Biblical Giants: What were they? with Doug van Dorn

Hello, welcome Creation Fellowship Santee. We have a different forum tonight that we're trying out.

We have Douglas Van Dorn here. I found

Douglas watching Prophecy Watchers and he is quite the accomplished author.

And I'm going to turn it right over to him for our new open forum tonight. And everybody, just to let you know, you are being recorded and you are being live streamed.

So, if you don't want to be in the recording, you can leave your cameras off and your microphones muted.

If you do not mind being recorded or heard, you can unmute if you have a question to ask

Doug Van Dorn. Okay, Doug, I'm going to turn it over to you. Can you tell us who you are, what you do?

Yeah, thanks Robin. Nice to be with you all tonight. I just found out about you,

I don't know how long ago it's been, a month or three weeks or something like that, not too long. And I was asked to talk about Giants tonight.

So, I'm a pastor, been a pastor for 22 years in Colorado, a

Reformed Baptist pastor. Our church is called the Reformed Baptist Church of Northern Colorado. We started it back in 2002, right when my oldest kid was, she was actually born about eight days before the crazy 9 -11 stuff.

That's kind of how I remember when we started the church. I've been doing that ever since.

How did I get into this strange topic of Giants? It's been a while, I think it's been about 15 years,

I think. I preached through Books of the Bible, and I was preaching through Exodus.

I don't remember exactly where I was at, but I do a lot of research using journal articles for whatever reason.

In the Google search came up this journal article on a very important passage to the subject of Giants, although most people might not really think it.

It's Deuteronomy 32 .8. This is Moses' second song, and this was the content of that article.

This verse, Deuteronomy 32 .7 and 8 says, Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations.

Ask your father and he will show you, your elders and they will tell you, when the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.

I just read that from the ESV. His article was on the last couple of words there, the sons of God.

If you were to read, for example, the New American Standard Bible, which only uses the

Masoretic Hebrew text for its translation, it reads according to the number of the sons of Israel instead of the number of the sons of God.

This was a 40 -page article just on this one little textual variant.

I was really interested in the article. I can tell you about this,

I suppose, a little bit later if you want to know, but he was arguing that the original reading of that is the sons of God because of the

Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint that we also have of this, which are a thousand years older than our oldest copy of the

Masoretic Hebrew text. I was completely fascinated. I don't even know why I read the article other than it was just mesmerizing.

Then I just kind of put it away because it actually didn't have much to do with what I was preaching on. A few weeks later,

I'm a little bit later in Exodus and I'm doing some more research, and I found another article.

I started reading it, I thought, man, this really sounds like that article that I had read before, and I wonder if it's the same guy.

So, I went and looked at the author, and it turns out it was the same person. Now, back 15 years ago, he was not known to hardly anybody in evangelicalism.

He had done a lot of coast -to -coast AM radio shows with Art Bell, and then he had gone down to Roswell New Mexico probably four or five years in a row to give biblical theology lectures.

It's LA, isn't it? It's not LA. But LA would know who he was because he was friends with him.

It was Michael Heiser. Oh, Dr. Michael Heiser. Yes, he has passed away, but I followed him extensively.

Exactly. Like I said, nobody knew who he was that I knew anyway 15 years ago, and so I'm reading this stuff.

He happened to be giving away a copy of his Unseen Realm book—that's what it became—to his fan base on his website.

I decided to start reading it, and I could not put the thing down. I read it twice, and I was so nerdy about it that I ended up creating a subject index at the back of it so that I could find references more easily.

Was that the Unseen Realm that you read? It was the Unseen Realm, but he called it The Myth That Is True, is what he was titling it back before Lagas ended up publishing it for him.

It's mostly the same book, but slightly different, but basically the same idea. This was the guy who had written this paper on this textual variant, the

Sons of God. In that book, he talks about a number of very important things in the

Unseen Realm, since that's what they ended up titling it. Among those are who are these

Sons of God, which is very relevant to Genesis 6, which is the giant story. He talked a lot about the giants themselves, which

I had never really heard anybody give any other interpretation for them, other than that these Nephilim are the sons of Seth.

We'll get into that when we get to the text. He talked a lot about Christ in the Old Testament, which was probably my favorite part of the book, because that's what

I do. When I preach, I'm telling people about Christ. That's all I want to tell them about, frankly.

To learn that Christ is in the Old Testament in ways that I had never even considered just revolutionized my life.

As I'm sitting here thinking about this stuff, having nobody to talk to, I end up writing a book myself that I never published, because it was basically plagiarizing everything that he had written.

I was only doing that for my sake to try and work through the information that was there, because I didn't have anybody to talk to about it or interact with.

That's how I learned the subject matter. Have you ever heard where the

Old Testament is the

New Testament concealed, and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed? Sure.

I had known that there was this idea of giants. I had known about what is called the divine council, which is this heavenly council of the sons of God, which was what he was arguing for in that text.

Psalm 82. Exactly. Psalm 82. I'd heard a little bit about it, but I'd never heard anybody go deep into it.

The whole angel of the Lord thing, I think I had heard people say that it's Christ and then other people said it wasn't.

But he went on such a deep dive with that subject, especially the word of God. John 1 in the beginning was the

Word, the Word is with God, the Word was God. At seminary, they teach you that John is writing this against Gnosticism in the late first century.

Gnostic made the argument that no, he's getting it from the Old Testament. There was a person in the

Old Testament called the Word of God. I'd never heard anybody say that in my life. That's just tragic when you start to think about the fact that this is what they're teaching people in seminaries.

I had not heard that till just right now. In Genesis 15, it says that the

Lord took Abraham and he showed him... How does it put it? Let me get the exact phrase.

After these things, the Word of the Lord came to Abraham in a vision.

What's so strange about that is that words don't come to people in visions, they come in ears, because they're words.

But this Word comes in a vision. He goes systematically through several other stories, such as the story with Samuel when he's a little boy, how the

Word comes to him and lifts him up. He sees him in Jeremiah's call in Jeremiah 1, the same kind of idea that the

Word touched me. What he's arguing is that words like the

Word, or the name of God, or the glory of God, or the arm of the

Lord... There's a whole bunch of them. They're all different ways of talking about this person in the

Old Testament called the angel of the Lord. The angel of the Lord is really Christ pre -incarnate.

I was utterly fascinated with that. What did you think about Melchizedek? Yeah. I recently did a podcast with the

Blurry Creatures guys on that, that they haven't released yet. But my opinion is that Melchizedek is the same person.

