Dr. Tim Chaffey and Pastor Joel Webbin conclude their Nephilim series by arguing that Matthew 22:30 permits fallen angels to procreate with women, as scripture depicts angels as physical beings. They identify Poseidon as a demon ruling the sea and assert female giants existed within warrior clans, countering Greek myths as distorted echoes rather than sources. Rejecting modern tall individuals as biblical giants, they emphasize ancient engineering over supernatural construction while questioning angelic DNA inheritance. Ultimately, this re-enchantment strategy counters secular humanism by upholding Scripture's authority against naturalistic explanations. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Angels Marry Human Women00:14:58
All right, welcome back to another episode of Theology Applied.
I'm your host, Pastor Joel Webbin, here with Right Response Ministries.
This is our fourth and final episode with Dr. Tim Chafee coming back onto the show to finish our four part series on the Nephilim, the Watchers.
Well, I guess I should start in order the Watchers, fallen angels, the Nephilim, and the Giants.
And today is kind of like a free safety catch all where we're kind of just dotting I's and crossing T's and finishing up all the looming hangover questions that you guys have had.
The most commonly asked questions from the previous three episodes that we've already done.
And just to give you a little bit of a sample of tasting, we're going to talk about is there really such a thing as female angels?
We kind of have a sneaking suspicion they might all be men.
I know that sounds crazy.
Hear us out.
We've got some arguments.
So are there female angels or are they all male angels?
And then male angels, are they physical, body and spirit, or just spirit?
How could they procreate with human female women?
How does that work?
And then we talk about, in addition to all that, How big were giants actually?
What kind of size did they get to?
I think it's fascinating.
It's some of the most fascinating, but also really practical questions, handling some of the most frequent, not only questions, but objections to this idea that fallen angels that rebelled against God could actually procreate with human women.
A lot of people just think that that's fantastical.
I think that's what the Word of God teaches.
So does Dr. Tim Chafee.
And I think that between the two of us, we make a very compelling argument.
So tune in now.
Applying God's Word to every aspect of life.
This is Theology Applied.
All right, welcome back to another episode of Theology Applied.
I'm your host, Pastor Joel Webben with Right Response Ministries.
Today, I am joined for the fourth and final time with Dr. Tim Chafee.
We've been doing a mini series, a four part series.
And so, if you haven't seen the first three parts, I encourage you to feel free to watch this video.
But if you have any looming questions, you know, well, they didn't really make a thorough argument because they didn't answer this objection and they didn't handle this, you know, nuance or whatever.
It's very likely that we actually did address it in one of the previous parts.
So I encourage you to go back and check out the first three episodes, but you don't have to do that preemptively.
You're welcome to stay and just watch this and work your way backwards or forwards, whatever you want to do.
But this is the fourth and final episode dealing with the Nephilim.
We're dealing with fallen angels.
We're dealing with the Nephilim, and we're also dealing with their down generations giants.
And so that's what we've been dealing with.
And today we really want to focus in on some of the questions that you guys have left for us in the comments.
The things that seem to be the most inquisitive questions, but also the most popular, common questions, right?
Working with FAQs, trying to deal with the most frequently asked questions.
How can we address all those?
So, this is kind of a final summary video where we dot some I's, cross some T's.
And without further ado, let's go ahead and get started.
Tim Chafee, thank you for coming on the show again.
Hey, Joel, it's great to be with you again.
Thanks for having me.
It's been a lot of fun so far, and I'm looking forward to this one as well.
All right.
Well, let's go ahead and do this.
You said that it might be helpful to give, obviously, we don't want to.
I mean, people can go back and watch the video, so we want to keep it brief, but it might be helpful for people just to get a little bit of a refresher.
So, why don't you take care of that job and recap a little bit of what we've covered thus far?
Oh, yeah.
Okay.
So, some of the objections we get, let me just give you like a rapid fire type of thing.
A lot of times I hear people say, well, Jesus said angels can't do that.
And they'll point to Matthew 22 30.
Just very quickly, we've covered that in two other episodes.
So, no, Jesus didn't say they cannot do that.
He said the ones who are still in heaven don't do that.
So, he never said about that.
What the ones who left heaven and are rebounding, what they can or can't do.
Some people say, well, this whole issue that you're talking about, the fallen angel view, that's all based on the book of Enoch.
It's not true.
There's much in this, much about in the Bible, and the book of Enoch is just representing an interpretation that people had during the intertestamental period.
So it aligns with this, but it's not based on the book of Enoch.
Some people think that the spies were lying in Numbers 13 and saying that the Nephilim were in the land.
But we have to remember that the narrator, Moses himself, tells us earlier in the chapter that.
The spies actually saw the Anakim there, and the Anakim are of the Nephilim.
So there were giants in the land.
Some people wonder how it's possible that people like you and me could think that God would ever allow something so wretched, so perverse.
And all we have to do is look around our culture, our world today.
God permits or allows abortion, He allows murder, He allows rape, He allows all sorts of evil things.
Just because that stuff exists doesn't mean we get to deny the reality of it.
We don't have to be comfortable with it, we don't have to like it, but it occurs.
So, those are just some of the objections that I hear, or the Bible would never call this marriage between the fallen angels and human women because that's not what biblical marriage is.
Well, Solomon had a thousand wives, princes, and concubines, and that's not ideal either.
If you think about worship in the Bible, you have true worship and you also have false worship.
You have the worship of pagan gods, of idols, and everything, and you have the true worship of the one true God.
So, the same word is used in both cases.
It's just one is what is ideal and what is right versus what is a distortion of that.
Great.
Okay, so then let's start there.
With the angels, specifically what you were talking about, you said Jesus didn't say they can't do that, just to explicitly spell out the that.
He says that angels do not marry in heaven.
That when we go to heaven, because it's one of those gotcha moments with the religious rulers of the day within Judaism, they're trying to.
You know, to trick Jesus.
And so they say, you know, Jesus, if there was this hypothetical situation with a woman who had seven husbands, right?
And, you know, the first husband dies, she marries again, the second, you know, not simultaneously, but one in sequence after another.
And the husbands keep dying, she keeps remarrying.
And then, you know, eventually has a total of seven husbands.
Which husband will she be married to in the resurrection?
And Jesus responds and says, you know, in the resurrection, you know, in heaven, we will be as the angels are who don't marry.
And so to use that and say, well, there you have it.
Case closed.
Out of the mouth of Christ himself, Angels cannot procreate.
Well, wait a second.
You just isogeated.
You just read into the text by that word cannot, speaking of ability, rather than what Jesus says they do not do, speaking of that.
That's not a prescriptive, that's a descriptive language of this is how it is, but that's not speaking in terms of possibility, ability.
And so, angels in heaven don't marry.
Rebellious angels who leave heaven, Jesus says nothing about what they can do.
And so, that's what's in reference there.
But I think that it's interesting.
We've explored a little bit of this in our previous episode, the most recent episode, I think part three.
But I think it's worth exploring again.
I am of the persuasion, I think you are, neither of us are definitive, but I think we both lean in this direction.
I'm of the persuasion that one of the reasons angels don't marry in heaven is that it's not God's design, it's not his will, but also it is an impossibility because I truly am, again, not 100% sure, but leaning heavily towards the possibility that angels are exclusively.
You want to talk about that?
What do you think about that?
Yeah, we did cover that a bit in one of the other episodes as well.
