The Nephilim, etc. | The Fellowship of God's Covenant People

by Rev. Jim Jester

May 24, 2026

SCRIPTURE READING: Genesis 6:1-4:

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; 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 mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

INTRODUCTION

This is one of the most marginalized passages in the Bible. Many pastors and Bible students tend to avoid it, because any serious study on it can quickly become quite controversial. But Genesis 6:1-4 actually plays a very important role in biblical theology. So how should this passage be interpreted? Who are these “sons of God?” Are they divine or mortal? And who were these “giants” (or, Nephilim) that these women bore?

The fact that this is a very unusual passage is seen in these quotes:

The tradition preserved in this brief fragment is condensed, and the language is not free from obscurity. There are, however, allusions in other parts of the O.T. to the race of giants which was believed not to have been extinct at the time of the occupation of Palestine by the Israelite tribes. Such a belief was incompatible with the tradition that all the primeval dwellers in the world, except Noah and his family, perished in the waters of the Flood (Gen. 7:21-23).

Commentators have often shrunk from the admission that this piece of mythology could have a place in the Hebrew Scriptures. Accordingly, very fanciful explanations have sometimes found favour; e.g. (a) “the sons of God” are the men of the upper classes, “the daughters of men” are “the women of the lower classes;” (b) “the sons of God” are “the sons of the god-fearing,” “the daughters of men” are “the daughters of the impious;” (c) “the sons of God” are “the descendants of Seth,” “the daughters of men” are “the women of the Cainite race.” Such interpretations may be dismissed as arbitrary and non-natural: and they furnish no explanation of the inference in Gen. 6:4, that a race of giants or heroes was the progeny of these marriages. (Cambridge Bible)

The previous quotes show that there are many opinions on what Genesis 6:1-4 means. But is it really “Hebrew mythology,” or is it unauthenticated legend from the past? More importantly, is it the word of God?

Note the logical progression here of a, b and c (above): One may lead to the other to the extent that all three become one unified theory. But there appears to be something missing, for how could giants come from the union of Sethite men with Cainite women? It would be very unlikely. Yet, we see plenty of Scriptural evidence that giants did indeed exist.

There are 12 individually named giants mentioned in the Bible:

RAPHA — Early ancestor of all the giant clans in what became the region of Palestine; included the Anakites, Emites, and Horites (Deut 2:10-12).

ANAK — Father of a clan of giants living in Canaan (Num 13:28).

ARBA — Forefather of Anak and the Anakim (Josh 15:13).

SEPHER — Another Anakite like Arba (Josh 15:15).

OG — The king of Bashan; the last of “the Rephaites” (Deut 3:11).

AHIMAN — A descendant of Arba and Anak who lived in Kiriath-Arba (later named Hebron) when Israel invaded Canaan (Num 13:22).

SHESHAI — A descendant of Arba and Anak (Num 13:22).

TALMAI — A descendant of Arba and Anak (Num 13:22).

GOLIATH — The “champion” of the Philistine army (1 Sam 17:4).

LAHMI — The brother of Goliath (1 Chron 20:5).

ISHBI-BENOB — One of the giants living in Gath (2 Sam 21:15-17, 22).

SAPH also called SIPPAI — One of the giants subjugated by the Philistines in Canaan (1 Chron 20:4, 8).

There are 2 unnamed individual giants mentioned:

“A giant with 6 fingers on each hand and 6 toes on each foot” (2 Sam 21:20-22): He was subjugated by the Philistines in southern Canaan.

“A man of great stature” (1 Chron 11:23): He was 7.5 feet tall.

[See christianidentityaustralia.org; Giants in the Bible, for more details]

From the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia:

Giants: The word appears in the King James Version as the translation of the Hebrew words nephı̄lı̄m (Gen 6:4; Num 13:33); rephā'ı̄m (Deu 2:11, Deu 2:20; Deu 3:11, Deu 3:13; Jos 12:4, etc.); rāphā' (1Ch 20:4, 1Ch 20:6, 1Ch 20:8), or rāphāh (2Sa 21:16, 2Sa 21:18, 2Sa 21:20, 2Sa 21:22); in one instance of gibbōr, literally, “mighty one” (Job 16:14).

