look like a footprint made in mud or wet cement. Because of this the details of the human prints are lost within days of the time of exposure.

I knew that the human footprints, found side by side with dinosaur tracks, if genuine, destroyed the theory of evolution all by themselves. Still, I wanted to see for myself. See agoracosmopolitan.com.

Along with two of my friends, Ted and Jorge Gomez, I went to Glen Rose to observe and participate in an excavation on June 19, 1995. We helped to remove the exposed rock ledge at the work site. This ledge covered the limestone layer in which the tracks had been previously discovered at other sites along the river. Each portion of the ledge we removed (approximately 50 sf.) weighed at least 2000 pounds. The removal of each piece took several men with sledge hammers and three heavy duty jacks hours of heavy work to accomplish. No Indian had ever lifted and then replaced this covering rock to carve anything! A dinosaur track, but no human track, was discovered on our first day.

Jorge and I returned to work on another site on June 29, 1995. This site was about 150 feet down river from our earlier location. Both sites were chosen because previous findings indicated a trail of footprints might extend to them. Dr. Carl Baugh (Ph.D. Anthropology, M. Archeology), was in charge of the excavation. Several of the people there had been working for the entire two week period.

When we arrived Dr. Baugh was beginning to carefully excavate clay from a depression in the target limestone. Several of us worked with hand trowels to remove the 3-4 inches of clay which overlay the fossil layer. This clay had been uncovered when the exposed covering rock had been removed the previous day. It was quite obvious that the clay layer had never been disturbed since its deposition. I worked within 3 feet of Dr. Baugh.

Once he suspected that the depression on which he was working could possibly be a human track, all other activity in the area ceased. Everyone then focused their attention on his work. Dr. Baugh removed the clay with utmost care and no chipping or sculpting occurred. Several of those in attendance testified to this on camera and that the site was previously unexposed or disturbed in any way. The rock ledge and clay had completely covered the depression until we removed them.

The depression in the limestone was clearly made by a large human foot. It was a right foot. The big toe and three rightmost toes made very clear impressions and rock ridges were found between the toe marks. The second toe made a lesser impression which is consistent with the way humans walk. There was a rock bump in front of each of the toes made when they pushed up the mud. The shape fit the arch and also the right side of a foot. The heel was not clear but looked as if the individual had slid in the mud. The depth of the impressions was consistent with the depth of tracks made by someone walking in mud. The toes were round and smooth. Everything was in the proper proportion.

Since I had the largest foot in attendance, size 13, my bare foot was used as a comparison for the extensive video tapes and photographs that documented the excavation. As my foot was both beside the footprint and in it for quite a while, I was able to examine it very closely.

Without any doubt, it was a human footprint.

I testify that everything I witnessed I have reported faithfully and without exaggeration.

M. Coppedge



Plaster casts of similar footprints found in Australia may be viewed at Rex Gilroy's Butterfly Museum near Tamworth, NSW, Australia, together with many other interesting artifacts.

In old river gravels near Bathurst, NSW, 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.

A fossicker searching the Winburndale River north of Bathurst discovered a large quartzitised fossil human molar tooth, far too big for any normal modern man. A similar find was made near Dubbo, N.S.W.

Prospectors working in the Bathurst district in the 1930's frequently reported coming across numerous large human footprints fossilised in shoals of red jasper.

Even more impressive were fossil deposits found by naturalist Rex Gilroy around Bathurst. He excavated from a depth of 6 feet (2 m) below the surface a fossil lower back molar tooth measuring 67 min. in length by 50mm. x 42 mm. across the crown. If his measurements are correct, the owner would have been at least 25 ft. tall, weighing well over 1,000 lbs!

At Gympie, Queensland, a farmer, Keith Walker, was ploughing his field when he turned up the large fragment of the back portion of a jaw which still possessed the hollow for a missing lower back molar tooth. This is now in Rex Gilroy's possession. The owner of the tooth would have stood at 10 feet tall.

In the Megalong Valley in the Blue Mountains NSW, a Mr P. Holman found in ironstone protruding from a creek bank the deeply impressed print of a large human-like foot. The print was that of the instep, with all 5 toes clearly shown. This footprint measures 7 inches across the toes. Had the footprint been complete it would have been at least 2 feet (60 cm in length, appropriate to a 12 foot human. However, the largest footprint found on the Blue Mountains must have belonged to a man 20 feet tall!