There's no indication anywhere in scripture, at least no clear indication anywhere in scripture, that angels could be described as feminine.
There is the one verse that you and I talked about in Zechariah 5 where it's a vision of these two storks and they're in the feminine, but whether or not that, and some people think that they're demons or at least evil spirits, you know, fallen angels, but again, it's a vision.
How much do we read into that?
And are they really representing two individual spirits or are they also?
Are they representing maybe nations or some other corporate entities, groups like the two witnesses in Revelation?
That could be two individual people, but it also could those two, you know, lots of faithful biblical scholars have defined that as representative of two churches, corporate groups of people.
And so to use a vision, that's just not the strong, but when we have a narrative, historical narrative, like Gabriel, you know, speaking to Mary, or three angels, one of them being the angel of the Lord himself, but then accompanied with two other angels meeting with Abraham.
In all these instances, not visions, but actual physical appearances of angels as historical narrative in the script, they're exclusively male.
Yeah, that's right.
You do have the one verse in Hebrews 13 that talks about how we're supposed to be hospitable to strangers because some people have entertained angels unaware.
Again, it doesn't say, therefore, someday there's going to be a female who shows up at your door and you should welcome her because it's really a female angel.
It doesn't say that.
It would be within the realm of possibility just from the textual standpoint, but it Is not proof at all that there are female angels.
I would agree with you.
Whenever we do see angels in scripture, whenever the gender is referenced at all, it's always male and masculine.
So, my, yeah, so thank you.
So, further fleshing that out, my position, and I think you and I are pretty linked up on this, I'm sure there'd be some differences, but my position is that, so now taking that, so we've established that, I know it's not a hands down definitive case, but we've made a plausible argument for angels being male.
And so it's a two part, two prong argument.
Angels don't marry in heaven, one, because there's only dude angels in heaven, you know, and not chick angels in heaven.
But then two, because it's also not God's design and will.
So it's these aren't the angels that are in heaven are not rebellious angels.
They're submitted to the lordship and authority of God as the supreme being, but also they're male.
Who would they marry?
But on earth, one, you have females, not female angels, but you do have female human beings.
And then two, these are rebellious angels who are no longer submitted to God's will.
Now the question is okay, so.
If angels are male, the next thing is, though, but how does one male species mate with another female species?
And so, what I would add now, dealing with that objection, is I think of David in the Psalms, which finds its ultimate highest fulfillment, as the author of Hebrews spells out for us, it has a messianic fulfillment in Christ.
So, the ultimate interpretation, what I'm about to quote of David in the Psalms, is that Christ ultimately fulfills it.
But David is also, I think it also is a faithful interpretation of David, means it as it pertains to not just Christ, but as it pertains to humanity in general as a whole.
And what David says is who is man that you are mindful of him, or the son of man that you should care for him?
He's talking about the compassion of God towards all things considered, a puny, tiny little creature, namely you and I.
But this infinite God who created all things is so compassionate and kind.
That he loves man, even man, us.
And he says, Who is man that you are mindful of him, or the Son of Man that you should show compassion to him?
You made him just a little lower than the angels.
And I understand that this is a fairly literal hermeneutic that I'm about to apply here, but a lot of texts should be interpreted literally.
And I take that to mean that a male angel and a female human being would not be likened to a male elephant and a female frog trying to mate.
I take it much more like a little lower than.
If man is made just a little lower, and I know that you hold the view that angels like man have likewise been created in the image of God, so both are image bearing creatures, and one is only a little lower than the other.
I take it as like two different species, separate, but within the canine larger family, like a great Dane and a German shepherd, angel, male, female, human being, and that they very absolutely could procreate.
And that brings up another thing, just briefly.
That I think a lot of times Christians have a.
We over spiritualize, I think, a lot of times, especially modern evangelicals.
I think some of it's Gnostic.
I'm not saying this interpretation is hard Gnosticism, you know, that it's heretical or anything like that.
But in general, I think that we have modern Christians have a Gnostic bent, a Gnostic bent, and an over spiritualizing bad habit.
Angels, as far as we know, they're not omnipresent like God.
God is the most pure spirit without body parts and passions, He's not confined.
To a physical location, a physical body.
Christ, the second member of the Godhead, second member of the Trinity, he is the God man, divine, fully God and fully man.
And so he does have a body.
He's seated on a throne physically in heaven at the right hand of the Father.
But the Father and Christ before the incarnation and the Spirit are most pure spirits without body parts and passions and infinite.
But every creature that God made, both heavenly and earthly creatures, angels, I don't think there's any reason to think that angels are pure spirit.
In heaven, and then whenever there's an angelic appearance on earth, it's actually just a purely spiritual entity without a body projecting a hologram or an apparition that looks physical.
I don't think that's it.
I think it's a physical being, just like human beings.
We have both spirit and body.
Spirit and body.
I think angels, likewise, are spirit and body, a spirit with a physical locale of the body.
And when they come to earth, they're coming in both spirit and body.
They actually are appearing in flesh in their body and.
You know, golly gee, what does that body look like?
A lot like ours to the point where even, you know, the inhabitants of Sodom, you know, could notice, hey, there's something different about them.
Like, and so in their lust and perversion, they were desirable, these angels, but they also weren't sitting there and saying, what's this crazy monster in town that looks nothing like a human being at all?
It was like, no, they stand out, but also they look like people enough to where we desire them lustfully and in a perversion.
Physical Bodies in Heaven00:14:55
Perverse way.
And same with, you know, when, you know, the three angels, you know, one being the angel of the Lord, eat with Abraham and Bob.
So I see angels as one, I think male, and then two, physical beings, not that unlike human beings to where they're physical, they're male, they don't mate in heaven because it's not God's will.
And there's not female angels, but there are female women.
And the gap between human beings and angels is not that.
Big.
And these are also angels who, if they come to earth, the ones that were fallen, they're rebellious, so they're not submitted to God's will.
It's not a crazy position.
Anything you think on that?
Yeah, I would largely agree with that.
I have a friend who argues that Jesus spoke against the fallen angel view in this way.
In fact, he went so far as saying, if the fallen angel's view is true, we can't be saved because Jesus would have lied and then Jesus can't be our Savior.
Well, where does he say that, anything like this?
Well, once Jesus rises from the dead and he appears to the disciples, and he says, handle me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.
And so they look at that and they say, see, Jesus said spirits don't have flesh and bone.
So how can you argue this?
Well, first of all, that word spirit is just the Greek word pneuma, which means lots of different things.
It's translated as our breath or as the wind or as the Holy Spirit is also used that term.
So spirits, it could be referring to angelic beings.
It could be a ghost that he's talking about.
And that actually seems to be what he's talking about because it, Other translations actually say that, like the Net Bible touch me and see a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.
And so he's not saying, I'm not an angel.
They didn't think that he was an angel.
That's not the point.
And so people who make way too much out of that one use of the word, when there's such a broad range, syntactical range of what that word can mean, I think you have to look at the rest of the context of scripture.
And in this case, when angels appear, they have human form.
They can look human enough for the sinful men at Sodom to lust after them and want to molest them.
They can eat and drink with Abraham just before that.
And they can pull Lot by the hand out of the city.
So they can do all sorts of physical human activity.
And to me, I think you're right.
I think they are, since I believe that they are also made in God's image, then we are.
In a, in a sense that they're, they're not so different than us.