In the first two cases the Revised Version (British and American) changes “giants” into the Hebrew words “Nephilim,” and “Rephaim,” respectively. (ISBE)

From the various Hebrew words we can deduce that there were different breeds of giants, just as we have different breeds of humans today. The existing giants of the Nephilim breed were destroyed by the flood of Noah; other breeds were killed by the Israelites or died of natural causes.

There is at least one lesson we can agree on from our passage, and that is the importance of choosing a wife. Gentlemen, don’t choose a wife simply because of her physical beauty; search a little deeper and look for those spiritual qualities: Does she have a heart for God?

Notice how the International Standard Version interprets Genesis 6:4:

The Nephilim were on the earth at that time (and also immediately afterward), when those divine beings were having sexual relations with those human women, who gave birth to children for them. These children became the heroes and legendary figures of ancient times. (Gen. 6:4, ISV)

Speaking of these Nephilim (“giants” in KJV), the writer of Genesis reveals they existed both before and after the flood of Noah. The word “and” in Hebrew text is quite important, often serving as a footnote. This version also chose a different term for the “sons of God;” instead, it is “divine beings,” or “spiritual beings different from man.” These divine beings must have also been giants (nephilim), for the women they took bore them children who became known as the Nephilim of ancient fame. Genesis 6 did not identify the Nephilim, per se, because the original readers already knew who they were (from 1 Enoch). It is also possible that an event like this had taken place much earlier than the writing of Genesis, which had left the earth in its condition, “without form and void, and darkness was on the face of the deep” (Gen. 1:2).

A number of answers have been proposed as to who the “sons of God” were: 1) the descendants of Seth; 2) angelic beings; 3) heroes of the past, which could apply to Sethites (if you choose that theory).

When God said, “My spirit shall not always strive with man… yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years” (v. 3); He was saying, “I’ve had enough of this evil: You have 120 years left, and then I will destroy you with the flood.”

If one were to ask a modern Christian, “Why is the world and all humanity so totally wicked?” The chances are very high that the answer would be, “the Fall of Adam.” While that is true, churches have been conditioned to look only to Genesis chapter three for an answer to that question. But if you were to ask a Judean living in the Second Temple Period the same question, the answer would be quite different. They would likely say that the “Watchers” are to blame for the proliferation of evil in the world. The story of the Watchers in the book of 1 Enoch is nearly identical to Genesis 6:1-4. According to 1 Enoch 6:6, Mount Hermon is the place where the Watchers descended and took an oath to commit the transgression described in Genesis 6:1-4. This was how such a flood of evil came upon the earth; not the fall of Adam and Eve, even though sin came through Adam. This fact does not minimize that tragic event in Eden, but rather strengthens the truth of what took place there: That being, an illicit sexual encounter between the serpent and the woman. Therefore, both chapters three and six of Genesis are describing events of a sensual nature.

THE SETHITE THEORY

The consensus Christian position, since the late fourth century A.D., has not taken this passage for what it says at face value: That the “sons of God” are divine beings (or, angels) and their offspring are the giants (nephilim). This consensus is still the dominant theory among churches today, which says that the “sons of God” are descendants from the line of Seth. They assume that these four verses describe the forbidden intermarriage between the godly men of Seth and the ungodly women of Cain. In this view, everyone who lived on earth ultimately came from these two lines, both of them descended from Adam and Eve’s children. In this way, the Bible distinguished the godly from the ungodly. Part of the rationale for this view comes from Genesis 4:26, where, depending on the translation, we read that either Seth or mankind, “…then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.” The line of Seth was to remain pure and separate from evil lineage. The marriages of Genesis 6:1-4 erased this separation and incurred the wrath of God with the flood.

Flaws in the Sethite Theory:

Genesis 4:26 never states that the only people who called on the name of the Lord were men from Seth’s lineage. That is an assumption imposed on the text.
The Sethite view fails to explain the Nephilim (giants).
The text never calls the women “daughters of Cain.” Rather they are “daughters of mankind.” There is no link in the text to Cain.
There’s no command regarding marriages or any prohibition against marrying certain persons. There are no jews or gentiles.
Nothing in Genesis 6:1-4 (or anywhere else) identifies men of Seth’s lineage by the phrase “sons of God.” That is an assumption made by those who hold the Sethite view. They are assuming the group of verse 1, “men began to multiply,” is identical to the group in verse 2, “sons of God,” but they are not.

