Crazy Prophecy Books

Books on Bible prophecy are getting crazy. And what's even crazier is that a legitimate news site is promoting them. There's David Flynn's Temple at the Center of Time: Newton's Bible Codex Finally Deciphered and the Year 2012. The latest end-time speculative prophecy book is Thomas Horn's Nephilim Stargates: The Year 2012 and the Return of the Watchers. Horn claims that "new experiments in genetic engineering could open the doors for the return of fearsome ‘giants' described in the Bible-the offspring of human women and fallen angels." The basis for this and other theories is Genesis 6:1-7 and the identity of "the sons of God" and the "Nephilim."

One of the most popular interpretations of Genesis 6:1-6 is that the "sons of God" are fallen angels who impregnated women and created a super race of beings called the "Nephilim." This interpretation is the basis of all Nephilim speculation whether it's demons, aliens, or some other fantasy. Chuck Missler and Mark Eastman argue in Alien Encounters that "the ‘sons of God' of Genesis 6 was understood as referring to (fallen) angels by the ancient rabbinical sources, the Septuagint translators, and by the early Church fathers."[1] The sources used by these Christian authors, by their own admission, are non-canonical books, for example, the "Book of Enoch, the Syriac Version of the Old Testament, as well as the Testimony of the 12 Patriarchs and the Little Genesis."[2]

Missler and Eastman claim that "the Hebrew term translated ‘sons of God' is . . . a term consistently used in the Old Testament for angels."[3] Even the well respected Hebrew scholar Umberto Cassuto takes this position. He argues that "whenever bene (ha)'elohim or bene 'elim [literally, ‘sons of Gods'] occurs (Psalm 29:1; 89:7 [Eng. 6]; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; also Deuteronomy 32:8[4] according to the text of the Septuagint) angels are referred to."[5]

For the moment, let's assume these advocates for the angel view are correct. Does this mean that in Genesis 6 the "sons of God" are fallen angels? Why would fallen angels be described as "sons of God"? Three times the phrase bene elohim is used in the Old Testament, all in the book of Job (1:6; 2:1; 38:7). There is no indication they are fallen angels. A similar phrase (bar[6] elohim, "son of God") is used in Daniel 3:25.[7] It is not a reference to a fallen angel. The term "sons of the mighty" (bene elim) is used in Psalm 29:1 and also Psalm 89:6. These verses do not describe fallen angels. In fact, the "sons of the mighty" is a reference to humans not angels. Psalm 29:11 reads: "The LORD will give strength to His people; the LORD will bless His people with peace." This last verse of this chiastic Psalm is in chiastic parallel with the first verse: "sons of the mighty" = "His people."[8]

Consider the use of "sons of God" in the New Testament. Adam is described as "the son of God": "The son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God" (Luke 3:38). He is neither a good nor a fallen angel. "Peacemakers" are described as "sons of God" (Matt. 5:9). The "sons of the resurrection" are "like angels" (because they cannot die) and are called "sons of God" (Luke 20:36). Paul writes, "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God" (Rom. 8:14; Gal. 3:26). Then there's the "anxious longing of the creation [that] waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God" (Rom. 8:19). In fact, every time the phrase "sons of God" is used in the New Testament, it never refers to angels, either good or bad.

Let's look at the use of the phrase "sons of God" in Job. Author Gary Bates argues, as do many others, "In the [Old Testament] passages outside of Genesis," [the phrase ‘sons of God'] . . . is always clearly used of angels."[9] The appeal is made to the three uses of "sons of God" found in Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:7. Part of the confusion arises because a number of modern translations translate the Hebrew bene as "angels," following the Septuagint, rather than "sons," which is the literal translation. Unfortunately, this is an interpretation rather than a translation of the Hebrew. Job 38:7 is the only example where "sons of God" could refer to angels, but not fallen angels. It appears in a passage of symbolism and is paralleled with "the morning stars sang together." Compare this with Judges 5:20 where we read "the stars fought from heaven." The stars here are a reference to rulers based on the parallel passage in 5:19: "The kings came and fought; then fought the kings of Canaan at Taanach near the waters of Megiddo; they took no plunder in silver."

A number of commentators contend that the "sons of God" are godly men (Job 1:1), possibly even prominent civil rulers, who "came to present themselves before the Lord" (1:6) for counsel because they are judges of the people. (The Hebrew word elohim is used in this way in Exodus 22:8-9 and Psalm 82:6. Most Bible versions translate elohim as "judges" in the Exodus passages.) Notice the Bible's description of Job: "His possessions also were 7,000 sheep, 3,000 camels, 500 yoke of oxen, 500 female donkeys, and very many servants; and that man was the greatest of all the men of the east" (1:3). The passage can read "sons of the east" since the Hebrew bene is used. This means that there were many "sons of the east." Compare this with Genesis 6:4 where the offspring of the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" are described as "the mighty men who were of old, men of renown." Notice in Job 1:5 that Job is concerned about his relationship with God and that of his sons. It's in 1:6 that the "sons of God . . . present themselves before the LORD." Job is one of the "sons of God."