Yeah, that's what I thought too. I think Hebrews lends itself to that. Anyway, this is a long way of saying how

I got interested in the Giants. When I was done with my little plagiarized book,

I thought to myself, I think I could actually write a book on the Giants. I think there's a lot more here that Mike hasn't dealt with.

I did that. I finished that in 2013 and then published it. Over the course of the next couple of years,

I became friends with Mike through a catechism, question and answer book that I wrote on the supernatural.

I decided on a whim to just send it over to him and see if he might... I wanted him to just give me a blurb for the thing, because that'd be pretty cool.

He actually wrote me back and said that he wanted to publish this as a companion volume to his Unseen Realm, and that's what they ended up doing.

So it's called The Unseen Realm, a Q &A Companion, I think is what they called it. It has the same cover and everything.

It's his book. I got to become friends with Mike, and we ended up doing a podcast together that we called

Piranormal, where we peer -reviewed literature on really bizarre things. We had a panelist of five or six of us that were part of that.

Then he passed away just a year and a half ago,

I guess it's been. Very sad. He was the guy that was promoting a lot of this stuff, and now it's up to those of us who have come after to take the baton up and keep talking about it.

I focused my first book on the giants, and I really wanted to tell a biblical theology of the

Nephilim. A biblical theology as opposed to a systematic thing, where I really go from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation and talk about how the giants are there, why they matter, who they are, how it's part of the storyline of the

Scripture. I knew that there were a few other books on the Nephilim that were out there already.

There weren't a lot of them. I also knew that I did not want to write a book like they were writing, because I don't get into end -time speculation, and that's kind of what most people do.

You're not a prophecy guy? I'm not a big prophecy guy, no. I was in that world.

I was a freshman in 1988. I don't know if you remember this book that came out, 88

Reasons Why Jesus Will Return in 88. We were all completely freaked out about it.

Everybody was on the edge of their seat, and it didn't happen. The guy writes another one in 89 and said he missed it by one one thing, and then that didn't happen.

Then another guy came out with the 1994, and that didn't happen. Another guy in 96, and that didn't happen.

I just kind of got tired of it. I think Campo in 2008 or 2009. 2000 was obviously a big one.

2001 was a big one. 2012 was a big one. I just decided

I wanted to write a book on the giants that would be different from what other guys are doing. I decided

I wanted to end that first volume at the first coming, instead of going into the second coming. My opinion is that the church, as fun as it is to talk about the second coming and to speculate about it, and don't get me wrong,

I do that. I just think the true power that we have as Christians is in understanding what

Jesus has already done for us, and with regards to giants, how he has actually defeated them, and what that means for us today.

That was the way that I brought that book to a climax. A lot of people would say, how could you talk about giants in the

New Testament? They're not even in the New Testament. That's actually totally incorrect.

They actually are in the

New Testament. Here's the way that I went about writing the book. I went to Genesis 3 .15,

and this is the first gospel message in the Bible. It's really God talking to the serpent after the fall, after they've eaten the fruit.

He says, I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.

This verse is telling us about a coming war between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman.

I never had any problem believing that there was a spiritual seed of the serpent, because Jesus calls the

Pharisees sons of the devil. I don't think he's talking about how the devil actually was their biological father of every one of them.

He was talking in a spiritual manner, that they're following after their spiritual head. The same sort of thing is called in Hebrews, the father is the devil.

It's really spiritual. When I read Mike's book on this, I came to the conclusion that this is really setting up the story of the giants in Genesis 6.

My circles in the Reformed world are huge on this whole idea that Genesis 6 is talking about Sethites marrying

Canites, essentially. A lot of them won't even entertain the idea that it has anything to do with the supernatural at all.

That's just basically the tradition that the church has inherited all the way back from Augustine and Chrysostom in the fifth century.

Then the Reformers, the Protestant Reformation, didn't even really think to look into it.

In fact, they didn't have most of the books that we have today in the intertestamental literature that confirms that that's actually not the right view.

It hasn't been until fairly recent decades that this has been really challenged.

Today, I think most scholars would say that it has nothing to do with Sethites marrying Canites. It has to do with something much more interesting and crazy.

Recently heard, I think it might have been you being interviewed on Prophecy Watchers about how that Sethite view came to be.

It didn't come to be until maybe the third or fourth century. Yeah, that's right. There's a scholar named

Jaap Dodens who's out in the Netherlands. I think he teaches somewhere in one of the

Eastern European countries. He did his dissertation on the history of the interpretation of Genesis 6, 1 through 4.

You can get that on Academia. You can go and read. He has 110 pages of just nothing but quotations from early church fathers and the early

Jews and what they believed. What's so interesting about that is that he proves that from all the known literature of the time, so it doesn't mean there wasn't something that we don't have, but all the known literature of the time, with the

Jews prior to the New Testament going all the way into the early second century, every single

Jew believed that we know of, that it was a supernatural thing that happened, that the sons of God are actually angelic beings.

Then he shows in the church, starting with the New Testament with Jude and Peter, and then going into the apostolic fathers, the early church fathers.

This was the only view that was known in the church for the first 250 years. Then it was really the only view that was taken in the church until about the fourth century, the middle of the fourth century.

That's 300 plus years. It was the only view. When you add them all up, it's something like 50 different sources, that not a single one of them has anything to do with a

Sethite interpretation of this passage. It all has to do with fallen heavenly beings coming to the daughters of men and creating basically demigods, which are the

Nephilim. When you progress here, will you be able to explain anything about the

Greek and Roman myths and how they line up possibly with the

Giants? Yeah, absolutely. Maybe it would be helpful just for people. I don't know how familiar everybody is with this topic, but if we look at Genesis 6 -1, we can just go through it really quickly.

Genesis 6 -1 -4. I can help you see from the text that this is in fact what it's talking about.

I'll read from the ESV here, when man began to multiply in the face of the land, and the daughters were born to them.

This is really important, because the word man there is the Hebrew word Adam, where we get the guy's name in Genesis 1, 2, and 3.

In the plurality of Adam, Adam's children began to multiply in the face of the land, and daughters were born to them.

To whom? To the sons of Adam, to the children of Adam. That's totally different than saying that they were born to the children of Cain.

Cain's not in the text. Adam is in the text. The next verse says, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive.

The daughters of man are the same as they were in the first verse. So, it's the daughters of Adam, literally the daughters of Adam.

