My thanks to Billy Hallowell of The Blaze for taking the time to interview me about the origin of demons. Those who follow this blog will be interested in reading my short essay on that on the Logos Talk blog — and probably saddened by some of the comments to it. You may want to reply!
I found it humorous at the end of the Blaze article where Billy quoted GotQuestions.org about the nephilim. Their response is illustrative of how the theology of this topic is relentlessly unscriptural. GotQuestions.org notes: “The most biblically consistent explanation for the origin of the demons is that they are the fallen angels, the angels who rebelled against God with Satan.”
Biblical consistent? The nephilim and the sons of God are not the same thing — this answer conflates them. Nephilim are never called angels or fallen angels. The Nephilim were corporeal warriors of unusual height, traits they passed on to their descendants, the Anakim (Num 13:32-33). In fact, as I point out in The Unseen Realm, their descendants are called “people” (Hebrew: ‘am; ) and “men” (Hebrew ‘adam; ). To quote my book, The Unseen Realm:
Despite their unusual size, the biblical text is clear that the giant clan members were human. For example, the word ʾadam (“humankind”; cf. Gen 1:26–27) is used to describe the victims of the conquest in cities associated with giant clans (Josh 11:14). Arba is called “the greatest man (ʾadam) among the Anakim.” The generic Hebrew word for people (ʿam; i.e., human populations) is also used of giant clans: Deut 2:10 (the Emim); Deut 2:20 (the Zamzummim); Deut 3:1–3 (Og’s people); Deut 9:2 (the Anakim).
These passages show conclusively that nephilim and their descendants (Anakim, Num 13:33) weren’t fallen angels. And guess what else? There is no verse that connects them to Satan — zero. And of course the GotQuestions.org response doesn’t incorporate any of the recent re-evaluation of the cuneiform tablets that provide the point-for-point Mesopotamian analogy to Gen 6:1-4 — which aligns perfectly with everything I talked about in “Where Do Demons Come From”.
So what’s “biblically consistent” about their answer? Nothing. It’s a textbook example of doing biblical theology without the Bible getting in the way.
“You may want to reply!”
Done.
You are most welcome. Probably.
So.
—the last thing he said to me, “Rock,” he said, “sometime when the team is up against it and the breaks are beating the boys, tell them to go out there with all they’ve got and win just one for Jesus”.
Thanks/Best.
Thanks – it’s very much appreciated, trust me!
I don’t know how you put up with this stuff; you have thicker skin than I do.
Our bastardization of the biblical language about these things has been coming up repeatedly for me lately. Basically everything your Logos article touches on.
I’m just baffled by the opposition to it. And not even on the obvious level that it’s the superior position to argue the worldview of scripture was a supernatural one — baby Jesus weeps that I even have to type that sentence.
I’m baffled by the hostility towards it.
It just feels…creepy.
You’re basically arguing the Bible is essentially casting creation as a conflict of the choice between Yahweh (life) and…well not Yahweh (death). And that conflict plays out in the visible and invisible; between the human and divine.
I mean that’s all of scripture, old and new, in a nutshell.
Then you throw in the growing pagan/neoplatonic/boarderline gnostic tendencies of the wider church (things like kicking heaven upstairs and existing only in some ethereal plane). I don’t know, it’s like there’s some unseen force(s) influencing our culture in ways that moves us away from scripture.
But of course that’s dramatic; we all know Paul famously said the battle is not against principalities but against idols [your favorite sports team/tv shows]. Because materialism is mutually exclusive to spiritually influenced issues.
The hostility is not unfamiliar (see my notes to other comments here).
Lord willing, things will happen in 2016 that will help me do more to feed people who care good content (and so, irritate the haters even more). Stay tuned, and thanks for the supportive note.
So looking forward.
Some of the comments were not too kind. Someone called this material junk theology and someone else said that you should go back and read the bible again or something to that effect. It just boggles the mind. I am loving the book by the way.
This is pretty regular when it comes to how mainstream people in the pew respond. Many are either self-styled “teachers of the Word” who are drastically under-exposed to the text (and so I’m a threat), while others are just made uncomfortable by hearing me talk about a doctrine with words that their teachers don’t use.