A careful reading of Genesis 6:1-4 makes it clear that a contrast is being shown between two classes of individuals, one mortal (or mankind) and the other divine (or angelic). The text mentions only daughters; which point is not that every birth after Cain and Abel resulted in a girl. Rather, the writer is setting up a contrast of two groups—this is the context. The first group is mortal and female. The next group (v. 2) gives the contrast, the “sons of God.” That group is not mortal, but extraterrestrial, or angelic. Some Bible translations use the term “divine beings” or “angels/fallen angels” (such as the LXX) instead of the phrase “sons of God.” A better term could be “sons of heaven” or “sons of the gods.”

So the Sethite hypothesis collapses under the weight of its own incoherence. It violates the original context of Genesis 6:1-4.

PETER AND JUDE

Both Peter and Jude gave two examples of God’s judgment upon the wicked, which parallels Genesis 6:1-4. First, the destruction by Noah’s flood, and secondly, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Second Peter 2:1-6:

1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly.

Jude 5-7:

5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. 6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Both of these passages are speaking of the same subject. And they also describe an event that took place in the time of Noah that was very unusual: A time when “angels sinned.” That sin, which brought about the flood of Noah, was sexual in nature, and it is put in the same category as the sins that prompted judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah. The transgression was interpreted by Peter and Jude as evidence of despising authority and the boundaries of “their own habitation” (or, proper living space) for the parties involved. All these principles are clearly seen in Genesis 6:1-4. There is simply no other sin in the Old Testament that meets these specific details. So, both Peter and Jude believed in a supernatural interpretation of this occasion.

Now, where did Peter and Jude get their ideas for what they wrote about in the New Testament? Well, besides inspiration of the Holy Spirit, scholars agree that the Second Temple Judean literature, which was part of the theological world-view at the time, influenced their thinking, along with other New Testament writers. Evidently, Peter and Jude believed what they wrote.

BOOK OF 1 ENOCH

The story of the sin of the Watchers found in 1 Enoch 6-16 was well-known by the Judeans of the Second Temple Period, more commonly known as the “Intertestamental Period.” Most scholars believe that 1 Enoch was originally written in Aramaic perhaps as early as the third century B.C. The oldest fragments of the book were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls and dated to about the second century B.C. This places the book squarely in the middle of the Second Temple Period (ca. 500 B.C.—A.D. 70).

The book of 1 Enoch was not included in the canon of Scripture, but that does not discount it as a reliable piece of literature that can help interpret other texts of the same time period, such as the Bible. Early Christian writers such as Tertullian, Irenaeus, Origen, and Clement either advocated 1 Enoch as worthy of canonical status or considered it authoritative on certain matters of truth and doctrine. Tertullian, the Christian writer from Carthage (A.D. 155-240), often spoke of it as “Scripture,” and defended it with 2 Timothy 3:16; “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” He was known for being the early church’s staunchest defender of 1 Enoch’s inspiration. The book of 1 Enoch was recognized full canonical status only in the Ethiopian Church.

The book of 1 Enoch was not written by the Enoch we know of Scripture; we do not know for sure who wrote it. It contains a number of contradictions, or other discrepancies, when compared to the canonical Scriptures. Nevertheless, it agrees in other areas, especially Genesis 6:1-4, as Peter and Jude concur.

The Watcher story of 1 Enoch is an expansion of the episode described in Genesis 6:1-4, in which “the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men.” “Watchers” is Enoch’s term of choice for the divine “sons of God” (angels). The story of this supernatural rebellion received very little space in the book of Genesis, but it received much more attention during the Second Temple Period. In chapter 32, Enoch sees the Garden of Eden and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil from which Adam and Eve ate. Interestingly, while this section of the book notes the sin of Adam, it considers it of lesser significance when compared to the sin of the Watchers.

The term “Watcher” is a biblical one, appearing in Daniel 4:13, 17, 23. The term is qualified by “holy one” (Dan. 4:13, 23), thus “Watcher” is not by default a term for an evil being; it could be either way. In 1 Enoch, the term “Watcher” is one of several used in place of the phrase “sons of God” in its retelling of the episode in Genesis 6:1-4; which, of course, was evil.