Somehow, the sons of God are distinct from these Adamite daughters.

They're not of the same race. There's something different. There's about 10 other places in the

Old Testament where the phrase sons of God appears. Actually, Heizer argues that it's technical language.

You can find things like Israel is God's firstborn son and stuff like that, but that's not what the phrase is here.

This is a technical language that was used in the ancient Near East to refer to heavenly beings of the cycle of Baal.

That's who it's referring to. We know this, for example, because in Job 38 .7,

God is talking to Job. He tells Job, where were you when

I created the foundations of the earth?

He's talking about there in Genesis day one and day two. We know that man wasn't made until day six.

He's asking, where were you when all the sons of God were shouting for joy?

How can the sons of God shout for joy on day two if they're humans when we weren't created until day six?

That's probably the best text that I take people to, to help them see that yes, indeed, sons of God refer to something else other than us.

Early on in Job, you see the sons of God appear as well in chapter one and chapter two when they go with Satan into heaven.

It's really a divine counsel scene where Satan, who's acting like a prosecuting attorney,

God comes to him and says, Hey, have you considered my servant Job? Satan says, Yeah, I can't do anything to touch him.

That lays the foundation of the book. It's the sons of God who are going with Satan into heaven.

I don't know how in the world you can have human beings doing that sort of a thing. This is the same phrase, and it's the same idea.

It makes perfect sense of the context. Greek Septuagint will translate that as angels to help us understand even more that these are heavenly beings.

They take as their wives any as they choose. In verse three, the

Lord said, My spirit will not abide in man forever, for he is flesh. His days shall be 120 years.

That's not referring to how old man will live. It's referring to how long it will be before the disaster comes.

I think that's a hotly debated topic in this room. I think it was the disaster until the disaster.

I know a few people in the room believe that's how long man was going to live.

I can see how you can say that, just because later on in the genealogies, starting with Moses, he lives to be 120 years.

Then from then on, you don't find anybody living longer than that. But the problem with that is that you have literally a thousand years where people are living longer than that, including all of the descendants between Noah and Abraham, including

Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. Anyway, I think that refers to how long it will be before the flood.

That verse is really a parenthesis to what we're talking about tonight. Verse four is where you get the giants.

The word is the Nephilim. The Nephilim were on the earth in those days. Also afterward, when the sons of God came into the daughters of man, they bore children to them.

These are the mighty men who are of old, the men of renown. So you have the Nephilim, mighty men of old, and men of renown.

They're all the same thing. The question is, what does Nephilim mean? A lot of pop teaching on Nephilim, they don't understand that.

They will say that Nephilim comes from a Hebrew verb meaning to fall.

The word is nephal. Its etymology is that. Then they'll say that Nephilim means the fallen ones.

The problem with that is that there's only one other verse in the whole Bible that even mentions the

Nephilim with this word. It's the last verse in Numbers 13.

That chapter is where the spies go into the land, and they come back, and they give a bad report to Moses.

The very end of that section is

Numbers 13, 32, and 33.

They brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, The land through which we have gone to spy it out is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height.

That establishes that they're giants. Then it says, We saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, who come from the

Nephilim, and we seem to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seem to them. The grasshoppers also confirms that they were giants.

When you go and read in Joshua, you find that the sons of Anak are there, and Joshua has to kill them.

You go read in Josephus, and he tells you how huge these guys were. When you say

Anak, is that with an A? You're not talking about Enak? No, it's A -N -A -K.

What was the race of the Nephilim? They were called Anakims, right? Yes, the Anakim.

They come from another ancestor. The key thing in this verse is that the word

Nephilim actually appears twice. There we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, who come from the

Nephilim. Why does that matter? It's because in the Hebrew, it's actually spelled two different ways.

It's not spelled the same way. You have to account for the spelling.

The problem is that the second spelling, the one that's different from Genesis 6, has the letter

Yod, which is basically our English letter Y in it. The only way to account for how that Yod is there is through an

Aramaic word. Aramaic is actually a cousin language of Hebrew. It's got a lot of overlap in the way that the letters actually are the same letters.

Many of the words resemble each other. This is what

Heizer and others argue, that the second

Nephilim is spelled differently. They called this a gloss, so it wasn't original to the text.

It was something that a later scribe inserted for the people of his day to bring a little bit of clarification to who they were.

In other words, it seems like even as far back as whenever that happened, probably second temple sometime, maybe the days of Ezra or something, that they had forgotten what the word itself meant.

He puts this little Yod in there, this little Aramaic word, in order to help the people understand that the word means a giant.

That's what it means. It doesn't mean fallen. It means a giant. This is also what you find in the

Septuagint translation, where it actually translates Genesis 6 -4 as a giant, the

Gigantus. You asked about the Greek myths, and that's coming right into the

Greek myths, because this is exactly what these guys were called in the Greek myths. They were called Gigantus.

They actually translate not only Nephilim, but the men of renown, the Giborim. They translate that with Gigantus too.

They translate both of those words with the same word that we translate as giant. If you were to get an

English copy of the Septuagint, every one of them will read, the giants were on the earth in those days.

They won't read Nephilim. Yeah, I did read that in there about 20 years ago, and that was my first exposure to giants.

Exactly right. I wanted to ask about the men of renown. What do you say about that?

When I read that in there, what are they trying to convey there? I think that this is actually coming into the whole context of what all the ancient peoples talked about as demigods.

Whether you're dealing with Babylon and Gilgamesh, or in chapter 10 of Genesis with Nimrod, where he becomes a

Giborim, he becomes a mighty man on the earth. Some of the guys in this space,

LA himself might say that he thinks that somehow Nimrod transformed himself into a

Nephilim. There's a lot of speculation about that that's interesting to me. I heard

LA say that. Yeah. Who were these guys in the mythology?

This is where you need to know a little bit of your myth. Let's go to Greek mythology just for a minute.

This goes into something Peter says. He talks about how these guys were locked into Tartarus.

Your English translation will most read, they were locked in hell. This is 2

Peter 2 .4. The Greek word is Tartarus. It's not the normal word for hell, which is either

Hades or Gehenna. It's Tartarus. It's the only time that that word is used anywhere in the New Testament at all.

It's like, why would he use that word? Especially when you understand that your Greek mythology is that this is where Zeus locked up Kronos and the

Titans during the big war that they had when Zeus usurped him and became the high god of their pantheon.

They used the word Tartarus for that. The Greeks used that word Tartarus for that.