And even though they may not have the same exact flesh and blood while they're in eternity, you know, not in eternity, but while they're in heaven now.
But I think if you think about eternity, um, this is one area, Joel, you and I, I think we'd agree on this where maybe our all millennial brothers would not.
Um, but I'm not quite sure where some of them would go on this, but in the eternal state.
So we have new glorified, but not new, we have glorified bodies.
Right.
This body gets glorified.
The one that goes into the grave is the one that comes out of the grave, but it's glorified.
It's transformed.
Paul talks about in 1 Corinthians 15.
And we're going to inhabit a new heavens and a new earth.
The new Jerusalem that's described in Revelation 21 22.
It's going to be a physical reality for all eternity.
It's not floating on the clouds, playing harps.
It's not a bodiless existence.
We are meant to have a body, and we're going to have a physical body for all eternity.
Again, glorified.
We're not going to get sore and tired, you know, like we do now and achy joints or anything.
Right.
And angels will be there.
And I don't think that they're just going to be floating around ethereal spirits.
I think that they're going to actually have bodies as well.
Are you a Christian struggling to find companies that align with your values and beliefs?
Well, then Squirrelly Joe's has you covered for all your coffee needs.
All of their coffee is hand selected and roasted fresh every day by a family of fellow believers.
Try them out and you'll savor exceptional coffee while knowing that your investment supports.
A company committed to following God's teachings and upholding truth and righteousness, ensuring that your hard earned money contributes to the growth of God's kingdom.
Stop giving your hard earned dollars to pagans who support evil.
Right response listeners have access to an exclusive deal.
Your first bag of coffee is free.
All you have to do is cover the shipping.
So head on over to squirrelyjoes.com forward slash right response.
Again, that's squirrelyjoes.com forward slash right response to claim your first free bag of coffee today.
Right, which is not that crazy to think, especially when you think of Jesus.
So, since the resurrection and more specifically the ascension, Notice this, like, uh, so Jesus in his glorified state, uh, after the resurrection, he was able, right?
Because this is important, so it's like, well, Jesus isn't the only resurrected being, no, he is actually.
He currently we're all going to be resurrected on the final day.
But Lazarus was not resurrected, that the better word technically would be, uh, he was revitalized, resuscitated.
Um, uh, but but he, when his body came back, uh, and it's sad, you know, but uh, his body did not come back for good, his body came back to die.
Twice.
Lazarus had to die twice, you know.
And so, you know, he did not come back with a glorified body.
He came back with the same body in the same state, but just resuscitated, revived, but not resurrected in terms of glorified.
But Jesus.
Which is why Jesus can be called the first fruits from among the dead.
Exactly.
Because otherwise Lazarus would, you know, or even before him.
Exactly.
So Jesus is the first fruits of being resurrected, glorified body from the dead.
Same body.
That he walked on earth in for approximately 33 plus years until he was crucified, same body, but made new.
Not a new body, meaning another body, same body, but made new in a new state, a higher state.
But here's the thing He wasn't just resurrected, and then for the last 2,000 years, he's hiding out somewhere alive on earth.
He was resurrected and then he ascended.
And in his glorified state, he was able, we know he was able to vanish, walk through a door.
As he appeared, you know, appearing to the disciples, the door was locked.
He walks into the room.
So he's able to appear and vanish.
And we don't know exactly how that works in his glorified body state.
But in the ascension, he doesn't just disappear after giving his final words to his disciples.
He physically ascends, levitates, goes up into the sky, and only disappears because the text explicitly says he was then hidden behind the clouds.
And what I'm trying to argue to this is my point is that Jesus, the God man, In flesh, still in flesh, these past 2,000 years, he went somewhere.
And if he is physical, he has a physical body now, he's not merely physical, but he does have a physical body forevermore, then that physical body can only exist logically in a physical place.
So he didn't go to the 17th dimension that is solely a spiritual plane.
Wherever heaven is, not even just the new heavens on the new earth that is yet to come, but even heaven.
Now has some, it must have some physical element in the sense that Jesus has a physical body.
He's seated, a physical body can only be seated on a physical throne.
And so the idea that there are other physical creatures, namely angels, in this place that is spiritual, but also has a physical element to encompass, to be the conducive context for physical beings, none of this is crazy.
And I think the fact that what we know, a lot of it seems like speculation, but if we argue from what's definitive, we know that Jesus right now has a physical body and he's somewhere.
And that somewhere is heaven.
And so we know heaven has to have, even heaven now, before the new heavens and the new earth, heaven as it currently is, has some physical element to it, to where our physical resurrected Lord is able to be there.
And that makes room, in my mind, for physical angels being there.
What do you think about that argument?
No, I think that's great.
And I look at 1 Corinthians 15 and beginning around 42, 43, it talks about how there's The body is so in a natural body, it's raised a spiritual body, and people look at that and they think, Oh, this is a so it is spiritual.
No, no, no, it's a body that is dominated by the spirit rather than a body that's dominated by the flesh.
Um, it's so even if you look into the Greek on that, that is that bears that out, and I've got that in the book.
But then he goes on, he says, The first man is from earth, made of dust, the second man is from heaven, and we're going to be like the one from heaven, we're going to be like Jesus was when we are glorified, when we are transformed.
And as he just said, he had a physical body that was.
Different than what it was before.
He could not die again.
He seemed to have had certain abilities that are not normal.
Like he said, whether he walked through a door or not, I'm not sure exactly how he got there, but somehow he appeared in their midst when the door was locked.
So whether he just walks right through it or said, I'm going to teleport right there, I'm not sure.
Yeah, I don't know.
But that's different than what we can do.
Yes, he's God, but he wasn't doing those things prior to that.
Right, right.
Yeah, great point.
So, what we've been arguing so far, and we'll move on to another topic, but there's one more piece on this subject that I'd love to address.
But what we're arguing so far is that we think this one we probably feel a little bit less strongly about, but fairly strong that angels were male.
And then, second point that we feel probably a little bit stronger about is that angels certainly are spirit and physical, they have bodies.
So, we think they definitely have bodies and probably male bodies and perhaps exclusively male bodies, and that those Angels, as creatures created in the image of God, like man, are different, but not so different from us that male physical angels could not mate with female physical humans.
And they don't do that in heaven, but it doesn't mean that they can't do that, especially if they're rebelling against God's will on earth.
So none of that is crazy.
And to say that Jesus just is the TKO knockout punch for the fallen angel view is just bad exegesis.
The Sethite view might be right, but not.
From that argument, that doesn't get you the Sethite view.
You're going to have to do better than that.
And so, the last thing that I want to say, though, I'm just thinking of one more objection that our listeners might have.
And I know it's a genuine question for me.
Well, what about other biblical texts that don't just talk about angels visiting?
Because when there's an angelic visitation on earth, they do appear human, like Gabriel with Mary.
But what about other biblical texts like Revelation talking about four living creatures covered in eyes with six wings and one, the head of an ox and the head of a lion and the head, you know?
Or Ezekiel, like wheels.
What would you say about that?
Yeah, I think what that shows us, other than maybe John and Ezekiel struggled to describe what they were seeing, because when you read Ezekiel's explanation, it's really hard to wrap my mind around what he is actually describing.
But yeah, I mean, I understand the passage in terms of he's seeing God's throne and these.
Cherubim that are there, they seem to be, you know, guardians of God's throne in some sense.
And so I get that, but in terms of how he's describing it, it's strange.