So what did the Watchers and their Nephilim cause to take place on the earth? For starters, we can get some idea by this brief summation from 1 Enoch 7:1-6:

1 These [watchers] and all the others with them took for themselves wives from among them such as they chose. And they began to go in to them, and to defile themselves through them, and to teach them sorcery and charms, and to reveal to them the cutting of roots and plants. 2 And they conceived from them and bore to them great giants. And the giants begat Nephilim, and to the Nephilim were born Elioud [3 lines of descent]. And they were growing in accordance with their greatness. 3 They were devouring the labor of all the sons of men, and men were not able to supply them. 5 And they began to sin against the birds and beasts and creeping things and the fish, and to devour one another’s flesh. And they drank the blood. 6 Then the earth brought accusation against the lawless ones.

Wow, sorcery, starvation and cannibalism! The next chapter mentions the making of every instrument of war; the art of metallurgy, particularly gold and silver ornaments for women, antimony, dyes, precious stones, and celestial observances. No wonder God destroyed their world by the flood of Noah. And we think we are seeing lots of evil today—and there is! But evil is not God’s fault; there are other sources that must take the blame for evil in the world.

ORIGIN OF THE NEPHILIM

The children who were born to the daughters of men because of union with the “sons of God” (angels, watchers) are called the “Nephilim” (plural). The Nephilim and the Anakim/Rephaim who descended from them (Num. 13:33; Deut. 2:20-21; 3:1-11) are described as unusually tall (Num. 13:32). King Og was a “Nephil” (singular), of Rephaim, and was delivered by God to the Israelites. “Only Og the king of Bashan remained from the remnants of the Rephaim. In fact, his bed was made of iron. It’s in Rabbah of the Ammonites, isn’t it? It’s about thirteen and a half feet long and six feet wide.” (Deu. 3:11, ISV) He was big, most estimations running 10-12 feet. He was the only living remnant of a gigantic race, supposedly the most ancient inhabitants of Palestine. Judeans of the Second Temple Period viewed the Nephilim as “giants” (gigas in the Greek Septuagint).

The most transparent understanding of Genesis 6:1-4, is that divine beings came to earth, assumed mortal flesh, cohabited with mortal women, and spawned unusual offspring known as Nephilim. What women were they? Likely, any who were geographically available, Adamic or Cainite. It seems the modern mind cannot tolerate such a concept as this, despite the fact that they are taught to tolerate all forms of race-mixing today. To them it seems impossible that a divine being could assume mortal flesh and do what this passage describes. Appeal is usually made to Matthew 22:30 under the assumption that angels cannot engage in sexual intercourse: “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”

But the text does not say that angels cannot have sexual intercourse, it says they don’t. The reason is obvious: The context for the statement is the resurrection, which either refers to the afterlife or the final kingdom of God on earth when everyone has a resurrected body. In the spiritual world, there is no need for procreation. Genesis 6 doesn’t have the spiritual realm as its context, so the analogy breaks down completely. The verse in Matthew is useless as a commentary on Genesis 6:1-4. Despite the flawed use of this verse, many still balk at this interpretation, while the ancient reader would have had no problem with it.

Think about this: There are many unusual and unbelievable events found in the Bible. What comes to mind? Moses’ staff becomes a serpent? The sea opens to dry land? Fire called down from heaven; a talking donkey; a man swallowed by a fish and lives? Water turns into wine? But the event that tops all of them is the incarnation of Yahweh as Jesus Christ. How is the birth of God as a man more acceptable? For that matter, what doesn’t offend the modern scientific mind about God going through a woman’s birth canal and enduring life as a mortal and having to learn everything again. All of these are far more shocking that Genesis 6:1-4.

Genesis 18-19 is quite clear that God Himself and two other divine beings met with Abraham in physical flesh and ate a meal together. Genesis 19:10 informs us that the two angels had to physically grab Lot and pull him back into his house to avoid harm, something that would be hard to do if the two beings were not truly physical. In Matthew 4:11, angels came to Jesus after He was tested by the devil and “ministered” to Him. Surely this means more than floating around in front of Jesus’ face. In Acts 5:19, angels opened prison doors. In Acts 12:7, an angel nudged Peter to awaken him. This was especially interesting, because the text shows Peter as mistakenly thinking the angel was only a vision.