What you have there is essentially, to put an overlay on them,

Zeus is the equivalent of the sons of God in our text. Go to the

Wikipedia, you'll see that Zeus had relations with a hundred different women and all these different children that came from him.

Guys like Hercules or Perseus or whatever. These are all half -god, half -women.

That's exactly the story of Genesis 6. Those characters, Hercules, Perseus, all the children of Zeus, born of women, are considered demigods.

They're half -men, half -gods. That's basically what Genesis 6 .4

is playing into when it talks about men of renown. Okay, I thought it might have meant that, but there's so much information out there.

Is your information more correct than L .A.'s, more than Michael Heiser?

I'm trying to think who else does it. I think on most of this stuff, we're in agreement on this.

The only thing we'd probably be in disagreement on would be the speculation stuff, and that's stuff I just don't even talk about.

That was very helpful. So far, the story's great.

Let's keep going. Chris If you can get to the point where you recognize that there are giants that are actually half -human, half -divine, that will become very important for the

New Testament, by the way, when I get to that. But now you can start to go backwards in your

Bible and come to a genesis of where these guys come from after the Flood.

It says they're there in those days and also afterward. In other words, the Nephilim were there before the Flood, and they're there after the

Flood. That's what Numbers confirms, that they're still here after the Flood. We had a speaker mention that very thing, and then when

I heard your interview, I knew I had to ask you to come speak. The giants during the

Genesis time were not really giants, that they were just tall people. Tom Right.

I don't even know how in the world people can get that. In this whole Sephite, sons of Seth marrying daughters of Cain thing, they still have to deal with the fact that these guys are giants.

I know a lot of Christians marrying non -Christians. I don't know any of them having giants because of that. My kids are rather short, actually.

At any rate, when I first started teaching this to our church, one of the guys was having none of it.

He was just getting frustrated and angry. He's like, what does this have to do with anything in the Bible? He's just kind of getting mad, thinking

I'm making stuff up. It kind of struck me. I said, well, man, you believe in Goliath, don't you?

He goes, yeah. I said, well, you know he's a giant, right? He goes,

I mean, yeah, I guess so. I said, well, have you ever looked into his genealogy? He said, no. For this particular guy,

I got him on that because he loves genealogies. So, he started looking into the genealogy with me.

You find out that Goliath, and then there's about four other giants that are mentioned contemporary with him.

That makes five giants. By the way, just a sideline note, when David takes up five smooth stones, it's not because he thinks he's going to miss.

It's because there's four others of them that are there that he might have to kill too. When you look and see that Goliath comes from Rapha, which is where we get the word

Rephaim, now you can start to go backwards and you can start to see, all right, where does Rephaim appear?

The first place it shows up is actually in Genesis 14. This is where there's this battle between four kings and five kings, and some of those kings are the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah.

It talks about how there's all these ites that are there, and the

Rephaim are part of those. You start to look at those tribal names, and then you start looking at where they appear in other places.

It very quickly becomes apparent that these guys are related to the Nephilim, are related to the

Rephaim, and they're all called giants in various places. Whether it's in the

Numbers 13 that gives a list of them, or in Deuteronomy chapter 2, which is another really good text for this, because Deuteronomy 2 is recounting the history of the nations around Israel.

It basically says, look, the Moabites that were over there to the south and the east, they had this group of giants that they had to fight, and they dispossessed them.

Then the Edomites, they had a group of giants, and they dispossessed them. Most of those names that are given in Deuteronomy 2 show up in Genesis 14.

I just have a quick question on that. Weren't the

Edomites descendants of Esau? What's happening is that we're in the days of Moses, so we're way after Abraham.

There were people that were living in the land of Canaan when Abraham came into it. Part of my book shows you that I think that some of those people that Abraham actually dealt with, not just in this

Genesis 14, but others, especially the Amorite people, the Amorite kings, they were themselves giants.

By the time you get to Moses, what happened was there was a promise, I think it's given at the end of Genesis 17, that God tells

Abraham something like, your people will be in a land not their own for 400 years or whatever, because the sins of the

Amorites and the people in the land have not yet come to their full fruition. By the time you get to Moses, that has been fulfilled, and you find that now the nations around Israel, like the

Edomites, their cousins, the Moabites, the Ammonites, who are descended from Lot, they've all had to fight these giants, and they've all defeated them.

Now the giants that are left are King Og, up in the northern part of Canaan, and then throughout the other places where Joshua will have to defeat them.

Og and Sion, his either brother or cousin or whatever. The sons of Anak that we talked about are mentioned quite a bit in Joshua.

And so you find that there's all these wars that start taking place, whether it starts there in Genesis 14, which is actually right after that war ends.

That's actually when Abraham meets Melchizedek on the plain there and offers him a tenth of everything.

Or whether it's Moses fighting Amalek, that's the story when he has to have his hands held out, and they get too tired, and so Joshua and Caleb have to hold them up.

So people get confused about Amalek, because there was a son of Esau named

Amalek, and a lot of the scholars will say that that's who Moses was fighting, but it's not.

When you go back to Genesis 14, you find that the Amalekites are in these giant wars.

But here's the problem. Esau hasn't been born yet, so how could it possibly be one of his descendants?

In other words, there's two different Amalekites that are there in Genesis. One was there long before Esau was ever there.

In fact, they were there before Abraham ever got to the land. And then the other one is a descendant of Esau, and my guess is what happened was that Esau was doing some bad things, mixing with the

Amalekites themselves, and so he probably named one of his children after those guys.

Moses fighting them, spying out the land, we've seen that in Numbers 13, that they don't want to fight except for Joshua and Caleb, because they don't have enough faith to go in there, because these guys are absolutely gigantic, and they're devouring the inhabitants, and all this kind of stuff.

I do, and I think that's what devouring is referring to in that text.

I wondered about that, because I heard of a recent Kandahar giant that was eating people in Iran.

I'm sorry, I got you off topic. Keep going. No problem. Keep asking the questions.

They're good. They're going into the land, and part of what's happening is that you will find all these laws that when

Moses goes in and Joshua goes in to the land, they're supposed to completely destroy, utterly blot out, utterly annihilate every man, woman, child, and even the animals.

That bothers a lot of people. This is one of the things that Mike brought out in the

Unseen Realm that I think is just great, and a lot of other people have caught on to this. God does not actually ever tell

Israel to wipe out the Edomites, or to wipe out the Ammonites, or to wipe out the

Moabites. Every group of people that he tells them to wipe out are associated with the giants, every one of them.