But we have to understand that that's not saying every single angelic being looks just like that.
Uh, we know the ones in Isaiah six, they have six wings.
They cover their feet with two of them.
They cover their eyes with two of them and they, uh, they fly with two of them.
And, uh, you know, all day and night, they're proclaiming holy, holy, holy.
And, um, so they have, they seem to have a unique role to play.
And there are other angelic spirits that were, or angelic beings that were, um, given the task of governing certain areas.
Especially at Babel.
We see that in Deuteronomy 32, 8, and then that's talked about elsewhere.
We covered that in one of the other episodes as well when we're talking about the divine counsel.
So, angels have different roles, they have different abilities.
There are different kinds, whether you're talking about seraphim and cherubim and perhaps the B'nai Elohim, which is the sons of God that we've been talking about.
So, we shouldn't just assume all angelic life is exactly like it, just one type of thing that God.
Create diversity of life here on our planet Earth.
And I think there's a diversity of life in heaven with Him.
Good.
Yeah, I agree.
So, one option is it could be the Ezekiel text or the Revelation 4 text.
Could be one, it could be more of a metaphorical, symbolic writing.
And then, number two, even if it is literal, that's entirely possible.
But even if it is literal, this is not a description.
Of every type of angel in heaven.
And it seems like, if anything, we don't know exactly, but if I had to guess, it seems like if it is literal, it would be a description of a minority type of angel in heaven.
Like there's four, not four million, but four living creatures covered in eyes.
Like it's a unique and even higher in terms of, I believe that there's different types of angels and a hierarchy in heaven.
And so.
And Paul bears that out as well.
And maybe this is more with the evil spiritual forces, but you have principalities and powers and thrones and dominions.
These are spiritual forces and there is ranking.
I don't know if we can have a completely fleshed out view of that because I don't think the Bible gives us enough detail to do that.
But to the point that we can say, yeah, there is some sort of hierarchy and difference in not just rank, but ability.
Hierarchy of Spiritual Forces00:06:43
Right.
So, yeah.
So, one, Explanation is Ezekiel and Revelation could be metaphorical, symbolic language.
The second explanation is even if it is exactly literal, a physical description, then okay, great.
Then some angels look really weird.
But that doesn't mean all angels look really weird.
And it seems, if anything, you could, by maybe not explicit argumentation, but implicit, you could say that it seems like at least some angels, if not the majority of angels, don't look weird.
And those that God commissions to have earthly visitations, They look a lot like us, and we are made just a little lower than them.
And they are physical, they're not merely spiritual, they're spirit and body, just as we're spirit and body, both made in the image of God, looking very similar in many regards.
And if they're in rebellion against God's will because they've fallen to earth, then absolutely plausible that angels could procreate with female human beings.
We could be wrong, we're not omniscient, but to say that that view is crazy is.
I just think you're, you know, you can't back that up.
You can, you can say you think it's wrong, but it is, I think it's certainly a permissible, plausible, reasonable interpretation of scripture.
Yeah, I would agree.
And if I can just finish up one other point, we were talking about a few moments ago with the in this eternal state that we're going to have physical bodies in a physical world.
That is so foreign to like the modern pop cultural view of heaven, of the eternal, of our afterlife.
We, so many people think that we're just going to become spirits and stand, you know, sing songs 24 7 around the throne.
And, you know, for a lot of people, that's disheartening because it seems like that wouldn't that be really.
I don't know that this is really what I'm looking forward to.
And that doesn't sound exciting.
Well, that's not what it's going to be.
It's so much more than that.
And we're going to have, like I mentioned, physical bodies in a physical world where there is no more curse, no more sorrow, no more tears.
And we get to enjoy that for eternity in God's presence.
So it'll be far better than we can imagine.
So I just think it's important for people to think rightly about what our future holds.
And this topic plays right into that.
But I guess another objection I hear to what we've been talking about, and this will shift the gears a little bit, is Joel, how dare we say that angels can create life, right?
And you've probably heard that.
And well, if that's your objection, good.
I'm glad you're thinking that because we don't want to sit here and say, yes, angels are just as powerful as God.
That's not at all what we're saying.
They are created beings.
But look in the mirror, and if you have children, ask yourself this question Did you create life?
You procreated, and that's what we're talking about here.
We're not talking about creating life from scratch, from nothing.
We're talking about procreation.
But even before you go too far down that road, people say, well, but they had to have created a body in order to be able to do it.
No, remember, we've already talked about how we think they have bodies.
But look back at Exodus chapter 7, and this is the passage that everybody is familiar with Moses and Aaron coming before Pharaoh, and Aaron throws down his rod and it becomes a serpent.
And then it says this it says that Pharaoh called his wise men and sorcerers.
So, this magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments or with their dark arts, through their occult abilities.
Every man threw down his rod and they became serpents.
They did the same thing that God did to Aaron's staff.
Now, I'm not saying that every single fallen angel or evil spirit can do the exact same thing.
I'm not saying they can do that whenever they want, but for his purposes at this point, God allowed them to do that.
They had the ability to do that.
And of course, we know what happened Aaron's rod swallowed the Theirs up showing that the God of Israel, Yahweh, is still more powerful than them, no matter how impressive that feat was.
Right.
But they transformed sticks, rods, into serpents.
So I think we have to be careful.
And I think you were talking about earlier that we almost like a Gnostic view, it's weird.
We over spiritualize and at the same time under spiritualize.
It's weird.
It's like Christians today, modern evangelicals especially.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately.
I think on one hand, we've adopted way too much of Darwin.
So, on one hand, we've been disenchanted since, I think, since the Enlightenment, which the Enlightenment, I think, was really the beginning of the Dark Ages of secular humanism.
And the so called Dark Ages, I think, actually weren't quite as dark as our modern historians try to make them out to be when people actually still believed in God, or even if they weren't Christian, they They believed in gods, pagans.
G.K. Chesterton talks about, you know, paganism is, and C.S. Lewis says the same thing.
The step from paganism to Christianity is a smaller step than the step from Darwinian secular humanism, you know, when the world has completely lost its enchantment and the world is just material.
You're just a raw materialist.
So, on the one hand, I think Christians have bought that narrative of modern, postmodernism, and secular humanism that, on one hand, we've under spiritualized and we're materialist.
The world is just stuff.
On the other hand, it's weird.
I don't know how we do it, but we simultaneously over spiritualize.
So, anything we read in the Bible, We think it's fantastical and spiritual, but then we think that we live in this world that's entirely material and physical.
And so then what we do is we just create this massive chasm between heaven and earth.
God does this here, and then what happens here, and what happens here all can be explained by Newton and this and that, and there's nothing supernatural at all.
And then over there, there's nothing physical at all.
It's all spiritual, 17th dimension.
And I think that's the framework that moderns.
Westerners have, even among Christians, that makes the procreation between angels and women seem preposterous.
But the ancients didn't think like that.
That's a fairly modern view.
It didn't happen until at a certain point in church history.
It didn't happen for 400 years.
For 400 years, nobody even thought the Sethite view.
Modern Views on Satan00:03:04
Wasn't it Augustine that was the first?
Augustine was the one who popularized it.
Gotcha.
A couple generations before him, there were a few people who held it.
But yeah, he popularized it and then it dominated from then on.
And then Calvin doesn't even have to make an argument.
