We respond to every follow-up question submitted, but only publish selected ones.
In order to be considered for publication, questions must be on-topic, polite, and address ideas rather than
personalities.
Question: The Torah mentions the Nephilim as giants in both sections Genesis 6-4 and book of Numbers. Who and what are they? I have had conflicting answers that they were fallen angels to just a story thrown in as filler? Can you please shed some light on this subject?
Answer: The most basic understanding of the Nephilim is that they were in fact giants as you mention. The word Nephilim is derived from the Hebrew word Naphal which literally means “fall or drop”. The commentators explain that these giants were called Nephilim since the hearts of those that saw them would “drop” as a result of seeing these awesome beings.
There also exists a Rabbinic tradition mentioned in some Midrashim and commentaries that the Nephilim were two angels who descended to earth to become humans. According to this tradition, they were called Nephilim since they “fell” from heaven to earth, from the spiritual world to the physical world (again deriving from the Heberew word Naphal meaning fall). Certainly according to this tradition, these fallen angels were giant beings as well.
This Rabbinic tradition further asserts that two of the children of these fallen angels were none other than Og and Sichon, mentioned in Numbers as the powerful kings of Bashan and the Emorites respectively. The Nephilim mentioned in Numbers as giants that the spies saw while spying out the land of Israel were therefore Og and Sichon.
Of course, any mention of fallen angels who in essense became humans, begs a deeper understanding. Recall that these fallen angels are mentioned in the same context as the intense immorality which pervaded mankind. The actions of mankind have reprecussions far beyond the physical world we find ourselves in. All our actions, whether positive or negative impact the spiritual worlds as well. The world had become so depraven that it impacted even how the angels behaved, to the extent that some angels descended from their pure spiritual realm to our physical world. The fallen angels were therefore, in essence the result of the actions of mankind on earth.
If the children of fallen angels were Og and Sichon as Rabbinic tradition suggests, does this tradition also suggest that there were remnants of the flood other than those recorded in Genisis 9:18? If not, then were these “fallen angels turned human” not destroyed in the flood? How could there have been more giants of the same seed and why don’t we see these giants today? The way my NKJ version of the bible reads, the use of the word “giants” could be removed and not change anything the bible says. Could it be a reference to dinosaurs just stuck in there?
I will try and answer you questions as best I can given my understanding of your questions:
If the children of fallen angels were Og and Sichon as Rabbinic tradition suggests, does this tradition also suggest that there were reminants of the flood other than those recorded in Genisis 9:18? If not, then were these “fallen angels turned human” not destroyed in the flood?
In fact, this Rabbinic tradition does assert that Og (and Sichon) were saved from the flood as well. They are not mentioned in the text of the narrative of the flood explicitly, but are hinted at in a verse in the flood narrative (I can provide the exact verse and hint if you like—its derived from a nuance in a Hebrew word). I would surmise they are not mentioned by name explicitly as they were not true physical beings like humans and animals, but rather some half angel, half man species, as I mention in my original response. The Torah (Bible) speaks most clearly about the purely physical, since that is most clear to us, and only provides hints about entities of a more spiritual nature, as the spiritual can be understood by us only through veiled references.
How could there have been more giants of the same seed and why don’t we see these giants today?
There may well have been more giants of the same nature at the time. With regards to why we don’t see such giants today, I believe the answer is directly related to a different question: why don’t have we experience miracles such as described in the Bible. The answer to both questions is a rather involved one but in a nutshell, traditional Judaism believes that as the time line of history moves forward, each subsequent generation is further removed from G-d and the experience of spiritual in general. As such, the giants, who were of a spiritual nature, and the miracles described in the Bible would not be appropriate nor appreciated (i.e. would not have the desired effect) in our generation so far removed from such spirituality. As mentioned, this is the short answer.
The way my NKJ version of the bible reads, the use of the word “giants” could be removed and not change anything the bible says. Could it be a reference to dinosaurs just stuck in there?
I am not entirely sure what you mean to ask here, but I will make a couple of points which I believe are relevant and might provide an explanation you find satisfying:
a) Traditional Judaism believes the Torah was given on Mt. Sinai by God Himself in Hebrew. As such, to gain a true appreciation for the message of the Torah, it must be studied in its original Hebrew. Translations have a way of skewing meaning.
b) As the Torah was given by God Himself, traditional Judaism believes the Torah to be the word of God, and as such, every word is necessary. There are no extra words and words which appear extra contain a message. In this case, the Torah informs us they were giants and sons of God to teach us something. That lesson may be as I explained in my original response that the actions of man have repercussions far beyond what we may imagine and as such we should think carefully about every action we take. It also speaks to the greatness of man for the same reason.
I hope this helps. If you still feel confused, please feel free to respond.
Be well,
Rabbi Yoel Spotts
Comment by ATR — September 22, 2006 @ 10:42 am