You have to ask yourself the question why that is. I think you guys will appreciate this as a

Genesis apologetics group of people. You know how in Genesis 1 it keeps saying that God made everything after its kind, after its kind, after its kind?

The only other time you find that phrase is really in the Genesis 6 and maybe early 7 story, before the flood hits, that all the animals came after their kind, after their kind, after their kind onto the ark.

Why would it care? Aren't all animals after their kind?

Isn't that redundant? Well, the answer to that is, if you understand Genesis 6, no, they're not.

The Nephilim were actually an abomination that weren't even part of God's creation. If you put it in terms of Levitical law thinking, where you're not allowed to have mixed seeds in your field or a mixed cloth that you're wearing your garments out of, those are considered unclean in terms of the law code.

That's exactly what a Nephilim would have been considered, because they weren't human. They weren't angelic.

They were something mixed. They weren't something God created. They were something that became an abomination that the fallen angels either made through DNA manipulation or through relations that they had with women or whatever it was that happened.

This becomes the reason why God says you're to absolutely wipe them off the face of the earth.

It's not because God's some sort of a genocidal maniac. He doesn't even want them to do that with the other humans.

But with these guys and those who have corrupted themselves with them, that's what that law is focusing on.

I will admit that when I first started reading the Bible, I've been following Michael Heiser for 10 plus years, and he was the one who finally made it.

I thought, too, why are we killing men, women, and children? But they're not God's seed, so to say, or they're not his.

About the Edomites, that makes sense. They were kind of a thorn in Israel's side.

You would think God would have said, just mow them down, but he didn't. Later we find that God says,

I will destroy Edom, but he never gives Israel permission to do that. That's like when you have a brother and a sister, and the parent steps in and smacks the sister for you.

I have several questions in the chat that I'm going to save for the end, but one is going to play right into this.

Jimbo is asking, maybe that's where the centaur legends came from.

When I get to the New Testament, I'll talk about that just a little bit to help you understand. I'll just finish up this broad overview of the

Old Testament. We know about Goliath, I've already talked about that.

I think those are the last remaining guys that hadn't been killed in earlier times that were being used as mercenaries by the human

Philistines. It calls Goliath a Philistine. That doesn't mean all Philistines were giants. To me, what that is saying is that they enlisted him as a mercenary to be their hero, their champion.

If you've ever seen the movie Troy with Brad Pitt, you see this exact thing where you have the two heroes fighting the war, and the rest of the army just stays on the side and waits for whichever one to win.

Then whoever wins, the other army just has to submit to them. That makes sense.

If the would have won every war all the time.

There's a story where King Saul captures

Agag the Amalekite. This becomes the reason why when

Samuel sees that he hasn't killed him. Saul gives him his lame excuse that he wanted to keep him alive and take him as a captive and then take all his booty.

Samuel gets absolutely irate. It's one of the most gruesome pictures in the Old Testament where Samuel hacks

Agag into pieces. Why would he do that? It's because he's an Amalekite who comes from these

Amalekites in the giant wars. That story actually fits right in line with this giant war that was predicted in Genesis 3.

There's going to be this war between these two seeds, the seed of the woman and then the seed of the serpent.

I'll move into the New Testament here just briefly, and then you guys can ask whatever questions you want.

I said that the giants are in the New Testament. Strictly speaking, there aren't actually any giants embodied in the

New Testament. That's not where they're found. Where they're found is in coming to understand the origin of what everybody in the ancient world believed.

Just like I said that they all believed that Genesis 6 was talking about heavenly beings and not humans marrying each other, the same is true for the origin of the unclean spirits in the

Gospels. I think I have a whole appendix in the book that shows how people believed this.

They believed that when a giant Nephilim died, that because it's not from heaven or from earth, that it became something that haunts the air in between.

This became the origin of the unclean spirits. In other words, when

Jesus is casting out demons and unclean spirits, he's actually continuing the war that goes throughout the entire

Old Testament narrative with the giants. It's just that now they're in the disembodied form instead of an embodied form where they're huge.

Like I said, everybody believed this in the early church, and the Jews believed the same things.

There are pseudepigraphal writings that talk about this very explicitly, like the Testament of Solomon.

You can go and read that. Those are basically intertestamental books.

There's about 80 to 100 of them. Nobody ever considered canon, but they're like contemporary books like we have today.

Billy Graham writing on something or Elie Marzulli writing on something. It's that kind of a thing.

They never considered them scripture, but they did read them, and what they do is they show us what the people of that day thought.

A lot of people, when you mention extra -biblical texts, or what do they call it?

Apocrypha. I'm sure you've had that experience.

Oh, I'm not going to read that. Oh, no, that's not canon. I don't think they understand, and if you could just explain again the value of it, but that it's not doctrine.

Yeah, absolutely. I actually have at least one appendix in this book on that subject.

By the way, here's the first copy of the book. That's the 2013 copy, Giant Sons of the Gods. Can you put that in front of the camera and back a little bit so we can get a look at it?

Here's the new copy. There's a glare. The old, boring brown copy. Oh, yeah, that's good.

Then the new blue copy, which has a little bit more material in it.

Our Diane has purchased your book. Good for Diane. Like I said, this is a hotly debated topic in this book.

Yeah, I understand it. That's why I wanted to put an appendix on it for this very reason. The best way that I like to help people see this is that when we think about what the

Bible is, as a Reformed Christian, I hold to something called Sola Scriptura, which is that the

Scripture alone is my ultimate authority. But what is it my ultimate authority for?

Well, it's my ultimate authority for all the things that it talks about that are true, but especially for faith, life, and obedience to God.

I don't need anything else. Anything else that contradicts that or speaks against that is teaching something false.

But what that doesn't mean is that I believe that the Bible is the only book that tells truth.

I go to school and I learn a grammar book about how to read English.

That's teaching me truth of how to read English. Or I read some sort of a

Ken Ham book on creation science or something like that. It's not the Bible, but I would believe that it's teaching truth about creation.

In the same way, these are books that the

Jews used during the intertestamental time, so basically when they came back from Babylon in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, for the next 400 -500 years, they're writing all kinds of books.

We have a whole bunch of them available. Some of these books are actually quoted and used in the

New Testament. The biggest example of that is the book of 1 Enoch that Jude actually literally quotes from one of the verses in the first chapter of that book.