He just says, Oh, that fallen angel view, we all know that's silly, which is very like that's what I would call rare Calvin L. Lose, because I like Calvin, as you know, and he usually is robust in his argumentation for any point that he ever makes, but that one, he doesn't make it.
There's a few times where he just kind of either throws up his hands or he just kind of mocks it because he doesn't like it, but yeah, usually he does do his best to exegete the text.
And so Whether you agree or disagree, you can at least respect that part of it.
But yeah, in this one, he, yeah, he didn't.
But another passage that I think is important to think about, and I think you and I would probably interpret who this is talking about differently or what's being referred to.
But in 2 Thessalonians 2 9, it's talking about the lawless one.
You know, a lot of times, like dispensational, premillennial, pre tribute, see this is like the Antichrist, but that's not even talking about that.
Look what it says about this, the lawless one, whoever or whatever that might be.
The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan.
With all power, signs, and lying wonder.
So, how much ability, how much power does Satan have or some of these evil spiritual beings?
It says here, all power, signs, and lying wonder, and say fake power and fake signs.
It's he's deceiving people with these real things, is what it's describing.
So, they do have tremendous ability, and I think it's dangerous for us to underestimate them.
But at the same time, I think it's People overestimate them as well.
Some people think Satan's omnipresent, that he's tempting them right now and all that.
A lot of people think he's omniscient.
They think Satan can read your thoughts.
Yeah.
I think Satan is better than, like, if a human, humans are not omniscient, we can't read thoughts, but if the best human interrogator can pick up on, you know, mannerisms and social cues and be in a room with someone without them saying it and get really close and just watching them to the truth.
So I think, you know, Satan is like, you know, You know, exponentially more talented and perceptive.
Like he's nothing to be trifled with.
Satan is greater than you.
He's not greater than God, but he, you know, greater is he that is in you, not you, but he that is in you than he who is in the world.
But if it's just us apart from God, Satan is not our peer.
He is vastly superior to us, but not infinite.
And so I think Satan is very, very perceptive and very good at concluding and deriving, deliberating our thoughts and knowing our temptations and those kinds of things.
But he, some people think, like, if I just think a thought, they attribute.
Satan Greater Than Us00:02:06
Attributes that are exclusive to God, to Satan.
Satan is not an equal to God.
Would you like to get control of your money and set up a system that will guarantee for the rest of your life tax protected compounding interest and growth?
How about having 24 7 electronic access to your money for funding wisely chosen investments, home improvements, and other large expenditures without going to the mainstream banks?
This is not a dream, but it could actually be a reality when working with our sponsor.
Private Family Banking.
See their contact information in the show notes below.
To make this season even brighter, Private Family Banking is giving away a pair of tickets of $500 value for the upcoming Blueprints for Christendom 2.0 conference, which is taking place on March 1st, 2nd, and 3rd of 2024 in Taylor, Texas.
To enter the ticket giveaway, join their email list by sending an email to banking at privatefamilybanking.com.
Again, that's banking at privatefamilybanking.com.
With the subject line of your email saying tickets, then include your full name and mailing address in the body of the email.
The ticket giveaway entry period will end at midnight Central Time on February 13th, 2024, and the winner will be notified via email on February 14th.
You must be 18 years of age or older to enter, and only one email per person can be entered into this giveaway drawing.
Yeah, and he does have.
Power as well.
You look at the beginning of Job, he's able to call down fire from heaven, whether that's lightning or actual fire.
So he's able to do certain things.
But again, it's only when God permits it.
Because if you think of Elijah and the prophets of Baal, you know, when they're having this competition about lighting the altar on fire.
Well, according to the book of Job, Satan is capable of doing it.
So if he's there, if he's one of the rebels who are there behind the prophets of Baal, he can't do it that day because God's not allowing him to do it that day.
But he seems to be capable at some time.
Fallen Angel Dominion00:04:12
So, yeah, my point is we shouldn't just automatically assume we know the abilities or capabilities of angels when the Bible tells us a fair amount of some things that they can do that are far beyond our ability.
But at the same time, and what you said is exactly right greater is he who is in us than he who is in the world.
So we don't need to fear them, but we should have a healthy respect for them.
Yeah.
Amen.
Going back, one more thing, and then I'll just let you steer the conversation for where you want to go next.
But with the Tower of Babel and in terms of princes and principalities, principalities, I understand that as regions, areas, and then princes being fallen angels that were set up over, that had dominion over certain principalities and regions.
With that, and this is just another genuine question that I don't know the answer, I certainly see that being as regions being indicative of nations.
Peoples and things like that.
But would there be or possibly be fallen angels over the realm of the ocean that might, like, Philistines, that's where giants ended up, like Goliath and his brothers?
We know that Joshua killed a lot of them.
The ones that got away went to Gath.
Goliath is from Gath and Gaza and some other places.
And then later on, in the time of David, you have the Philistines, they have giants, descendants from the Nephilim.
But then also, like, one of their, they've got, they're Polytheists, but one of their chief gods is a fish god, Dagon.
And then I'm thinking about the Greeks, and maybe it's the same thing, but just the Greeks have a different name for them, a different conception, or the Romans and Poseidon.
And I'm wondering could one of these kind of Elohim, sons of God, have not just a realm over land and a people group, a nation, but over the ocean?
Or part of the ocean or something.
What do you think about that?
Yeah, I don't see why not.
I mean, Adam was given dominion over the rule over the birds of the air, the fish of the sea, and the beasts of the earth, obviously.
So mankind was supposed to rule this earth as God's vice region.
And yet Adam, in a sense, yielded that dominion when he rebelled, when he sinned.
And then what we see at the Babel event, man rebels again and God puts them under.
The subjection of these other entities.
So, if the original dominion mandate included the fish of the sea, which it does, then yeah, I don't know why they wouldn't also have that as well.
And then going back to what you said earlier, you said, you know, the ability to call fire out of heaven, but like any creature, not just angels, but any creature only underneath the banner of the sovereignty of God and what he allows.
And so, not able to call down fire on that particular day, you know, the showdown between the prophets of Baal and Elijah, but Able to do it in the book of Job.
Another example from the book of Job is Satan had the power to control wind.
Oh, yeah.
And I know that almost sounds blasphemous because the disciples say to Jesus on the boat in the middle of the storm, Who is this who has authority to where even the wind and the waves obey him?
And certainly Jesus is God.
And so he has the supreme authority over the created order.
But that doesn't necessarily mean that there's no other creature that he's given also that ability.
And so I'm thinking of wind just to explicitly state the example.
It's when God gives permission to Satan to torment Job, but before he has authority to afflict his body.
And then later on, he can afflict his body, but he can't kill him.
But in the first phase of torment, you can do anything to him, but you can't hurt his physical person.
And one of the things that he does is he kills all of Job's children by sending a great wind.
It seems as though he has power and control over the wind to cause the house where Job's children are to collapse on them and kill them.
Greek Mythology Objections00:06:56
And so back to my point.
Poseidon theory.
Is it possible that fallen angels could have dominion over the sea, and then within that dominion over the sea, even a measure of control and what God may allow over wind and waves?
Yeah, I think that's totally reasonable.
Yeah, Job 1 19 is the verse that you're citing.
Suddenly a great wind came from across the wilderness, struck the four corners of the house.
And yeah, so I think that's entirely reasonable and consistent with what we see in Scripture.
Cool.
Poseidon is a real being.
But turns out, shock.