But how does Satan, a fallen angel, fit in with this interpretation? Satan is described in the Bible as "the accuser of our brethren . . . who accuses them before our God day and night" (Rev. 12:10). In the case of Job, Satan interjects himself among the godly rulers-"sons of God"-and accuses Job before God. He did a similar thing when Jesus went out into the wilderness. "And the tempter came and said to Him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread'" (Matt. 4:3). George Rapkin's comments in his Genesis in Harmony with Itself and Science are helpful:

Even the phrase "present themselves before the LORD" (Job 1:6) is not a tip off that the scene in Job is describing angels in heaven. In 1 Samuel 10:19 we read, "But you have today rejected your God, who delivers you from all your calamities and your distresses; yet you have said, ‘No, but set a king over us!' Now therefore, present yourselves before the Lord by your tribes and by your clans." Similarly, Joshua 24:1 states, "Then Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem, and called for the elders of Israel and for their heads and their judges and their officers; and they presented themselves before God." Notice that it's the leaders, including judges, who present themselves before God. The situation is identical to what is taking place in Job 1:6 and 2:1. Psalm 2:2 shows the negative side of this principle: "The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against His Anointed." ("presented themselves before" and "take their stand" use the same Hebrew construction.) None of these presentations take place in a spiritual realm where angels reside. God's heavenly host is described differently (see 1 Kings 22:19; Acts 7:55-56).

While the Hebrew is different, the idea is similar when Cain is said to have gone "out from the presence of the LORD" to settle "in the land of Nod, east of Eden" (4:16). Jonah flees to "Tarshish from the presence of the LORD" by a ship "going to Tarshish" (Jonah 1:3). The men on the ship knew Jonah "was fleeing from the presence of the LORD, because he had told them" (1:10). How does one flee from the physical presence of the Lord by ship? "Presence of the LORD," as these verses indicate, does not mean angels in the physical presence of God and neither does "presented themselves before God." The "sons of God" in Genesis 6 are like the sons of God found elsewhere in Scripture: they had at one time identified themselves with God's covenant. They are not fallen angels or demons.

[1]Chuck Missler and Mark Eastman, Alien Encounters: The Secret Behind the UFO Phenomenon (Coeur d'Alene, ID: Koinonia House, 1997), 334.

[2]Missler and Eastman, Alien Encounters, 207. Here's another example: "The Apocryphal books of Enoch, 2 Esdras, Genesis Aprocryphon and Jasher support the Genesis story, adding that the sin of the angels grew to include genetic modification of animals as well as humans. The Book of Jasher, mentioned in the Bible in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18, says, ‘After the fallen angels went into the daughters of men, the sons of men taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order to provoke the Lord' (4:18)." ("Are Bible's ‘giants' set for return? Author warns genetic engineering could bring back ‘Nephilim' [September 19, 2008]: http://tinyurl.com/4guw2t).

[4]The Masoretic Text reads "sons of Israel." "Sons of God" is probably the better translation. It seems obvious that both "sons of man" and "sons of God" are referring to human beings. Deuteronomy 32:9 reads: "For the LORD's portion is His people; Jacob is the allotment of His inheritance."

[5]Umberto Cassuto, "The Episode of the Sons of God and the Daughters of Man," Biblical and Oriental Studies (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1973), 21-22. Quoted in John H. Walton, "Are the ‘Sons of God' in Genesis 6 Angels?-No," The Genesis Debate: Persistent Questions about Creation and the Flood, ed. Ronald F. Youngblood (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1990), 189.

[6]The Hebrew word for "son" is ben; in Aramaic it is bar. The passage in Daniel 3:24 is written in Aramaic.

[7]The phrase "like a son of the gods" or simply "like a son of God" is used in Daniel 3:25, but it is King Nebuchadnezzar who describes the fourth man in the furnace this way.

[9]Gary Bates, Alien Intrusion: UFOs and the Evolution Connection (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2004), 352.

[10]George Rapkin, Genesis in Harmony with Itself and Science (1899). Quoted in J. Sidlow Baxter, Studies in Problem Texts: Being a Short Series of Elucidatory and Applicatory Expositions of Certain Scripture Passages Which Have Occassioned Perplexity (London: Marshal, Morgan & Scott, 1963), 188.

——You said, “Doesn’t make sense, since human giants, known as the Nephilim were alive both in Joshua’s day and in David’s, and who knows until when.”

Sorry to give you so much to read, but here’s the Appendix that addresses your statement. ——

25. THE NEPHILIM, OR “GIANTS”
Of GEN. 6, &c.

The progeny of the fallen angels with the daughters of Adam (see notes on Gen. 6, and Ap. 23) are called in Gen. 6, Ne-phil-im, which means fallen ones (from naphal, to fall). What these beings were can be gathered only from Scripture. They were evidently great in size, as well as great in wickedness. They were superhuman, abnormal beings; and their destruction was necessary for the preservation of the human race, and for the faithfulness of Jehovah’s Word (Gen. 3:15).
This was why the Flood was brought “upon the world of the ungodly” (2Pet. 2:5) as prophesied by Enoch (Jude 14).