I think Jesus quotes Enoch too, doesn't he? Well, he certainly alludes to it. Enoch is alluded to all over the place, and it's never alluded to negatively.

It's only positive. Again, it doesn't mean that they thought it was Scripture, but it does mean that they thought it told truth, and so they used it freely.

It's like when Paul, when he's in Athens, he quotes one of the Greek poets. Does not even your own poet say, and then he talks about how there's an unknown

God or whatever? He's not saying that, therefore, I think the Greek poet should be the

Bible. He's just saying that, yeah, the Greek poet had truth here, and I'm going to use that because you guys know who he is, because you're in Athens.

That makes a lot of sense. I see a lot of people quoting

Spurgeon or any number of preachers. What's his name?

Graham. They read their books and things like that, and they don't think twice about that.

Right. For whatever reason, and I'm not quite sure why it is.

It could be a hangover because the Protestants didn't like the Apocrypha and didn't want it to be in the

Bible, whereas it is in the Catholic Bible. What's funny about that is that Martin Luther actually said he wanted everybody to read the

Apocrypha. He just didn't believe that it was Scripture. He thought it was valuable to read and give you good history and some good wisdom and stuff like that.

It's kind of like we've knee -jerked against that whole idea for whatever reason. I'm very not

Catholic, and whenever something Catholic comes up, I'm always doubtful, etc.

It's a good thing to talk about this, because it's really important to remember that the

Catholics aren't wrong about everything. They believe in the Trinity, for example. So if we were to kick against anything that they believe because they're

Catholic, we couldn't be Trinitarians. Think we all have that,

Robin, to one degree or another. It's part of human nature. All I'm trying to say is that I don't think that...

Oh, Doug, you froze. You said, I don't, and then you froze. Oh, that's weird.

I said, I just don't go to them thinking that they're

Scripture. Just treat them like you would any other book, and then... Doug, you have frozen.

Oh, dear. Am I still here with you? Now you are. You're trying to tell us something

I think Satan doesn't want us to hear. This happens all the time. I wanted to mention, because the question brought up satyrs, and this is a really wild thing.

There's a couple of passages in Isaiah that talk about satyrs and centaurs and sirens, and John in Revelation 18 actually comments on this passage, and this is where it gets so interesting.

What is this Scripture again? I couldn't get it. Revelation 18, verse 2.

I'm putting it into the chat. This is what it says. He called out with a mighty voice,

Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great. She's become a dwelling place for demons, a haunt for every unclean spirit, a haunt for every unclean bird, a haunt for every unclean and detestable beast.

When you understand that John here is actually going back to the story in Isaiah 13, this is where he gets this from.

You go and read that little passage, and you'll see there's unclean birds there, there's unclean beasts there, and guess what?

There's demons that are there. These demons are sometimes called satyrs.

Some of them are called centaurs. Some of them are called sirens. One of them is called the Lilith. All kinds of weird stuff going on there.

The point is that the ancient people thought of those creatures as demonic.

What I said earlier about the demons is that the demons were the giants.

They were the Nephilim, the half -human, half -men, unclean spirits.

However, what I'm saying here is that we can extend that to half -animal, half -heavenly being, and that becomes the origin of all of these weird chimeric creatures.

Chimeric, that's a good term. That leads me to another question that somebody asked.

So, you don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that these fallen beings took animals as well as females?

I do not think it's beyond the realm of possibility, no. Okay, because I've wondered about that, because satyrs and the lion men of Moab, I mean, they definitely have reference to these chimeras in the

Bible, but your average Joe person reading the Bible, they're not going to get it.

I try to read through the Bible every year, and I just gloss over the stuff

I don't understand. I mean, that's the purpose of writing a book, right? So that you can focus your attention on the one thing and really kind of go on a deep dive on it.

Jim was saying maybe they could take any form. Maybe they could take the form of an animal.

In order for the fallen to have relations with the women, it seems people are thinking,

I think when people think that the fallen are giants, but they're not. You've had angels appearing to Abraham.

Jesus appeared to Abraham with two angels. They appear as men.

So that gets a little bit tricky, because when you read what the ancient Jews thought in the Pseudepigrapha, there's differences of opinion.

Sometimes the sons of God are actually described as fairly tall, like eight feet tall.

To me, that actually kind of makes sense of what happens when Abraham actually sees them.

If you read the Genesis 18 opening lines, it's like Abraham's under the tree, and then all of a sudden he sees these three guys, and he immediately knows who they are.

How could he possibly know who they are unless there's something distinct about them that he would have recognized?

That's kind of a bunny trail. People have differences of opinion about that, but I think that it is interesting that they were sometimes described that way.

I'm talking about the mechanics of the situation without being graphic.

The mechanics of it, just to kind of touch on that question that was just raised, I don't know if they could have appeared as animals or not.

I just don't have information for that. It's theoretically possible. But I do know that the sons of God, that is the angels, for example, the very angels that came to Abraham in Genesis 18, when they leave and they go to Sodom, they're actually called men.

In Hebrew, there are two words for a man. We've already seen one of them is the word Adam.

That only ever applies to the sons of Adam. It never applies to anyone else.

But there's another Hebrew word, which is the word Ish. That word sometimes refers to humans and it sometimes refers to angels, but we always translate it as men.

So, it's kind of like a genus species sort of a thing that we share Ish manness with angels, but we do not share

Adam manness with angels. Oh, okay. That does make a lot of sense. And this is why an angel can be called a man throughout the scripture.

Because I've heard Perry Stone, I'm following him for 25 years, and he does talks on giants every so often and the mechanics of it.

And he did not say, as you were speaking, he didn't talk about the two different words for men.

And so, that was very, very interesting. Um, did you have more or should

I start asking my questions? Oh, I just want to finish up with this. So, the point of Jesus fighting the demons,

I just want you all to understand that the way, at least the way I wrote the book and the way

I see it, is that Genesis 315 predicts that there will be a war. What I've tried to do is unfold a little bit of that war between the seed of Satan and the seed of the woman.

But that war comes to a climax in the New Testament, because the problem is, in the Old Testament, it's never carried out perfectly.

It's never carried out totally. It's never carried out without sin.

And so, that's why the Lord Jesus has to come. And when he's fighting the demons, he's actually engaging in this war, and he's showing them that he is, in fact, the

Son of God. It's kind of funny, because for the longest time in the Gospels, the only ones that know who

Jesus is, the Son of God, is demons. And so, nobody else seems to get the point.