All the Percy Jackson fans right now are excited.
So you heard it first.
Tim Chafee, he has confirmed my theory.
Poseidon is real.
That's the good news.
Bad news, he's a demon.
Or Neptune for you Romans out there.
Yeah, there you go.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Neptune, old Neptune.
All right.
So, rest of the episode, let's.
I don't have a whole lot more time, but why don't you take 15, 20 minutes and just anything you want to talk about?
You get the objections more than I do because this is, I like this stuff, but this is your specialty.
So, why don't you just cover any base that you think our listeners, after all four episodes, might still have this hanging, looming question or objection?
Okay.
You know, get all your thoughts out.
Well, because we're not going to be able to cover everything, First, you got to buy the book, Fallen.
There you go.
Many people have.
So the sales have gone up since your videos went up.
So I like that.
Awesome.
And keep on supporting it.
I appreciate that.
And several positive reviews, too.
So I'm glad for that.
Thanks for doing that.
Hold it up one more time, Tim, just because some people will be watching, but then also let's say the name because some people only listen.
Yeah.
Fallen, the Sons of God, and the Nephilim by Tim Chapey.
That's me.
Amazon.
Is that where you want them to go?
On Amazon, or if they go to my website, they can still get 15% off and a signed copy as well.
So.
We've seen an increase in sales in both, so that's great.
So, one thing you and I talked about before we came on, we talked about how there were no female angels, but we do think that there probably were female giants, or at least I think there probably were.
I think so.
So, the reason for that is first, the Bible never says they're not, that there aren't, so that doesn't prove there were, but it does talk about certain clans like the Emim and the Zuzim.
It talks about how they were a people.
As great and as tall as the Anakim.
So, as a people group, they were tall.
And of course, if there's going to be an entire clan where they're perpetuating these giants, you need females as part of that.
As we've talked about, you need male and female.
So, it seems as if the entire people group were giants, meaning that there would be female giants.
Maybe a parallel, speaking of Greek mythology, like we were just talking about, you had the Amazons who were like these demigods, goddesses.
They were often considered to be giant Tesses.
We talked about before with the potential connection to the Odyssey when he goes to the island of Lystragonians, there are giant Tesses there that are described.
Again, that doesn't prove my point, but it's just completely consistent with it.
And you have that in other mythologies as well that seem to.
I think what we're seeing in some of these mythologies are.
Distorted echoes of what really took place on this planet in some cases.
So, when you have the gods coming down and marrying women and having demigods, the giants and everything, I think that is going right back to what happened in Genesis 6 and also afterward, after the flood.
And so, some people will look at that and say, Well, you're just borrowing from Greek mythology, aren't you, Sam?
I mean, this whole fallen angel view, that's just copying Greek mythology.
Actually, it's the other way around.
That's right.
And what I found to be really ironic, well, let me, I wouldn't say quite the other way around.
It's not what both are describing.
What really happened.
One is describing it perfectly accurately because it's part of God's inspired word.
That's the Bible.
The other one is the distorted version of that that's been passed down generation after generation after generation, and it gets distorted a little bit and embellished.
But what I found really interesting is a lot of times the people who hold the Sethite view, they'll use this objection that, oh, you're just borrowing Greek mythology.
Actually, the shoe is on the other foot because what we are doing is just interpreting the text for what it says, and we don't have to spiritualize the meaning of anything.
We don't have to look for a non- Straightforward meaning on this passage.
And what's happening is that in so many of these cases, they're resorting to allegorizing the text.
Well, where did allegory as a hermeneutic come from?
And you can trace it back to the Greek philosophers in about the 6th century BC.
And there's a book by, I think his name is Luc Bassan.
He's a French guy, and that was his dissertation.
But it was called How Philosophy Saved Myth.
And what he was talking about is the philosophers in the 6th and 5th centuries BC, the Greek philosophers, the Greek people loved Homer and Hesiod.
This was, in a sense, their Bible.
This was their.
Story of origins.
This is what happened in the past.
This is where they came from.
And they didn't want to get rid of those stories because as people started to become more and more modern and realize that some of these things sound a little ridiculous.
And do we really like the idea of Zeus coming down and marrying and having offspring with this woman?
And yet he's supposed to be with Hera.
And then, oh, he's also going down and having an affair here and now having an affair here.
And they don't seem like the most moral of characters.
So people started to disbelieve in them.
And so, what the philosophers did is they invented this new hermeneutic, which is that you allegorize it, you change.
Zeus isn't really a god, he's just now this force.
He is now, he stands in for something else.
So, that way we can keep the stories of Homer and Hesiod and we can still enjoy them, but we understand it's not real, it's not reality in any way.
We just reinterpreted it to mean something else.
And then, of course, that idea, that kind of philosophy made its way to Alexandria, which is where a lot of this allegorical interpretation came from.
And The Augustine got that from Ambrose, that whole approach.
And so, you, the set site view is actually the one that is borrowing from Greek mythology.
And so, it's very ironic.
I know that might have sounded a roundabout way to get there, but the fallen angel view is a very straightforward view, which is why it was the earliest view and the only view that we know of during the intertestamental period and the first couple centuries of the church, which is straightforward.
So, Yeah, that's really good.
Sethite View Irony00:15:20
Any other things you want to add?
Any other loopholes you want to try to close?
Yeah, so I get a lot of people asking about some of the modern things that we see.
And, you know, Tim, I'd really like your thoughts on this, even after, you know, hearing what we've talked about.
And I said, you know, my goal was to create or to write what was really the most detailed or most serious Bible study on this topic available, not to get into all of the sensationalism.
And so people will still say, okay, but what do you think about these modern reports of giants, like the Kandahar giant?
This report that was back in 2002 in Afghanistan.
It's pretty cool.
I'm not going to lie.
It's a really cool story.
I'm not saying it's true.
I'm rooting for it.
I know it's not plausible, but go ahead.
Yeah, yeah.
It's a cool story.
Other than some of our servicemen were killed, that's not great.
Right.
Yeah, you're right.
Yeah.
So the idea is that they encountered up in the mountains of Afghanistan this 13 to 16 foot giant who killed a couple of them and then they had to shoot at them with their machine guns for 30 seconds before they finally dropped him.
And then, of course, the military came and whisked them away and.
Nobody knows what happened to the body.
And of course, they describe him with six fingers and six toes, which, just so everybody knows, the Bible does not say all giants have six fingers and six toes.
There is one man described that way in the Bible, and he is a giant.
But people today who are not giants are born with either six fingers or six toes.
It's just called polydactyly.
And there are a lot of examples.
You can look at x rays of it.
It looks really weird.
I think we've all seen it before in Prince's Bride, right?
The six fingered man, Count Rugen.
But it's just a, it's something that happens.
It's just a genetic duplication.
And it's usually like the ring finger gets duplicated, say, of two of those.
But it could be one of the other fingers as well.
So, yeah, giants didn't have to be like that.
The same thing, sort of like with the Solomon Islands giants, people ask about that.
Solomon Islands are pretty remote, kind of in between Australia and Fiji, a little bit north of that.
And there are reports of these giants living in caves in the inner parts of the island, and nobody goes there because they disappear or they get eaten.
But again, I'm not opposed to the idea that there could still be some remnants of giants existing because I think giants did exist on this earth.
And I think the Bible describes that.
