Nephilim: Biblical Giants?

Yes—giants existed—and it wasn’t just Goliath. Developing a well-rounded view about giants from the Bible requires studying the entire set (and not just a few) of the following Biblical passages: Genesis 6:4, 14:5; Numbers 13:28–33; Deuteronomy 1:28–3:11, 9:2; Joshua 11:21, 13:12, 14:12–15, 15:8–14, 17:15, 18:16; 1 Samuel 17:4, 49–50; 2 Samuel 5:18–25, 21:15–22; Amos 2:9; 1 Chronicles 11:23, 20:4–8; Numbers 13:22; Judges 1:20; Isaiah 17:5; Psalm 82, and Job 4:13–18. Scripture also includes passages that appear to highlight distinct characteristics about the giants/Nephilim, such as in Numbers 13:23-25 where two men are required to carry a “cluster of grapes” (why does the writer need to point this out?) and certain unique characters and family lines that were pursued, engaged in battle, and conquered (such as ‭‭Joshua‬ ‭15:13-14: “Now to Caleb the son of Jephunneh he gave a share among the children of Judah, according to the commandment of the LORD to Joshua, namely, Kirjath Arba, which is Hebron (Arba was the father of Anak). Caleb drove out the three sons of Anak from there: Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai, the children of Anak”). The angels that “broke their domain” were punished and judged (Jude 1:6–8 and 2 Peter 2:4–11). The giants/Nephilim and their descendants that were pursued and annihilated after the Flood (e.g., by David and Joshua) were present on earth either by a re-incursion or through the line of Ham’s wife (see Genesis 9:18 and others).

Why does Genesis Apologetics hold firmly to the “angel” view of Genesis 6? What about the other views, such as the Sethite, Royal Tyrant (Kings), Nobles or Mighty Men, Demon Possession, or

Mixed Supernatural-Human Leadership views?

The answer to this is quite simple: The angel view is only perspective that is both historically and Biblically consistent. Let’s explain both.

Historically, the angelic view is the only interpretation that fits the earliest interpretive stream. Genesis 6 says the “sons of God” took women and produced the Nephilim, and Second Temple Jewish literature repeatedly understood this literally as heavenly beings sinning with human women. 1 Enoch 6 says “the angels, the children of heaven” desired women and chose wives from mankind; Jubilees 5 says “the angels of God” took wives and “bare unto them sons and they were giants.” The Book of Giants continues the same Watcher/giant tradition, showing that this was not a fringe reading but a developed Jewish interpretive framework. The same tradition appears in early Christian writers: Justin Martyr said the angels were “captivated by love of women” and begot children, and other early fathers such as Athenagoras, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Lactantius, and Ambrose likewise treated Genesis 6 as angelic rebellion.

Biblically, the Angel view is really the only perspective that fits with the New Testament teaching about the “sins of angels.” Jude writes: “The angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper dwelling… He has kept in eternal chains… just as Sodom and Gomorrah… indulged in sexual immorality and pursued strange flesh…” (Jude 6–7)

Notice the flow:

Rebellious angels
Then Sodom and Gomorrah
The word “just as” (Greek: hōs) links the two examples.

The natural reading is that the angels committed a sin analogous to Sodom’s sexual sin. Verse 7 says Sodom pursued: “strange flesh” (sarkos heteras). This literally means “other” or “different” flesh. In Sodom’s case, the men attempted sexual relations with angels (Genesis 19), crossing the boundary between human and angelic beings. Jude intentionally parallels this with Genesis 6:

Angels crossed their God-appointed boundaries.
Humans crossed theirs.
Both involved illicit sexual behavior.

Why mention the angels “leaving their proper dwelling”? This is another indication: Jude doesn’t simply say they sinned. He says they:

“did not keep their own position”
“abandoned their proper dwelling.”

Those descriptions fit with Genesis 6—angels took human form to have relations with women.

Peter says the SAME thing writing: “God did not spare angels when they sinned… if He did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah…” (2 Peter 2:4–5)

Notice the sequence:

Angels sinned
Noah
Flood
Sodom

That follows Genesis almost exactly.

Peter is referring to the same event as Jude.

So the Angel view is the only view that truly meshes with the historical framework and context as well as the New Testament teaching on the same topic.

Due to the crowded and controversial content so widely available online and in print on this subject, we advise being careful to stay within biblical boundaries. So many have taken this topic too far. We therefore only recommend two well-done sources for this topic; one short, and one lengthy. The short article can be found here, titled, “Giants in the Land: A Biblical Theology of the Nephilim, Anakim, Rephaim, and Goliath.” The complete treatment on the topic by Tim Chaffey from Answers in Genesis is: “Fallen: The Sons of God and the Nephilim” available here on Amazon. Because of the New Testament connection (Jude 1:6–8 and 2 Peter 2:4–11) with the verses above, we agree with the conclusion in these two sources.