We can conclude then, that angels can take on flesh, as Genesis 6:4 shows, and can procreate with women. And it is interesting that always angels are referred to in masculine form. This being true, many Bible students have wondered if the serpent of Genesis 3:15 was related to these other angels. It is a reasonable question, for in both cases their deeds were evil, and both incurred the judgment of God. It could very well be that the serpent (Satan) was related in some way to the Watchers and the Nephilim, but since there is no mention of such in Scripture, we cannot say for sure; except for the book of Job where this statement is found twice (Job 1:6 & 2:1).

Job 1:6, KJV; “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.”

Job 1:6, Brenton LXX; “And it came to pass on a day, that behold, the angels of God came to stand before the Lord, and the devil came with them.”

Job 1:6, ISV; “One day, divine beings presented themselves to the LORD, and Satan accompanied them.”

Job 1:6, BBE; “And there was a day when the sons of the gods came together before the Lord, and the Satan came with them.”

Note that we have four different interpretations here, yet they all may essentially agree if properly understood. The phrase “sons of God” only appears in Genesis and Job, a total of five times. This phrase also appears in the New Testament but has a totally different meaning.

From the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia:

In the passages from Job and Psalms it [the phrase, “sons of God] is applied to supernatural beings or angels. In Job the “sons of God” are represented as appearing before the throne of Yahweh in heaven, ready to do Him service, and as shouting for joy at the creation of the earth. In the Psalms they are summoned to celebrate the glory of Yahweh, for there is none among them to be compared to Him. The phrase in these passages has no physical or moral reference. These heavenly beings are called “sons of God” or “sons of the ‘ĕlohı̄m” [not Yahweh] simply as belonging to the same class or guild as the 'ĕlohı̄m, just as “sons of the prophets” denotes those who belong to the prophetic order (see A.B. Davidson, Commentary on Job 1:6). (ISBE)

NEPHILIM AFTER THE FLOOD

Genesis 6:4 informs us that the Nephilim were on the earth before the Flood of Noah “and also after that.” This phrase looks forward to Numbers 13:33, which says of the giant sons of Anak, “which come of the giants [Nephilim].” The UASV concurs with the KJV: “And there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak came from the Nephilim, N7 and we were like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their eyes.”

The Note for this verse provided by the Updated American Standard Version:

The sons of Anak were not of the pre-Flood Nephilim. This was a ruse to scare the people. As a result of these distortions, a wave of fear spread throughout the camp. The people even sought to return to Egypt, where they had been slaves (Num. 13:31–14:4). Remember, the Nephilim were the offspring of fallen angels and women (Gen. 6:4), who had perished in the Flood.

So, if the pre-Flood Nephilim were already destroyed, how is it that they appeared again through Anak? We have two alternatives for explaining the presence of Nephilim after the flood: 1) the Flood of Genesis 6-8 was regional, not global; 2) the same kind of event as Genesis 6:1-4 happened again (or continued to happen) after the Flood, producing other Nephilim. A third possibility is that there may have been a pre-Adamic survivor.

MOUNT HERMON

Note how the book of 1 Enoch compares with Genesis 6:1-4.

1 And when the sons of men had multiplied, in those days, beautiful and comely daughters were born to them. 2 And the watchers, the sons of heaven, saw them and desired them. And they said to one another, “Come, let us choose for ourselves wives from the daughters of men, and let us beget for ourselves children.” 3 And Shemihazah, their chief, said to them, “I fear that you will not want to do this deed, and I alone shall be guilty of a great sin.” 4 And they all answered him and said, “Let us all swear an oath, and let us all bind one another with a curse, that none of us turn back from this counsel until we fulfill it and do this deed.” 5 Then they all swore together and bound one another with a curse. 6 And they were, all of them, two hundred, who descended in the days of Jared onto the peak of Mount Hermon. And they called the mountain “Hermon” because they swore and bound one another with a curse on it. (1 Enoch 6:1-6)

Jesus was discussing about His identity, and so He asked his disciples, “Whom do men say I am?” Simon Peter responded correctly.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matt. 16:17-18)

We have one of two choices: The church is built upon Peter, or the church is built upon Peter’s confession. The Catholics assert that the church was built on Peter. But there are problems with this. Jesus said to him, “Thou art Petros,” which in the Greek is a little stone. And then He declared, “upon this Petras,” which is a giant stone, “I will build my church.” The church was not built upon the little stone, but upon the giant rock. Jesus was saying, “Yes Peter, the church is based on the confession that I am the Christ.”