And they're totally afraid of him. They think he's going to come to judge them before the appointed time. And he's showing in his ministry that he has the power over them because of who he is.

And this is the way that I finished the first edition of the book, is that in dying on the cross and then rising from the dead, and in between that, when he descends into hell, he's actually doing more than that.

He's actually conquering them and the sons of God, their fathers, in a legal sense, that they no longer have the right to have the power over his people and over the

Gentiles that he calls to himself. And probably most people in this room are actually living proof of that.

And if people are tormented by demons, or they're living in unbelief, that's something that the gospel has the power to save somebody from that immediately, because that is the kind of power that Jesus has.

And that's the culmination of the war that's predicted in Genesis 3 .15, at least in terms of its legal aspect, what we call justification by faith, being saved.

In the newer version, I added a couple of chapters just to talk a little bit about Nephilim in the future and whether they're here now.

And I think it's in a physical form. I think it's quite possible that there are giants that are still here now, and I think it's possible that giants might play some kind of a in the end game, as it were, in a physical form and not just in demonic form.

But I absolutely believe that the demons play a role in the end in terms of spiritual form.

I think Revelation 9 and the locusts that come out of the pit of hell, that's all demonic imagery, and it's really quite terrifying.

That's why I think being rooted in the first coming and knowing the power that Jesus actually has right now, and not thinking that I have to wait for the future for this all to end, but not for us to have victory in Christ.

That's the good news of the gospel that the whole New Testament is full of. I guess that's kind of the way

I'll leave the lecture here. And this has always been kind of unclear to me and maybe to somebody else in the room.

So, Jesus ascended into hell, and now I've heard a couple different versions of that, and that he takes back the keys, but they also say that Satan is the prince of the power of the air, and Daniel's messenger was held up 21 days by a spirit that he had to call help.

He had to Michael to help him fight it off. So, where does

Jesus come in where he's taking that from him? He's sovereign here, but he's still called the prince of the power of the air.

Can you rephrase the question a little bit? I know, right? I'm not making any sense. Did he take the keys from him, and Satan is no longer the prince of the power of the air, or is that still the case?

Yeah, okay. So, I think I understand your question. So, this is why I'm trying to make a distinction between something that's legal and something that's like his presence.

So, there's a difference there. So, this is where actually having divine counsel theology in your mind can help a little bit.

I don't know that I can do this quickly or not, but basically, the idea is that at the Tower of Babel, God gave the nations over to the sons of God.

That's what that first verse that we looked at tonight talks about. The very next verse says that actually

Yahweh is Israel's portion and Jacob's inheritance.

So, in other words, if the sons of God are being set over the nations to rule over them,

Israel is unique. They weren't even at the Tower of Babel. They were created many centuries later when God called to Abraham, and then

Jacob came, wrestled with him, and he called him Israel. That's the birth of Israel. He becomes their

God. Now, you have to keep it in context, because if it's sons of God inheriting the nations, then the one who inherits

Israel has to be the Son of God. Not just God in generic, and not the

Father, not the Holy Spirit. It's the Son of God. He's inheriting Israel to be people.

The promise in Psalm 2 is that if he asks the Father, he will receive all the nations as his inheritance.

Then in Psalm 82, because God is judging the heavenly beings for how they have ruled wickedly, the promise is that, yes, in fact, you,

O God, the Son of God, will inherit all the nations. When Jesus comes in human flesh, and he has his perfect ministry, and he dies on the cross as our sacrifice for our sin, and ransoms us, he descends into hell, and he takes the keys in a legal sense, so that when the gospel comes to someone now, as opposed to the

Old Testament, the gospel can come to me in Colorado, and I don't have to go to Israel and become circumcised and live in that country, because that's the only country that is legally the

Lord's. Jesus has disinherited these guys of their legal inheritance, and so they still control people.

They still hold them under their sway. But when the gospel comes, and the power of the gospel goes into a person's life, they are set free, and they no longer have to worship these entities because God put them over them.

It's all kind of a weird thing. Maybe the best picture for it that you can get is, if you remember the story of Naaman, the

Syrian leper, he comes to Elisha, and he says, Can you heal me of my leprosy?

Elisha says, Yeah, but you have to come down to the Jordan River to do it. Well, he's from Syria, and he likes the

Euphrates River better. It's closer, and it's cleaner. He goes, Why would I want to come all the way down to your dirty old river when

I have this one right here? Elisha says, If you don't come down here, you're not going to get clean. He comes down, he bathes in the water, and he's cleaned of his leprosy.

Then he goes home, but he takes a whole bunch of dirt from Israel with him.

Why does he do that? It's because that turf belongs to Yahweh, as opposed to in Syria, it belonged to the

Prince of Syria, whoever he happened to be. In taking the dirt and then setting up a shrine, he's basically exporting

Israel to his place. That's a picture in the Old Testament of essentially what

Jesus has done for us. He has made Christians so that we become the turf. We are the temple of God.

Wherever we are, anywhere in the world, we're his. We belong to him. There's nothing that Satan can legally do to stop that.

That doesn't mean Satan isn't still prowling around like a roaring lion. It doesn't mean he doesn't have some kind of authority over the people that are still in darkness.

It just means that Jesus has done something in the legal realm covenantally.

He has one authority, and there's nothing that they can do to stop either that authority from going and saving people, or when he comes back, from them ultimately being destroyed.

Well, that was very good. That really helped me understand. I appreciate that. I'm going to run back through the chat here and see if I can find the questions.

Oh, Linda said that she doesn't know much about giants. I hope, Linda, you're a little more informed now.

Let's see. Oh, yes, thank you very much. You're welcome. And Linda says

I've been fascinated. So have I been fascinated for 15 years, Linda, so you're not alone.

Okay, and then I have iPhone Cheryl. She says, can you address the archaeological evidence of giants?

I can do it a little. Mostly, the archaeological evidence that we have comes from the recent period of time.

So I guess there is old archaeology, and then there's also not just archaeology, but eyewitness testimony and also history books from other cultures and stuff like that that talk about them.

If you look at the walls that they made, Jericho was said to be a city of giants. You look at its gigantic walls.

It's not absolute proof that there were giants, but it lends itself to everything they believed and that they tell us that was going on there.

There are reports that you'll find occasionally, especially back in the 1800s when the

English were going through Israel and doing all their surveying and stuff, that they found a cemetery of giant bones or things like that.

