I’ve blogged once before about this point of pseudo-research as it relates to using the Talmud for its justification. In biblical thinking and history, however, the nephilim (who were unusually tall) died out in biblical times. That means there were no modern nephilim in North America of anywhere else.
I know all about the books that (allegedly) chronicle giant clans in North America. They are entirely based on 19th century and early 20th century newspaper reports. While I believe that it’s certainly plausible for someone to come across a human skeleton of unusual height (say, 6’6” on into the 7-foot range, the height of the biblical giants) during those periods (after all, we have such people living among us now – lots of them), I don’t believe there is any solid evidence for a “race” of such people in North America or anywhere else that descend from the nephilim. Nephilim descendants and races in North America is, of course, part of the modern Moundbuilder myth. It is a fact of history that the Moundbuilder myth was created to deny the indigenous native North American races the ability and credit for such creations. While I don’t believe modern nephilim enthusiasts intentionally seek to denigrate the non-white European people in ancient North American, that’s actually where this idea leads – because that was the milieu in which it arose.
Associated with 19th-early 20th century newspaper reports of giant skeletons are certain “findings” of skeletons with “double rows of teeth.” This feature and, supposedly, elongated skulls, is proof of nephilim races. I’ve blogged before about how these skulls have nothing to do with nephilim. I want to shift attention here to the other feature: the “double rows of teeth.” Anthropological archaeologist Andy White has done a good bit of research into these reports. His efforts conclusively show that such language in giant skeleton reports does not refer to skeleton that was double-jawed, or that had four rows of teeth inside the mouth. Rather, “double rows of teeth” is a stock description during the 19th-early 20th era for having two nice rows of teeth (the normal uppers and lowers). Nothing abnormal is indicated by the phrase. I recommend Andy’s excellent research on the matter, specifically:
The Modern Mythology of Giants: “Double Rows of Teeth”
More Misinterpretations: “Giants with Double Rows of Teeth” from Ohio
Four Individuals with a “Double Row of Teeth” to add to your Giant Nephilim File
The long and short of this is, as I have pointed out before, is that it’s important to put forth real, extant data for ideas (and, therefore, to base beliefs on real data). When Christian researchers refuse to do this, they are not being honest. When they lack the research skills to test an idea, they are being inept. I’m grateful for Andy White’s tenacious research on the double-row teeth. It’s a shame that no Christian researcher was as earnest.
 I think the alleged evidence for North American giant “races” is a combination of (1) misidentified fossils; (2) inept researcher bunk; (3) and journalistic contrivance. On the latter, newspapers literally made up stories for readership; the era is infamous for this sort of journalism. See for example, Arthur Wrobel (ed.), Pseudo-Science & Society in the 19th Century America (University Press of Kentucky, 1987). For those who will charge me of “denying the Bible” in regard to this, let me ask for the chapter and verse of the Bible that either requires or says nephilim lived on after the biblical time period. There is no such passage. The modern nephilim race myth has nothing to do with biblical integrity, on this or any other point. It’s a modern myth. On the unusual height of the nephilim and their kin in biblical material, see The Unseen Realm, chs. 12-13, 23-25.
 Archaeologists are well aware of this situation and sensitive to it. The archaeological report that destroyed the non-indigenous moundbuilder myth was published in 1894: Cyrus Thomas, Report on the Mound Explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology (Smithsonian Institution Bureau of Ethnology, 12th Annual Report, Washington, DC. For more recent treatments, see Robert Silverburg, Moundbuilders of Ancient America: The Archaeology of a Myth (New York: Graphic Society, Greenwich, CT, 1965; and Robert Silverburg, The Moundbuilders (Ohio University Press, 1970).
But Mike, any real in-depth research would disprove my paradigm. How else am I going to get fringe Christians to keep buying my cutting-edge Nephilim productions?
So, you’re telling me LA and Steve Quayle are off their rockers?
I’d have to agree. People love a good “mystery”, instead of finding real biblical truth.
Well, “off their rocker” shifts the focus to sanity or something like that. I’d say that they are quite wrong — and demonstrably so — not crazy or any similar adjective. Anecdotes and opinions aren’t data. That’s all I’m interested in.
Dr. Heiser, you asked for “the chapter and verse of the Bible that either requires or says nephilim lived on after the biblical time
period” and I would ask anyone for “the chapter and verse of the Bible that either requires or says nephilim lived on after the flood.”
If I may, in The Unseen Realm chap 23 you wrote, “Genesis 6:4 pointedly informs readers that the Nephilim were on earth before the flood ‘and also afterward.’” The phrase looks forward to Numbers 13:33…”
May I noted that the text does not state “before the flood ‘and also afterward’” but states “in those days, and also after that” which, indeed, is commonly taken to mean pre-flood and post-flood.
However, one can just as easily, and more in keeping with immediate as well as greater context, to take is to mean “in those days” with a timeline beginning point which verse 1 has as “when men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born unto them” which could be as early as when Adam and Eve’s offspring first started having offspring, and “also after that” being just that: after that beginning point and yet, still pre-flood.
I will noted that the majority of spies are the ones who reference the Anakim in relation to the Nephilim within their bad/evil report.
However, God references this event in Numbers 14:24-25 and affirms the presence of the Anakim (and Canaanites) in the land but states nothing of the Nephilim.
Moses references this event in Deuteronomy 1:28 and affirms the presence of the Anakim in the land but states nothing of the Nephilim.
Caleb references this event in Joshua 14 and affirms the presence of the Anakim in the land but states nothing of the Nephilim.
Now, I grant that perhaps that they did not mention the Nephilim (or, mention the Anakim’s relation to them) means just that: that they
simply did not mention it.
However, the Numbers 13 context is that the spies mention the Anakim, Caleb chimes in to encourage the people and the spies take their fear mongering up a notch by, only then, tying the Anakim to the Nephilim within their bad/evil report (note also that the Anakim come from Anak whose father is Arba—sadly, we do not seem to have a genealogy for him).
In short, I would side with Caleb, Moses and God and against the spies and thus, see no post-flood Nephilim at all with the “giant” tribes simply being that which giant means: taller than the average.
What thinkest thou?
After the flood: Num 13:32-33. The spies weren’t lying. They are condemned for faithlessness, not lying. And the Num 13:32-33 passage is just one of a whole matrix.
What do I think? You apparently haven’t read a good bit of my material, either here or Unseen Realm. I agree that the giants of OT times were of the same uncommon height as today. I’ve blogged that before and it’s in my book.
It’s funny you think the whole world wasn’t populated BCE. Of course there was niphilim scattered threw out why wouldn’t they?