But let us examine verse 18 a little closer. “Thou art Peter:” Yes, his name means “a small stone.” But this is not the appointment of a Pope; it is about all the apostles. “Upon this rock:” This truth that Jesus is the Rock, the Foundation, the Conqueror. What other kind of “rock” could Jesus be referring to? What was the occasion of this event in Matthew’s Gospel? It is Jesus and his disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration after the resurrection! In verse 13, Matthew mentions Caesarea Philippi, which is at the foot of Mount Hermon. 1 Enoch 6:6 confirms it was Mount Hermon. It was at this mount where the Watchers took a vow to mix with the daughters of men and sealed it “with a curse.” Was Mount Hermon the location of an alien invasion? This was the event that brought on the flood of Noah; an event that proliferated much evil in the world—a literal hell on earth—far more than the Fall of Adam. Jesus was saying by symbolism, “I am taking back this rock (Mt. Hermon) and reversing what the Watchers and Nephilim have done.” Yes, the rock that Jesus and his disciples were standing on was Mt. Hermon.

Just a little about Mount Hermon from Smith’s Bible Dictionary:

Her'mon. A mountain on the northeastern border of Palestine, Deu 3:8; Jos 12:1, over against Lebanon, Jos 11:17, adjoining the plateau of Bashan. 1Ch 5:23. It stands at the southern end, and is the culminating point of the anti-Libanus range; it towers high above the ancient border city of Dan and the fountains of the Jordan, and is the most conspicuous and beautiful mountain in Palestine or Assyria.

When the whole country is parched with the summer sun, white lines of snow streak the head of Hermon. This mountain was the great landmark of the Israelites. It was associated with their northern border almost as intimately as the sea was with the western. Hermon has three summits, situated like the angles of a triangle, and about a quarter of a mile from each other.

In two passages of Scripture, this mountain is called Baal-hermon, Jdg 3:3; 1Ch 5:23, possibly because Baal was there worshipped. It is more than probable that some part of Hermon was the scene of the transfiguration, as it stands near Caesarea Philippi, where we know Christ was just before that event. The height of Hermon has never been measured, though it has often been estimated. It may safely be reckoned at 10,000 feet. (Smith)

A few other unusual facts about Mt. Hermon:

Hermon means “forbidden place.”
It was the place of Nimrod’s Castle.
It was the place of the Tower of Babel.
Today there is a UN Base located at the peak called “Hermon Hotel.” Why would the UN have interest in Mt. Hermon? Could there be a portal there, through which the Watcher angels came, and they want to greet them if they return?
In the year 1,666 AD, King Louis 14th established that the original Paris Meridian was 33.33 degrees North and 33.33 degrees East as the location of Mt. Hermon. This was later changed by newer technology.

Then there is that comment in 1 Peter 3:19, “By whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison…” referring to the judgment during Noah’s time. Remember, Peter provides reliable commentary on the events of ancient times noted by Genesis 6:1-4 and 1 Enoch. Who are these “spirits in prison” that Peter says our risen Lord Jesus spoke to? Couldn’t they be the spirits of the Nephilim? Jesus now stands before them and tells them He has won! Jesus has risen from the dead.

“And the gates of hell shall not prevail:” This is one of those commonly misunderstood verses from the Bible—it is understood totally backward. The first impression and concept of most Christians, is that they are hold up in a defensive mode against hell (or Satan). Too many people think the devil is always after them, and they interpret this as cowering in fear behind the walls of the church. But wait—they’re missing something: Gates don’t march against anything! Gates are permanent structures! There’s no gate coming after anyone! It is the church that is on the move, attacking Satan and his minions at their gate! It is the “gates of hell” that are on the defensive. The church is the one who is moving forward into enemy territory and causing havoc to Satan’s domain behind his gates. Those gates cannot hold back the church. This truth should encourage Christians and increase their faith.