A set of 3 huge footprints was discovered near Mulgoa, south of Penrith, N.S.W. These prints, each measuring 2 ft long and 7 inches across the toes, are 6 ft. apart, indicating the stride of the 12 ft. giant who left them. These prints were preserved by volcanic lava and ash flows which "occurred millions of years" before man is supposed to have appeared on the Australian continent (if one is to believe the evolutionary theory):

Noel Reeves found monstrous footprints near Kempsey, N.S.W. in sandstone beds on the Upper Macleay River. One print shows a toe 4 inches (10cm) long and the total toe-span is 10 inches (25cm) - suggesting that the owner of the print may have been 17 feet tall.

It is certain the Aborigines were not the first to reach Australia. Anthropologists maintain mainland Aborigines are in fact quite recent arrivals who ate their predecessors who were akin to the New Guinea natives.

Aborigines themselves admit in their ancient folklore that this land was inhabited by several groups of men, as well as giants, before they settled here.




Fossilised human footprints have also been discovered in Sweden, and in Mexico.
Giant skeletons have been discovered throughout the United States.
Photos of giants from recent times.


An article from Strand magazine (December,1895) reprinted in Traces of the Elder Faiths of Ireland by W.G. Wood-Martin mentions this fossilized giant discovered during mining operations in County Antrim, Ireland:

"Pre-eminent among the most extraordinary articles ever held by a railway company is the fossilized Irish giant, which is at this moment lying at the London and North-Western Railway Company's Broad street goods depot, and a photograph of which is reproduced here. . . This monstrous figure is reputed to have been dug up by a Mr. Dyer whilst prospecting for iron ore in County Antrim.

The principal measurements are: entire length, 12ft. 2in.; girth of chest, 6ft. 6in.; and length of arms, 4ft. 6in. There are six toes on the right foot. The gross weight is 2 tons 15Yadat.; so that it took half a dozen men and a powerful crane to place this article of lost property in position for the Strand magazine artist.

Dyer, after showing the giant in Dublin, came to England with his queer find and exhibited it in Liverpool and Manchester at sixpence, sixpence a head, attracting scientific men as well as gaping sightseers".

Offline Icy  
#7 Posted : Monday, February 11, 2008 7:56:28 AM(UTC)
Icy
Joined: 9/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 641
Man
Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Thanks jojo. I don't see why that was blocked. Maybe evolutionists run the program that blocks stuff.
Offline shalom82  
#8 Posted : Monday, February 11, 2008 12:09:08 PM(UTC)
shalom82
Joined: 9/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 735
Location: Penna

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
This is really great stuff. I think there is enough biblical evidence to suggest that there were large races of people with extreme physical prowess at one point on this earth. Imagine the Israelites having to cross the Yarden and taking on these people...we like to pick on poor Israel for all their shortcomings...but would we have fared any better?

Uh, guys...there are rather large men over there...and their beards are longer than some of the men in the camp are tall...are you sure this is where YHWH told us to go?

It's not all that hard to see why these people would have been extremely evil and corrupt. As we see in our own times...physical prowess becomes an attribute to boast about and gives a sense of license. Look at the players in the sports leagues...many of them think they are above the law, can have whatever woman they want on any given day, and are often violent. AND THESE GUYS ARE NORMAL by relative standards. Imagine now that you are 15 feet tall and can wield a 200 pound spear with ease, pitch boulders like baseballs, drink wine and beer by the barrels, build cities with your own two hands, and take on armies....naw...that wouldn't go to your head. Better to bow down to gods you have created than to walk with the one true Elohim.

I think that might be a plausible explanation for it all! We find it so unrelatable and so preposterous that these ancients bowed down to carved idols...and desired to worship stone, metal and wood rather than YHWH who only wanted relationship and friendship from them. But could it be that they weren't bowing down to gods so much as they were bowing down to their own accomplishments, their own creations, their own power? They were exaulting themselves!!! Could it be that the ancients knew exactly what they were doing and were either consciously or subsconciously the first secular humanists???!!!!

Yevarekhekha YHWH

Shalom
YHWH's ordinances are true, and righteous altogether.
Offline Truth Seeker  
#9 Posted : Friday, February 29, 2008 6:18:00 PM(UTC)
Truth Seeker
Joined: 2/24/2008(UTC)
Posts: 20
Man
Location: Wisconsin

The nephillim are mentioned in Genesis 6:4. from the HCSB.

The Nephilim [a] were on the earth both in those days and afterwards, when the sons of God came to the daughters of man, who bore children to them. They were the powerful men of old, the famous men.

Footnotes:
Genesis 6:4 Possibly means "fallen ones"; traditionally giants; [Nm 13:31-33]

It depends on who you think "Sons of God" and "daughters of man" are.
Two schools of thought-The sons were fallen angels,daughters were normal human women.
The other idea has these sons and daughters being the children of Cain and those of Seth.
Jude 6 mentions angels that kept not thier own place or first estate.
It's definitely an interesting subject.
Offline Matthew  
#10 Posted : Thursday, January 8, 2009 3:05:00 AM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
How reliable is the Book of Enoch because it mentions giants as well, but it seems to indicate that the giant race was formed by fallen angels reproducing with women from earth.