This is why I only target (with content) people I know who care about the text first. Supernatural (a book aimed at the people in the pew) was not my idea, but I felt I needed to try it to say that I did, and to hopefully (am I really saying this? yes) stimulate interest in the biblical text among CHRISTIANS.
Welcome to my world.
I finished Supernatural and was left with too many questions so I am now reading The Unseen Realm. I like the footnotes and deeper explanations. It is starting to make more sense now. I think you should either expand Supernatural or drop it. It really needs more depth. The additional support that Unseen gives is to answer the questions as I am formulating them (polytheism? only begotten?). It seems like you “tested” your “product” before its final version.
By the way I keep trying to get into the companion website for more notes but all I am finding is advertising for the book. Where do I find all your other notes?
I may come back and beat you up later but for now, I am grateful for Unseen, the perspective of reading it from the reader’s and writer’s perspective, and recognizing our romantic/modern/post-modern biases.
yep – Unseen Realm is where to start with questions.
No buddy, the Living Soul is a combination of Dust of the Ground (body) and Breath of Life (conscience). When you die nothing is left for body has separated from the breath of life. The dead know nothing. There are no beings strong enough to defeat death to have there spirit roam the universe. The War in heaven happened Before the fall of man. The serpent of old was in Eden before man had committed to sin.
The Nephilum we’re a cross breed of Godly people(Christians) and worldly people (Man) so when the sons of God(Christians) saw that the daughters of man were fair(“pretty”) they came into them. Godly people and worldly do mix well, mutant genetics aka DNA, sin. Holy spirit be with you
I approved this one so readers can see it. It’s a textbook example of doing Bible interpretation without the Bible getting in the way. It’s starved for textual legitimacy. But this is what passes in the Church for “Bible knowledge”.
Don’t believe me? Read The Unseen Realm.
Great opportunity to plug the book! If what I say is so detached from Scripture in your mind — I challenge you to read the book.
Given the different times that anakim, or rephaim or any other giants are mentioned, just how big DID Israelites consider them? I mean, did they think them like Jack and the bean stock or something? Why would they be so afraid when the spies came back with report of them?
I’ve blogged about this before, so you can search for that (“giants”). I also address it in The Unseen Realm. Only *one* giant in the Bible is actually given a description in terms of height (Og isn’t — only his “bed” is described — and the number is highly symbolic, linking Og back to Mesopotamia and the apkallu, and thus the nephilim – all laid out in The Unseen Realm).
Short answer: Goliath’s height in the Dead Sea Scrolls is 6′ 6″ (or 6′ 9″ depending on the cubit). The scrolls text has him a lot shorter than the Masoretic text. Every OT text-critical scholar I know of takes the scrolls readings from Qumran very seriously (typically as superior), especially when they disagree with MT and agree with LXX (which is the case with 1 Sam 17:4, Goliath’s height). As I have blogged previously, the biblical giants were people whose height was unusually tall for their day (and ours to some degree): over 6 feet tall up to 8 feet.
So they were regular (tall) people that the surrounding people gave a sort of mythic origins story?
Let me put it another way. Given the (pre Israelite) idea of angelic procreation existing in Mesopotamia and they spawns being sort of half-breeds, was this an attempt to knock two birds with one stone? (i.e., give an origin account of these tall people while at the same time using it as a polemic against pagan theology). Perhaps in the same manner the Bible tries to give the origins of the nation of Moav, which was that Lot’s daughter had sex with her father.
Hypothetically, if an Israelite ever sat down for coffee with one of these anakaim or nephillim and asked about they ancestors, I am sure the anak would not relate to them they are descendants of fallen angels.
Mesopotamia itself takes this view, so it wasn’t imposed by Israel on Mesopotamia (that would be completely anachronistic). If the conversation you sketch had occurred, I’m not so sure about your presumption. Ancient warriors would likely have been proud to think their ancestors were gods. We know the elite thought that. Biblical writers likely made the connections they did (on a purely literary level for discussion) on the basis of their knowledge of Mesopotamian material (recall that I’m of the opinion that Gen 1-11 was written in Babylon): “the really tall people our ancestors fought in Canaan must have come from the apkallu/nephilim” – Hence Num 13:33, the amazing connection between Marduk and Og’s bed [see The Unseen Realm], etc.).