But in this day and age, when we have cell phones and so many people, no matter which country, whether you're first world, second world, third world, so many people have cell phones with cameras, somebody somewhere at some time or with a drone could get pretty good footage if these, I think, could get good footage if these people are still around.
So until I have some hard evidence of that rather than just anecdotal evidence on the internet, I'm not going to base my arguments on this at all.
I'd rather just see what the Bible says.
And if it says there were giants, okay, there were giants.
Right.
Yeah, that's our position.
What we're convicted of is that there were giants.
What I'm open to is that there might still be giants.
But my argument is not that there were giants and that's what the Bible says because I can show you giants today.
No, my argument is there were giants because the Bible says there were giants.
Yeah.
And I would have, you know, I think you and I would probably share this as well.
It's a little bit different topic, but it's the same idea that, you know, there's some people who think there are maybe some dinosaurs existing somewhere in remote.
Places like in the Likuela swamp of Cameroon and the Congo, you know, just this huge unexplored area.
And there are reports of it.
Well, again, somebody get really good footage of it and maybe I would go for it.
It wouldn't be surprising to me.
As a young earth creationist, dinosaurs were on the ark and they got off the ark and they didn't live that long ago.
I think they're probably extinct, but maybe there's still a few around.
I don't need them around to believe it that they were there and that they were on the ark.
But yeah, so I think that's a very similar idea.
Because this scriptures tell us something, we believe that to be true.
And as a result, yeah, this could still be going on, but let's not focus on the modern sensational idea like some people do.
Those are the YouTube videos that get a lot of views.
True.
If I made a video that said I saw the giants on Solomon Islands, then I'd probably get a lot of views, but I'd rather focus on what scriptures.
The same thing goes for the reports about North American giants in the 1800s and early 1900s.
Six fingers, six toes, red hair, double rows of teeth.
It's very similar to these other ones.
Again, plausible within the realm of possibility, sure.
Do I really think they were there?
I don't think so, but maybe.
It's not a big deal to me, one way or the other.
Or related to that, some people think that we need the Nephilim because they built like the Great Pyramid, right?
We need really big people to build really big things.
Well, no, you need smart people, ingenious people to build really big things.
People who do construction and figure things out like this are very intelligent and they are capable of doing things that my mind doesn't work that way.
I watched a demonstration of how maybe they would have got some of the obelisks up.
If you've seen the movie The Ten Commandments, you have the push pull men, 10,000 people getting ready to move the stone.
And one demonstration was what if they just use a giant kite and use wind power?
And then you just cut the rope at the right time.
Then you just think you work smarter, not harder.
And maybe that is how they did things.
Now, I'm not saying just in every case, but over in Israel, you can see in certain locations.
What's the name of the city that we visited, the ruins that we visited?
There is a, I think it's Beth Shian, it's just south of Galilee, of the Sea of Galilee, and pretty close, just east of Mount Gilboa.
There's a place where you can see, like this, almost like how they would have moved the big stones that you see down in the Western Wall and everything.
The Ashlar stones during Herod's time, they would actually build wheels around them and then stone become the axle.
So that's how you move something really big.
Well, my mind wouldn't have, I would have thought, how do we get enough people to lift this thing up and carry it or roll it across logs or something?
Well, how about you just make that the axle and you roll it?
So, yeah, people are creative.
We don't have to think that really big people needed to be here to move these really big things.
Yeah, that's a really good point.
Yeah, it's entirely possible the giants did set up Stonehenge or something like that, but it's not.
Yeah, and I should clarify I'm not saying that they didn't help.
Obviously, if you have somebody who's four times as strong, that could help.
That's helpful.
So that's possible, but you're right.
It's not absolutely necessary.
But, you know, so whether it was giant, you know, it may have been giants or it may have been just know how, ingenuity, which is possible just because man's created in the image of God.
And contrary to popular belief, we're not the first generation of intelligent people.
In fact, I would argue our generation is.
Kind of a little bit dumber than I would like.
And I think some past generations were actually smarter than us.
We may have more access to technology and things like that, but I don't think that we're necessarily smarter.
So there were genius people in the antediluvian age and geniuses after.
And also, I was going to say whether giants aided and helped or whether fallen angels taught their offspring and then descendants taught them certain techniques and skills and tricks of the trade and Carried down,
passed down certain technologies that allowed without the aid of giants, giants still existing, but without the aid of giants, just having knowledge of certain engineering and mechanics and physics to be able to make things happen.
That's entirely possible.
And in terms of just so knowledge and fallen angels passing down knowledge and then man himself being created in God's image and being smart and having certain people that were genius, just like we have today, certain people that are really smart.
And then also giants, it's possible, could come to the aid.
With certain things.
And then the last thing I was going to say, also just sheer numbers.
You could have just a lot of people, you know, moving like, you know, Charles Heston, you know, like, you know, the Ten Commandments, like just a lot of people moving something big.
And with that, you know, in ancient civilizations, I think that's another thing.
Number one, we're not the first generation to be smart.
But I also have a sneaking suspicion, this one I can't prove as much, but I have a sneaking suspicion that we're not the first generation to be large numerically.
I understand.
Statistically, in terms of the entire population combined, a cumulative population of people up until the time of Christ, a lot of people argue being relatively small.
I think that's true if we're saying post flood to the time of Christ.
I think that's true, looking at the population, how it's exponentially grown.
And sadly, the West needs to be fruitful and multiply because we're starting to shrink.
But I do have some suspicions, just speculation, ideas about.
Um, you know, before the flood, uh, with you know, in the case of Adam and several 900 year plus lifespans, and um, and in terms of fertility, there's nothing in the Bible that tells us, you know, that a woman is, you know, like Eve is, you know, we don't know.
I mean, she could have lived for 700 years, 800 years, um, and she could have been fertile for 600 years, wait, and um, they're being fruitful and multiplied, like we, you know, I mean, Adam and Eve, you know, had other sons and daughters, we don't know how many, it could have been seven other sons and daughters, it could have been, um, like.
Yeah, 70.
It could have been a couple hundred, you know, and that's just one couple.
And, you know, and then span that out and exponentially.
I heard one guy, and I'm not even saying this is true, but I heard one guy, his estimation, he did like some, it was just, it was intriguing.
I don't know if it was true, but it was intriguing the way he did the numbers and said that there could have been 11 billion people in the 1500 year time period from Adam to the flood.
A larger population than today.
That's crazy.
Go ahead.
Yeah, we have calculations at the Ark shown.
Even if you use the modern.
Growth rate, you would get to, I'm trying to remember what number, it's like 400 million.
But even if you go up just like one tenth of 1%, suddenly you're up into like the 4 billion range.
And then you go up one tenth, you get like 18 billion or some crazy number.
So it's very possible they had a high population before the flood.
So it could be with a margin of error 400 million to 18 billion.
Yeah, if I remember the numbers correctly.
But it's just, it doesn't take much when you got exponential growth to have a very high population.
So giants could build pyramids, but also.
A few million people working together.
That's also pretty.
Yeah, and I would say pyramids are post flood, but yeah, absolutely.
They could.
Right.
Yeah.
I know we're running low on time.
I got one other thing I wanted to real quickly bring up because I hear this all the time.
Like, oh, yeah, I believe in giants too.
I see them playing on TV in the NBA.
That is not what we're talking about.
Really tall people today are not what we're talking about.
You look at the TV shows, there were the tallest people on earth.
And I knew the guy who was the tallest person in America for a Several years until he passed away about three years ago.