Chapters VI and VII should be read together and Chapter VII immediately continues of VI. Then I've copied another section, Chapter XII a few chapters later:

CHAPTER VI.
1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' 3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' 4. And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' 5. Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. 6. And they were in all two hundred; who descended ⌈in the days⌉ of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. 7. And these are the names of their leaders: Sêmîazâz, their leader, Arâkîba, Râmêêl, Kôkabîêl, Tâmîêl, Râmîêl, Dânêl, Êzêqêêl, Barâqîjâl, Asâêl, Armârôs, Batârêl, Anânêl, Zaqîêl, Samsâpêêl, Satarêl, Tûrêl, Jômjâêl, Sariêl. 8. These are their chiefs of tens.

CHAPTER VII.
1. And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. 2. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: 3. Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, 4. the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. 5. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. 6. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.

Chapter XII
3. And I, Enoch was blessing the Lord of majesty and the King of the ages, and lo! the Watchers called me--Enoch the scribe--and said to me: 4. 'Enoch, thou scribe of righteousness, go, †declare† to the Watchers of the heaven who have left the high heaven, the holy eternal place, and have defiled themselves with women, and have done as the children of earth do, and have taken unto themselves wives: "Ye have wrought great destruction on the earth: 5. And ye shall have no peace nor forgiveness of sin: and inasmuch as †they† delight themselves in †their† children, 6. The murder of †their† beloved ones shall †they† see, and over the destruction of †their† children shall †they† lament, and shall make supplication unto eternity, but mercy and peace shall ye not attain."'

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/index.htm
Offline agat0r  
#11 Posted : Saturday, January 17, 2009 6:34:32 AM(UTC)
agat0r
Joined: 1/2/2009(UTC)
Posts: 30
Location: Florida

Hi guys,
OK, I am at the study of "giants". I figured this was as good a place to submit this as any other lconsidering this topic was touched upon a little earlier. Who were the giants? I know they are mentioned in Gen 6 but they are also mentioned(using the same Hebrew word) in Numbers where regular men are as locusts or grasshoppers in their sight. Did the flood not destroy them? Like Steve said earlier, I have trouble with "angels" coming to earth to breed with humans. What am I missing? Can KP please elaborate on the entire "sons of man, daughters of men, giants" debacle please? I think the Sons of God means "offspring of man w/ a nesamah", and daughters of men mean " homo sapiens w/o a nesamah". Perhaps this is what displeased Yahuweh leading to the flood, but I am a little perplexed at the source of "giants". Family members are asking about "angels" breeding w/ man but I , like Steve, can't reconcile it considering that they are spiritual....but didn't Mary conceive in this fashion also?Sigh. I think they are basing this on reading the book of Enoch, but since I haven't read it, perhaps someone here who has, can tell me if it is consistant with "scripture". I say: had God wanted us to read it, He would have said so while camping out with us 2000 years ago. Thoughts? I know one day, I will read it, but clearly I have much more to discover before getting to that place in my journey. Where and when were the "angels" cast down and for what purpose? Thanks for any help you can shed.
If ya aint a Gator, you must be Gator bait.
Offline In His Name  
#12 Posted : Saturday, January 17, 2009 7:05:19 AM(UTC)
In His Name
Joined: 9/7/2008(UTC)
Posts: 550

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Quote:
2. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: 3. Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, 4. the giants turned against them and devoured mankind. 5. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. 6. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.


An ell is roughly 2ft.(ref: wikipedia)

That would put the height of these giants at 3000 ells or 6000 ft. So a short giant would be like a mile tall...

I have a number of doubts about the probability of this; a standard skeletal system (muscle and bones) wouldn't support thie weight, could they get enough oxygen when standing, a cow would be like and ant to them, how would they sustain themselves?

To that point doesn't it say they devoured mankind, did Yah just start over and leave this part out of the story?

And where is the archeological record there should be some mighty big bones laying around somewhere.

I have to think this is early fiction, which is why Yah didn't have it placed in His Scripture.
“Because he clings to Me, is joined to Me, loves and delights in Me, desires Me, therefore I will deliver him, carry him safely away, cause him to escape from harm making him inaccessible and strong, and delivering him safely to heaven, because he has known, observed, cared for, recognized, instructed and advised others to use, designated, acknowledged, discerned, answered in, My name, authority, character, report, mark, and nature." Psalm 91:14
Offline agat0r  
#13 Posted : Saturday, January 17, 2009 7:53:28 AM(UTC)
agat0r
Joined: 1/2/2009(UTC)
Posts: 30
Location: Florida

I assume that is from the Book of Enoch? If so, doesn't this confirm my suspicions about the authenticity of the writings? The only exception would be if "3000" was actually "30", making them about 15 ft. Thanks for the information, In His Name.