>“the really tall people our ancestors fought in Canaan must have come from the apkallu/nephilim”
So what were they?
The OT describes them as people (‘am) and men (‘adam) — but it also describes angels as men (Gen 18-19, e.g.). This is one item where the “mythic” view (supernatural view #2 I’ve mentioned before) may have an edge — the belief that these unusually tall people must have had a more than human origin (divine assistance / intervention of a non-sexual nature, akin to Abraham-Sarah-Isaac) — over the more explicit supernatural-human cohabitation view.
I mean, what were they in real life. You said ““the really tall people our ancestors fought in Canaan ….”
So in real life they were just really tall people that they (Israelites) thought came from more divine origins?
That would be the outcome of the mythic view (in principle).
What the mythic view suggests is that nephilim were real and tall and the result of some sort of divine intervention by rival gods (but not actual cohabitation — again by analogy to Abraham and Sarah and Isaac). Later on, Israelites run into tall people in Canaan (going by various regional names: Anakim, Rephaim, Emim, Zamzummin, Zuzim). On the basis of their height, it was believed that they were “from the Nephilim” (Num 13:33). The view therefore doesn’t require a Gen 6 event for these peoples of Canaan — it merely suggests this was the rationale behind herem (it was theological targeting that drove the herem command). It could further be argued that one can’t conclude (logically) that because tallness associated (theologically) with divine parentage rules out supernatural intervention (that word could be used instead of “origin”). The effect is to argue that the mythic point in using tallness as a descriptive criterion was to link these enemies to an ancient quasi-divine enemy who were supernatural ENABLED to make war against Yahweh’s people (supernaturally raised up via Abraham and Sarah.
The giant people I understand. It’s the giant grapes that fascinate me!
Nate,
From my understanding, there were no giant grapes. The reason they carried it like that is because these grapes were being taken on a long trek back to the Israelite encampment. In a long journey, grapes would dry up and die. The solution would be to take the grapes ALONG with their vines and some clumps of dirt. To do this you would tie the entire thing around a long pole to make it easier to carry the whole thing.
Mike,
Regarding some of the comments on the LogosTalk site,
annoyed would be my response.You can’t teach people who already
know everything,anything.You must have the patience of Job.
The comments on the Logos site are actually quite sad in my mind. In theory all these people are Christians but some of the commenters are over-the-top rude – it’s really pathetic. I’m also amazed at how many of them think they are the experts and when shown facts contrary to their views they just blindly ignore them and parrot their own faulty theology.
Now onto the Blaze article, the comments there are all over the map and many are absolutely crazy although I guess we shouldn’t be too surprised.
Bottom line – we (all of your readers who have bought into reading the bible unfiltered and “letting the bible be what it is”) have a serious task ahead of us trying to educate the body of Christ. It will not be easy!
I am very much enjoying the thought provoking book, and have recommended it to our modest e-mail list.
Do you think, as in the days of Noah — and afterwards — that we will see nefilim in our day before the return of the Lord?
No; I don’t think that’s what Matthew 24 is about, since (a) there are no specific textual links (via the LXX) back into Genesis 6) and (b) the rest of the elements referred to apply quite clearly only to normal people, not nephilim. In other words, “Marrying and giving in marriage” does NOT actually use the LXX terminology, and the rest of the description in Matthew has nothing to do with nephilim. That is, the “eating and drinking” and “being unaware point to the people of Noah’s day, not the nephilim. To focus ONLY on the reference to Noah and conclude Matthew 24 is talking about nephilim isn’t sound hermeneutics.
Thank-you. Many assumed truths connected with the time of the end are being re-considered today, since the coming of the Lord is probably, IMO, during our generation, and He wants us to be prepared for things to come, and to be on guard against the powerful deception we are warned about in the last days.
Thanks, Howard. I do believe thinking clearly about these sorts of things will help discernment in that respect.