But we read of the Nephilim again in Num. 13:33 : “there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, which come of the Nephilim”. How, it may be asked, could this be, if they were all destroyed in the Flood? The answer is contained in Gen. 6:4, where we read : “There were Nephilim in the earth in those days (i.e. in the days of Noah); and also AFTER THAT, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became [the] mighty men (Heb. gibbor, the heroes) which were of old, men of renown” (lit. men of the name, i.e. who got a name and were renowned for their ungodliness).

So that “after that”, i.e. after the Flood, there was a second irruption of these fallen angels, evidently smaller in number and more limited in area, for they were for the most part confined to Canaan, and were in fact known as “the nations of Canaan”. It was for the destruction of these, that the sword of Israel was necessary, as the Flood had been before.

As to the date of this second irruption, it was evidently soon after it became known that the seed was to come through Abraham; for, when he came out from Haran (Gen. 12:6) and entered Canaan, the significant fact is stated : “The Canaanite was then (i.e. already) in the land.” And in Gen. 14:5 they were already known as “Raphain” and Emim”, and had established themselves at Asteroth Karnaim and Shaven Kiriathaim.

In ch. 15:18-21 they are enumerated and named among Canaanite Peoples : “Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, and the Amorites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites” (Gen. 15:19-21; cp. Ex. 3:8, 17; 23:23. Deut. 7; 20:17. Josh. 12:8).

These were to be cut off, and driven out, and utterly destroyed (Deut. 20:17. Josh. 3:10). But Israel failed in this (Josh. 13:13; 15:63; 16:10; 17:18. Judg. 1:19, 20, 28, 29, 30-36; 2:1-5; 3:1-7); and we known not how many got away to other countries to escape the general destruction. If this were recognized it would go far to solve many problems connected with Anthropology.

As to their other names, they were called Anakim, from on Anak which came of the Nephilim (Num. 13:23), and Rephaim, from Rapha, another notable one among them. From Deut. 2:10, they were known by some as Emim, and Horim, and Zamzummim (v. 20, 21) and Avim, &c.

As Rephaim they were well known, and are often mentioned : but, unfortunately, instead of this, their proper name, being preserved, it is variously translated as “dead”, “deceased”, or “giants”. These Rephaim are to have no resurrection. This fact is stated in Isa. 26:14 (where the proper name is rendered “deceased,” and v. 19, where it is rendered “the dead”). It is rendered “dead” seven times (Job 26:5. Ps. 88:10. Prov. 2:18; 9:18; 21:16. Isa. 14:8; 26:19). It is rendered “deceased” in Isa. 26:14.

It is retained as a proper name “Rephaim” ten times (two being in the margin). Gen. 14:5; 15:20. Josh. 12:15 (marg.). 2Sam. 5:18, 22; 23:13.& b31 nbsp; 1Chron. 11:15; 14:9; 20:4 (marg.). Isa. 17:5. In all other places it is rendered “giants”, Gen. 6:4; Num. 23:33, where it is Nephilim; and Job 16:14, where it is gibbor (Ap. 14. iv). By reading all these passages the Bible student may know all that can be known about these beings.

It is certain that the second irruption took place before Gen. 14, for there the Rephaim were mixed up with the five nations or peoples, which included Sodom and Gomorrha, and were defeated by the four kings under Chedorlaomer. Their principal locality was evidently “Ashtaroth Karnaim”; while the Emim were in the plain of Kiriathaim (Gen. 14:5).

Anak was a noted descendant of the Nephilim; and Rapha was another, giving their names respectively to different clans. Anak’s father was Arba, the original builder of Hebron (Gen. 35:27. Josh. 15:13; 21:11); and this Palestine branch of the Anakim was not called Arbahim after him, but Anakim after Anak. They were great, mighty, and tall (Deut. 2:10, 11, 21, 22, 23; 9:2), evidently inspiring the ten spies with great fear (Num. 13:33). Og king of Bashan is described in Deut. 3:11.

Their strength is seen in “the giant cities of Bashan” to-day; and we know not how far they may have been utilized by Egypt in the construction of buildings, which is still an unsolved problem. Arba was rebuilt by the Khabiri or confederates seven years before Zoan was built by the Egyptian Pharoahs of the nineteenth dynasty. See note on Num. 13:22.

If these Nephilim, and their branch of Rephaim, were associated with Egypt, we have an explanation of the problem which has for ages perplexed all engineers, as to how those huge stones and monuments were brought together. Why not in Egypt as well as in “the giant cities of Bashan” which exist, as such, to this day?

Moreover, we have in these mighty men, the “men of renown,” the explanation of the origin of the Greek mythology. That mythology was no mere invention of the human brain, but it grew out of the traditions, and memories, and legends of the doings of that mighty race of beings; and was gradually evolved out of the “heroes” of Gen. 6:4. The fact that they were supernatural in their origin formed an easy step to their being regarded as the demi-gods of the Greeks.

Thus the Babylonian “Creation Tablets”, the Egyptian “Book of the dead”, the Greek mythology, and heathen Cosmogonies, which by some are set on an equality with Scripture, or by others adduced in support of it, are all the corruption and perversion of primitive truths, distorted in proportion as their origin was forgotten, and their memories faded away.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.