If ya aint a Gator, you must be Gator bait.
Offline In His Name  
#14 Posted : Saturday, January 17, 2009 8:28:40 AM(UTC)
In His Name
Joined: 9/7/2008(UTC)
Posts: 550

Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Yes, the quote is from Matthew's post above quoting the Book of Enoch.

30 ells would make them 60 ft tall, still hard to believe.

And 3 ells would make them 6 ft tall, hardly giants, at least in todays world. (I am 5'11" and when I walk through my son's high school it seems like even most of girls are taller than me!)

I believe they have been explained as giants in power or ability, not stature. I want to say this is from KP's writings, but could be Yada or elsewhere. I am leaving soon, but I will try to find more next week.
“Because he clings to Me, is joined to Me, loves and delights in Me, desires Me, therefore I will deliver him, carry him safely away, cause him to escape from harm making him inaccessible and strong, and delivering him safely to heaven, because he has known, observed, cared for, recognized, instructed and advised others to use, designated, acknowledged, discerned, answered in, My name, authority, character, report, mark, and nature." Psalm 91:14
Offline kp  
#15 Posted : Saturday, January 17, 2009 9:15:56 AM(UTC)
kp
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,030
Location: Palmyra, VA

agat0r, I have read the book of Enoch, and my impression was that while it may contain truth (it was quoted by Jude), it is in places fanciful, misleading, pointless, and probably hopelessly corrupted. While the Genesis 6 record leaves us in doubt as to precisely what the "Sons of God" and "Daughters of Men" were, Enoch (as we've seen) is quite blatant in its interpretation---supporting one of several current theories to the exclusion of all others, saying that the Sons of God were fallen angels who cohabited with human women. Since Genesis doesn't exactly say that (but could mean that) we are left to contemplate it on our own. If demons were the fathers of the giants, that would explain why God made sure they are being held in the abyss until the day of Judgment, no longer free to trouble men in this way. Another theory is that the Sons of God were the godly line of Seth and the daughters of men were non-adamic human women---that is, not equipped with a neshamah. But there is no particular reason (at least, that I know of) why such a union would result in giants being born. I'm pretty sure our race's orignial genome would have allowed a range of stature far beyond what we see in the world today---up to perhaps ten or twelve feet tall (not 6000, though :-). After all, look at dogs: within a single species, you've got varieties ranging from the chihuahua to the mastif or great dane---a far bigger range that we see among humans.

Basically, I wish I could help you agat0r, but scripture just isn't definitive enough on the subject for me to have formed a firm opinion. On the other hand, I can't say I've spent a lot of time looking for an answer: there may be one, but I haven't gone out of my way to look for it.

kp
Offline agat0r  
#16 Posted : Saturday, January 17, 2009 10:41:10 AM(UTC)
agat0r
Joined: 1/2/2009(UTC)
Posts: 30
Location: Florida

Quote:
30 ells would make them 60 ft tall,


You're right! Now the Book of Enoch has no merit(in my opinion), because the only hope I felt it had was scribal error of numbers. You pretty much shot that down after my fuzzy math. It doesn't seem to matter whether it is "3", "30", or "3000" does it?
Thanks for your timely response K. Although you rightfully point to Jude, I was wondering....Wouldn't Yahushua have said something about the Book of Enoch if He thought it was pertinent? Afterall, several people "prophesied" without ever writting a "book", right? I understand that you haven't had a need to delve into this topic, but what do you think about the concept of Spiritual entities, mating with physical beings? I didn't think they even had a sex! Furthermore, these rebellious "angels" are lacking Yahuweh- would they have the ability to manifest themselves in the form of a man? Sure, Yahuweh, being Spirit, can, has, and will again manifest Himself in the form of a man, and I suppose Mary was impregnated through Spirit...but He is God! I have a hard time placing these "angels" in the same league. Thoughts?
If ya aint a Gator, you must be Gator bait.
Offline Matthew  
#17 Posted : Saturday, January 17, 2009 3:24:20 PM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
kp wrote:
agat0r, I have read the book of Enoch, and my impression was that while it may contain truth (it was quoted by Jude), it is in places fanciful, misleading, pointless, and probably hopelessly corrupted.

While I haven't completed the Book of Enoch I also got the same idea from it. It does make for an interesting read, or at least from what I have read so far.
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.