Greg – thanks for the note. This is actually not uncommon for the sorts of “feedback” I get on the Logos outlets — and not just to divine council / supernatural topics. Basically, anything I say that is outside of their filters is treated with suspicion or hostility. I’m going to use your comment in a post today. More folks who care about biblical theology unfiltered need to see the vitriol, and thereby see what we’re up against.
Hi Dr. Heiser, I read the Blaze article & I decided to come to your blog as I find the topic very interesting. Even though growing up in a Christian family & going to church 4 days a week I had not heard of this Nephilim until I saw a YouTube video of it about a year ago. Don’t remember who it was but very interesting. I was taught the fallen angel theory. I have to admit I am very Bible illiterate as we only read the Bible as kids by force & my very religious parents didn’t seem interested in understanding it I think cause they had made up their minds that what the church taught was what they will follow. It’s way too ShakespeareIan for me & I got F’s in that. What is your understanding on Lucifer? Do you think he is a fallen angel? Is he a Nephilim? Do you feel that he is what we have been traditionally taught to believe? Though I can see evil all around I do not want to believe in a Lucifer nor an anti christ. It’s just too much to deal with. If Satan is Lucifer then who or what would Satan be, or the devil. I had listened to Hank Hannagragh, the Bible Answer Man, on the radio & on one episode he was asked about the end times & left behind. I don’t really like Hanks show cause I have to get his answers interpretated into something not so difficult to understand but on this one he had said much of what is in the Left Behind books or movies is nor in the Bible & suggested that maybe LaHaye put much of that in cause it sells & in this case in the tune of millions of dollars. How will all of the rapture & tribulation & Revelation traditional teachings play out or may it all be different with the Nephilim theory? How does alien beings, ufos, ghost, poltergeist, walking dead & all of that stuff fit in. Are these possably the presence of Nephilim spirits residing in another being? I think I can deal much more in a spirit soul than a being who abduct & impregnate humans with reptiles. PS. I have asked way too much & please understand I am not trying to come across as a smart you know what. I am very curious & this is my first few minutes at your blog. if your books, podcasts or articles address some of these things I would be very interested. Thanks
A lot of convoluted comments! Your answers are great, although people don’t like “read my book,” “read the Unseen Realm.” A topic with powerful generation of controversy. Another one being, of course, Jesus–his historicity and his deity.
Brad – glad you’ve found the blog and the content. It’s time to graduate from the sources you’ve been exposed to and get oriented to the biblical text. The first thing you need to do is read the Unseen Realm. Emails like yours are why I wrote it, but I can’t reproduce 400 pp. on the blog. Know this: all of the content is based on peer-reviewed scholarship (that’s what I do) — there’s nothing in there I couldn’t take into a seminary classroom as a professor and articulate and defend. Like I said, time to graduate from the sources you’ve been exposed to. Show like the Bible Answer Man mean well, but it’s really the English Bible-based / Church tradition Answer man show. And I wouldn’t say that publicly if I couldn’t demonstrate it.
Having once been a part of the Worldwide Church of God back in the day, I have, since my departure in the late 90’s been searching for something that makes more sense than what I was taught. There always seemed (to me) to be something missing. I was never satisfied with the truth as it was presented and is espoused in most every church/ denomination to one extent or another.
I must admit yours is the very first site of many that clearly gives me a renewed hope and urgency to know more. I am eager to continue to listen to your videos and read your books and literature.
I am looking forward to what I know will be a total rethinking of God and the bible as I understand it and thought I knew. Thank you.
I have some friends just like you (WWCG). Hope you find The Unseen Realm as stimulating as they have.
Wow, what vitriol (meaning so many of the comments at The Blaze).
I am amazed at the “What the Nephilim really are is…” type of ‘rebuttals’ without any scholarly sources…
I also wanted to know since I just finished Unseen Realm it is now being passed around to some very interested folks at church, including my pastor who is very interested.
In fact, this Sunday he even ‘casually’ mentioned, in the sermon, how ‘even the angels looked at the human women and came down to have sex with them’ (related to Matthew 5:27 as an illustration).
So take heart, many WANT to hear and are open… though sometimes I think you enjoy, in a small way, the attacks 🙂
Welcome to my world.
Who knew you could kill angels with water?! (If that’s what nephilim were, that’s what you have to conclude.) Talk about incoherent. If that’s the sort of clarity you get on Gotquestions.org, that’s really a shame.