Do you recall what the Watchers said? “Then they all swore together and bound one another with a curse” (1 En. 6:5). Well, the curse has been lifted by our Lord Jesus Christ. He has already won the battle against hell on earth. 1 John 3:8, “He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning [Genesis]. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.” Truly good news!

Jesus informed His disciples in Luke 10:18, “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” Then He related this adversary to serpents and scorpions where He continued: “19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you.” A picture of this same phenomenon is seen in Revelation:

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. (Rev. 12:7-9)

Notice, there are two parties here, and one party was cast to the earth. This explains the origin of both the serpent of Genesis chapter 3, and the Nephilim of Genesis chapter 6. These Nephilim were the result of fallen angels breeding with mortal women: In the words of Jude, these angels are identified as “the angels which kept not their first estate.” (v. 6)

CONCLUSION

What lesson can we take from Genesis 6:1-4 and 1 Enoch 6:1-6? You might disagree with what I’ve presented here; but one thing cannot be denied: This event was a matter of out of kind “marriages” (so-called). I say this because interracial marriages are not legitimate in God’s eyes—it is fornication (from pornea), which means mixing of blood, and refers to the worst types of sexual perversions. It is the destroyer of nations. America, you want hell on earth? Then just keep on race mixing.

37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. (Matt. 24:37-39)

One might ask, “What is wrong with marriage?” It’s true, there’s nothing wrong with marriage; but this statement is not speaking of true marriage—is it? True marriage is within one’s own race, one that produces “kind after kind.” This passage is in the context of Noah’s time. It is to remind us of Genesis 6:1-4, 1 Enoch 6:1-6, Peter, Jude and even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ as recorded here in the Gospel of Matthew; that unusual phrase, “marrying and giving in marriage.”

Can giants become Christians? If you ask the modern church they will likely say, “Yes, all they have to do is believe in Jesus and say the sinner’s prayer.” But the giants were not a part of God’s covenant with Jacob/Israel. They were a whole different race of beings. And the same applies to all other races today! All other races cannot become a part of the family of God, and neither can they marry into the Adamite race with the blessings of God. Such unions are pornea and an abomination.

I have some questions: Were Peter and Jude wrong in the language they used? And how about Jesus? They all were familiar with the book of 1 Enoch; otherwise, where did they learn such things as “angels that sinned?” (2 Pet. 2:4) Were they in error? Did they accept 1 Enoch worthy of the status of Scripture? Maybe—maybe not. It is true that parts of 1 Enoch may disagree with parts of canonical Scripture, but on the portions about the Nephilim and Mt. Hermon, they agree! In this case we must accept it. Evidently, Peter and Jude believed parts of the book or they would not have expressed the same ideas found in it. The fact that Jude, the brother of our Lord, quotes from 1 Enoch must count for something.

Bibliography:

Reversing Hermon, Dr. Michael S. Heiser, 2017

1 Enoch, 300 BC

The book of Jubilees, and other literature of the Second Temple Period found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, contain versions of the Watchers story found in 1 Enoch. Jubilees presents the account of a revelation given to Moses on Mt. Sinai: God forewarns Moses that Israel will apostatize but then will repent. The book shifts, and an angel speaks for God, informing Moses about all that had transpired from the creation to the arrival of Israel at Sinai. Thus, Jubilees is a rewriting of Genesis 1—Exodus 19. What is noteworthy is that the author of Jubilees added 5 interpolations of material from 1 Enoch (4:15-26; 5:1-12; 7:20-39; 8:1-4; 10:1-17) to the biblical text. So, for the author of Jubilees, and other Judeans of the period, Enoch was the predecessor of Moses as writer of authoritative scripture. (Heiser, p. 184)

I’ve heard that Enoch did not author the book of 1 Enoch, but Wikipedia says the book is “ascribed by tradition to the patriarch, Enoch, who was the father of Methuselah and the great grandfather of Noah.” So who really knows for sure?

The Biggest Error of Christian America

Most ministers call Abraham a “Jew” without justification or Scriptural evidence. Preachers refer to Moses and the ancient Israelites who came out of Egypt as “Jews.” Why? It is because they are taught to do so in their colleges and seminaries (controlled by jews). The book of Exodus calls them Israelites, the House of Jacob, Hebrews, Israel, and the children of Israel. Never are any of this race called “Jews.”