Igor Vavkovinsky, his name was.
When he was 13, he was my height, and he used to come into the store that I worked at.
I talked to him a few times, and he ended up being like 7'11, I think he got to, or something.
But that is not what we're talking about somebody who's got a growth on the pituitary gland or something, or some tumor that causes them to grow super fast, and doctors are trying to slow the growth, or maybe it's Marfan syndrome, where usually that affects the joints and it allows people to get.
Taller, but not super tall.
Maybe they're more like 6'5, 6'6, but then a lot of times they're weaker as a result, too.
We're talking about people who are warriors, people who are sons of other giants, whereas in these cases, they're not.
It's not something that is passed down generation after generation.
It's just one mutation or something that has caused that particular person.
So, what the Bible is describing is something very different.
People who are not necessarily awkward or clumsy or going to die at a very early age because of their size or something.
Their entire clans or groups of people and generation after generation who are giants.
Okay, one final question for me.
This just came to my mind.
It's random.
But if angels, male physical angels, could procreate with female physical human beings, could one of those fallen angels, if he sticks around, could he then, or another fallen angel who didn't sire this particular Nephilim, another fallen angel then mate with a female Nephilim to where the angel gene pool is now at 75% instead of 50%?
Yeah, that's interesting.
I don't know why they wouldn't be capable of doing that.
I mean, I.
I don't look at it in terms of like the percentage of the gene pool.
I mean, maybe that's a good way to look at it because I think that they are also made in God's image.
We talked about how it's not like one kind of an elephant and a different animal altogether, but sort of the same sort of animal, same sort of creature.
And so I tend, when it calls them men of renown, I tend to think of them as being fully human, but different because of their parentage.
But if what you're describing is the right way, and a lot of people who hold the fallen angel view do look at it that way.
Yeah, why wouldn't you be able to get to 75 or next generation 88 or something?
Exactly.
And the only reason I'm asking that is, and I know that this is something that you would disagree with, which is totally fine.
Your position makes a lot of sense, but it would be possible if the angels are, you know, and this may, you know, I think part of it deals with, you know, the intent and purpose of the angels and why they're doing this in the first place.
You know, but if part of what they're trying to do is just completely pervert, you know, God's creation and those kinds of things, but also create a monster, Then, you know, I wonder if, you know, maybe Nephilim 1.0, you know, 50 50 angel human is, you know, and then their descendants being giants is, you know, gives you eight foot giants, you know, a nine foot giant, you know, like Goliath.
But I wonder if you can up that angel percentage DNA and if you really could get tall as cedars and not as a metaphor, but, you know, maybe not 120, but I've read some, you know, I've done some reading where, you know, Particular cedars in a Mesopotamia region is 40 50.
I don't know.
Re-Enchanting the World00:04:58
I'm just throwing it out there.
May not be possible.
That's a good teaser for our last episode, isn't it?
Yeah.
We can leave it on that.
Hey, that's an interesting thought.
I mean, I haven't really thought too much about it because of how I view the situation.
Well, and I don't think that's your calling.
I think, like, I'm so appreciative.
I think it's our last episode, the end of our last episode.
So I want to end by at least saying this I'm so appreciative of your work.
And I think the focus of your work is to make a strongly biblical and plausible argument for why this is not fantastical.
You're not the guy who's doing the YouTube videos of the 3000 L's, the giant where mountains, plateaus are just tree stumps that giants who were seven miles tall could have.
That's fun.
It's intriguing.
But you're not that guy.
And my point is we need you.
We need the guy who.
Makes a very reasonable, plausible, and most importantly, biblical argument for taking the Bible seriously.
And I think that's what you've done.
So I'll be the guy who tries to think of a creative way to get to a 40 foot tall giant because it just sounds awesome.
And I think it's possible.
But you be the guy who does what you do.
I think both are needed.
And I appreciate those kind words.
I really do about me, about the book.
But sometimes we do, because we can be too careful, sometimes we don't think outside the box enough.
So it is helpful to have people get very creative and think, I wonder if.
This and then one day, and I think Michael Heiser was good at this, but you know, he was within the academic community.
Here's a guy who's super smart, saying things that most academics didn't want to touch with a 10 foot pole.
And I'm not saying that he was right all the time, but he was bringing he was talking about some of the weird things that most people, well, I don't want to talk about that.
Well, people are a lot of people are super curious about this, and a lot of unbelievers are very curious, believers are curious.
Why would we not want to go where they are and try to talk about things they're talking about, understand their worldview?
And somehow, some way, connect them to the gospel and help them see the truth.
Amen.
And especially in our day and age, where I really think, like, sure, technology continues to develop and improve and all these kinds of things.
Yet at the same time, though, in terms of worldviews, it is becoming increasingly evident and blatantly obvious to even unbelievers that secular humanism is that dog won't hunt.
It's not holding up.
And that I think, in some ways, the world is being re enchanted.
The dark enchantment of materialism is starting to fade.
We're starting to see that it just doesn't work.
It's not true.
That Darwin was a hack and always was.
And so, as the world is becoming more enchanted, I think that I see, I don't know about you, but I see like a phenomenon happening right now a trend of an exponentially growing infatuation and interest in the supernatural.
And if Christians, out of some desire to be sophisticated and buttoned up and irate, Ivory Tower, if out of a desire to impress the secular humanist, the scientist who always picked on us, I feel like some creation guys are still trying to get the approval of that atheist scientist.
You're never going to get it.
They think you're stupid.
Who cares?
But if we keep trying to stand in that space and be legitimate, incredible in the secular humanism space, meanwhile, the culture is realizing that that space isn't worth listening to and they're getting enchanted.
But by the time they get enchanted, we've successfully moved Christianity over to this very reasonable, materialistic, natural position, and we've taken all the enchantment out of Christianity.
But the people actually want enchanted worldviews again.
Then the only options they'll have available to them will be occults, the occult, and paganism.
And I want to say, no, Christianity, yeah, I'm a Christian.
I believe in dragons.
I believe in giants.
I believe in fallen angels.
I believe in.
I personally believe that there were unicorns, sirens, as in the King James Version, and I think there's some creative things to do with that.
And in the wilderness, I don't think it was just snakes, seraphs, and fire.
I think dragons were maybe biting people, and you can't get any more fantastical than this magical world that God made.
Yeah, and the world may call us foolish, but if the Lord says, well done, good, faithful servant, that's really what matters.
And Paul talked about in 1 Corinthians 4 that he said, we are fools for Christ's sake.
Okay, well, if the world thinks I'm a fool for believing in the risen Lord and Savior and then what his word says, so be it.
I'm a fool.
Fools for Christ's Sake00:00:54
I don't care because I just want to hear him say, Well done, good and faithful servant.
And so I appreciate having the opportunity to talk about this and appreciate your having me on and discussing these and making me think through some of these things that, in a maybe the more speculative that I haven't necessarily gone down.
It's fun to talk about it.
And I guess just to speak to the maybe the listeners real quickly, just Dig in, dive into God's word, and hold that up as the authority.
And this is not something that we have to split the church on.
You know, I see those kind of comments too that, uh, what a heretic, you know, because of a different view on the fallen angel.
I, on this, I come on, it could be wrong, but that's not heresy.
Yeah.
So, well, Tim, thank you so much.
It's an honor.
Um, I'll let you go, and I hope that our listeners have enjoyed.