This is why I tell whoever will listen that if they want to understand why I do what I do it’s simple: I’m looking for the 3-4 people in every church who KNOW they aren’t being asked to think, and who sense that there must be more to the Bible than the self-help platitudes and Sunday School stories with adult illustrations they get on a weekly basis. THEY’RE RIGHT — and I have something to give them.
I think your book could really work on people who are pretty new to the faith Dr Heiser. There’s so much to sift through if you are serious about understanding what you have come to believe is true, which in effect is the supernatural. Having really well researched peer reviewed work like yours could really make an impression on someone who does not already have an orthodoxy, or tied to some form of literalism. I know it has helped me look at scripture with a much more open mind, and a huge amount of respect for the ANE worldview.
Thanks; I hope Unseen Realm can do that for many. It will be interesting to see if Supernatural reaches the folks who basically equate Bible reading or sermon listening with Bible study. It was a difficult task to write that sort of book, aimed at the beginner.
Mr. Heiser thanks for speaking and teaching what no other person that I have known, would dare to, what is in the text as a whole thanks Jesus and you have renewed my scriptural vigor and renewed my hope on why I believe.
Thanks for that encouragement; glad you’re finding the content stimulating and beneficial!
I’m not sure if this is the right place for this question, but I couldn’t find a more specific one.
Do you think that the angels of each of the seven churches in Revelation are literal angels of the divine council, or pastors/priests? (Mal 2:7)
Haven’t really decided. I favor the patron angel idea, but can’t say I’m married to it.
Mike, thanks again for all you do. Giving copies of your books to veterans, civilians, believers and new to the faith folk is a blessing all the way ’round. Looking forward to what the LORD has in store for the cases coming for distribution at a retreat this weekend.
Michael I was stunned by your comment in the blog “The sons of God—angels in more familiar parlance—transgress…”. I’ve followed your work since the edge and.. where in the texts do you get Angels=’Sons of God’?
So Jesus was an angel? [not]
I’ve said this here before: we [‘orthodox’] desperately need a modern scholarly ‘dictionary’ of sentient beings of Judeo/Christian revelation. Your comment underscores this in my view.
note the “familiar parlance” line — the whole point was “that’s the term popularly used.” I can’t assume people have read all you and others have.
At any rate, as I write in Unseen Realm, all divine beings are elohim. Terms like “angel” and “sons of God” refer to job descriptions or hierarchy in the spiritual world. They are not ontological terms as though the terms designate some sort of ontological difference.
Thank God for all the negative comments on the web. Seriously! As someone with a marketing background I think it simply means your work is getting attention. Just look at all the new people showing up in this thread. In fact years ago I found your blog because two “experts” were having a goofy fight online. Negative comments are simply the landscape of the internet. Dont let them get you down!
I’ve become accustomed to web trolling. Ten years ago it would have been something to reply to, but not so much now. Thanks!
Hope this the right place to ask this question- the 3 rebellions talk I found it very interesting. Somewhere in it I think you said God has to deal with these three rebellions. Then after listening to David Burnett on Psalm 82v8 referring to the Resurrection (rise up God judge the earth- the nations) would this make sense that all 3 rebellions would that be dealt with, with Jesus’ death on the cross (sacrifice) dealing with us humans the = 1st rebellion resolved
He goes and proclaims to the watchers – its over victory won = 2nd rebellion resolved
Jesus Resurrection psalm 82v8 deals with the nations to be bought back = (3rd rebellion resolved) ?
Thanks for your work ….love the info.
Short answer to your question: yes. The reclaiming of the nations is tied to the resurrection (note David’s short commentary on the use of anistemi [anastasis is the noun used most often for the resurrection) in the Septuagint translation of Psa 82:8. That connection happens elsewhere, too.
From the Numbers 13 account:
23And they came to the Valley of Eshcol and cut down from there a branch with a single cluster of grapes, and they carried it on a pole between two of them.
Certainly, they were remarkable grapes or they wouldn’t have named the placed “Cluster” after them.
Not sure what this has to do with the Blaze post, but it’s approved.