Around the same time in the Americas, you find thousands and thousands of these references to giants that are found in especially the mounds in the

Ohio Valley, Eastern New York, and stuff like that. But they're actually found all over the whole

North American continent. Even in California? Even in California, yeah, and Catalina Island.

They were everywhere. My thought about that is that some of them were surely hoaxes, but with a thousand plus, they weren't all hoaxes.

All it takes is one for it to be true. Dr. Judd Burton agrees with me on this.

What happened was that there were migrations from the Middle East at various points in time.

Probably the biggest migration took place when Joshua kicked them out of the land. They didn't all die, so some of them fled.

As they fled, they went north and west. They went into Turkey and then they went up into Gaul and Julius Caesar fights them.

I have a whole appendix on this. Then they go up into England and Ireland. Everywhere they go, because they're cannibals and they torment people and they steal children and everything else, the people fight them.

Eventually, the people win because there's not enough of the giants. There's nowhere else for them to go, so they come over to North America.

This is the reason why there are so many giant stories and bones that you find in newspaper reports for between about 1750 and about 1930.

Bekkah, we're probably going to have Elie Marzouli on, and he has a lot of information.

Ken Johnson, Alpha Rad, if you want to put into the chat how to reach

Ken Johnson, he does a lot on that too. There is a lot of archaeological evidence, so it is there.

It definitely is. L .A. has some good stuff on the Paracas skulls down in South America.

Aaron went with him for that. L .A. has his cult following for the

Watcher series, which I actually own a few of those.

I'm just going through the chat here about any questions.

Alpha Rad has some information in there. Diane, our regular, has a question for you, so let me get that.

I know Ron Wyatt. You're familiar with Ron Wyatt? I know who he is.

I think everybody does, and the pastor of the Holy Land site, he spoke for us a few times.

Todd Fink is his name. He said that Mrs. Noah was probably a giant.

Oh, Diane, I should have read this before. I think it's Ham's wife that was the giant.

That's usually what people say. There's a funny story in the pseudepigraph. It's actually in the Dead Sea Scrolls, believe it or not.

I'm not saying this is true. I'm just telling you it's a story. When Noah is born, he has the complexion and the skin and the color of all this that looks like a

Watcher, a son of God, at one of these fallen angels. When he's born, his dad looks at him, and he goes to his wife and he says,

Were you with somebody that I don't know about? She goes, No, I promise I wasn't. He then goes over to his great -grandfather

Methuselah and he says, What's going on here? And he says, Don't worry about it. Noah is perfectly human.

I bring that story up because the Jews were wrestling with the same kind of ideas that we're wrestling with here.

Usually, the first question people want to know is, how did the giant survive the flood?

One of the explanations people will give is that I've never heard it

Noah's wife, but I have heard it Ham's wife maybe carried the genetic material.

That's where it came from. I don't actually tend to think that that's true because I think that would have defeated the point of God saving

Noah because he was pure in his generations. In other words, he was biologically human.

Why would you save somebody that wasn't? That doesn't make a lot of sense. I think that the best answer to the problem is that, if you put it in terms of Kronos and the

Greek myths, once those guys were locked away and then God said he'd never flood the earth again, another group of them up there said,

Hey, he said he'd never just do that again, so why don't we go down and do something else? In other words, there was another incursion of it, and I actually think that that was what was going on at the

Tower of Babel. Oh, okay. That makes sense. Diane, Doug doesn't feel that they were.

I don't know if you want to jump in here, Diane, you can unmute. I'm here. Yeah, I wondered about that because they did find giant bones at the site that they found that they believe is where the

Ark landed. Oh, I have not heard that. Yes. If you go to the Holy Land site, there's a whole video on Noah's Ark.

Oh, interesting. Yeah, and it is very, very good. But yeah, they found giant bones and they found one, whatever, pictograph or whatever it is, where the eight people were pictured, and one of them was a giant.

That's interesting. From the placement, it would have been Mrs. Noah. Yeah, Holy Land site,

Dr. Pastor Todd Fink. Yeah, that's his name. Thank you.

Yeah, and I had wondered about that because what you said about God did this to wipe it out, so why would a giant's genes get through?

Right. To bring up the point I made earlier about pseudepigrapha, how these are just simply stories that were there, and you have to evaluate each one on its own.

The same thing would be true for any kind of artwork or whatever that you would find. I mean, somebody clearly obviously thought that that was what it was, but it doesn't mean that that's the original and it's the truth.

Can I interject something? If it's quick,

Jeff, because I want to close out the recording and the live stream, and then we can let our so -called hair down.

I just wanted to say that Ken Johnson did extensive research in the

Dead Sea Scrolls. His take on it was that prior to Noah, there were writings by the

Nephilim or whoever else. There were extensive writings that he had with him on the

Ark, and apparently some of those writings were taken to Mount Hermon. Sometime after that, somebody else went to Mount Hermon, found those writings, and started following them.

There apparently were recipes on how to mix animal DNA to create hybrids that had phenomenal properties.

That's his theory. It makes a lot of sense to me. It ties in with the Greek mythology, etc.

I don't have a problem with any of that. Thank you, Jeff. Now I'm going to have you mute again,

Jeff. Doug, if you could show us your books again. Diane's already purchased one.

Tell us how we can get one. Tell us everything we need to know. It's Giant Sons of the

Gods. My name is Doug Van Dorn. All my books are on Amazon .com.

I have a website, which is DouglasVanDorn .com. You can go there. I have tons and tons of podcasts that I have linked if you just go to the podcast page.

I've talked about this subject extensively with lots and lots of people. If you're interested in more or just want a different overview or whatever, feel free to go there and listen to any of those.

I have a bunch of other books too that you can see on the site as well. I forgot to mention this.

When I was going through Mike's stuff, I did say that the angel of the

Lord really caught my attention too. I wrote a book with a pastor friend of mine on the angel of the

Lord too. It's not a companion in terms of the material is not really overlapping, but it is a companion in terms of the fact that the angel of the

Lord is the main character of the Old Testament. If anybody's interested in going deeper on that, then

I would recommend that book as well. We are

Creation Fellowship Santee. We meet on most Thursdays online here in Zoom.

If you want to get on our mailing list, email me at creationfellowshipsantee .com or at gmail .com.

We'll get you on the list so you can come and join us. All right. With that,

I am going to turn off the live stream and the recording, so just bear with me here. I'm running all the systems myself tonight.