There are no giants in the original bible

originally posted by: Toseekthetruth

Genesis 6:4 (Original KJV):
There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that,
when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and
they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which
were of old, men of renown.

deleted nonsense

Thanks for that, proving my point, didn't even bother to read and understand the OP and here you are spewing forth an irrelevant diatribe based on your unevidenced belief

Thanks for playing

originally posted by: Blueracer
Original bible? It's just a translation and many Christians know the King James version is full of errors. Not all Christians use the King James version.

Yeah, just the delusional ones...

a reply to: Blueracer

He meant the one that Christians don't use, the Torah.

a reply to: Marduk

Oh yeah, well what about the LXX using the word gigantes for nephilim? Those translators believed in giants.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Marduk

Oh yeah, well what about the LXX using the word gigantes for nephilim? Those translators believed in giants.

The LXX is also a later translation of the original bible, its the reason that the later translators used the word "Giant",
so thanks for supporting what I am saying

Going by the dreaded Wikipedia a cubit is anywhere between 18.9 and 22.7 inches and a span being 9.45-11.34 inches or half a cubit.

This would make the bed 14' x 6.3' to 17' x 7.5' Now that's a monster bed either way

This would make Goliath between 85" (7') and 102.14" (8.5') in the Hebrew version or 122.85" (10.25') to 147.54" (12.25') in the KJV .

That's pretty much giant territory in my book never mind when the avg height was well less than 5 1/2'

Wiki link

I was just trying to add to your interesting post. Didn't expect this..... And playing? Is that what we are here to do? I'm here to explore and expand my mind. Thanks.




a reply to: Marduk

a reply to: Marduk

LXX was translated by Jews for Jews who became Hellenized and never learned Hebrews.

a reply to: Marduk

What's a Nephilim look like ?

a reply to: Marduk

Thanks for this! Great thread!!!

a reply to: Marduk

Mainstream "Sunday Church" Christians would have little to no interest in Nephilim, Seraphim, or Cheribim / Watchers.

Mostly only those who research alternative information sources relating to the "Pre-Flood" period.

Apocrypha, the Dead Sea Scrolls

My 16 yr old nephew is a giant. He's 6'6" to my measly 5'10". I call him Gigantor. You may call him a giant if you would like.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Marduk
In other words, "giant" is a relative term, meaning "taller than us", and the height difference gets exaggerated in imagination.
With comparatively isolated populations, and differences in available nutrition (the occupants of the Fertile Crescent would probably be better fed than the desert wanderers), the contrasts between "giants" and "dwarves" would arise easily enough within ordinary humanity.

a reply to: swanne

My fault for not indicating sarcasm. It's hard to discern online. Apologies!

a reply to: Marduk

Oooooh, that's a movie script in the making. Good one!

originally posted by: Kukri
Going by the dreaded Wikipedia a cubit is anywhere SNIP

TMI

The Biblical cubit is the correct measure

The Near Eastern or Biblical cubit is usually estimated as approximately 46 cm (18 in).[9][10] In Deuteronomy 3:11 it is referred to as the 'standard cubit' in the New King James Version and the 'common cubit' in the Revised Standard Version. The King James Version refers here to the 'cubit of a man'.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Marduk

What's a Nephilim look like ?

About 6'1, dark hair and eyes, with a spear

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
They might be giants.

Make a little birdhouse in your soul.

While you're at it
Keep the nightlight on
Inside the bird house
In your soul

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Marduk

Oh yeah, well what about the LXX using the word gigantes for nephilim? Those translators believed in giants.

"Gigantes" in Greek does not mean the same as "giants" in English.

Using the similarity of word sounds across languages like this is what Dan Brown did in his book "The Davinci Code".

a reply to: chr0naut
To be fair, my dictionary gives the English word "giant" as derived from "gigantes", via the Old French "geant". The Old French must have been slurring their words a bit.

originally posted by: Marduk

originally posted by: Blueracer
Original bible? It's just a translation and many Christians know the King James version is full of errors. Not all Christians use the King James version.

Yeah, just the delusional ones...

actually despite its occasional translation errors and some are important errors the KJV is the version that comes closest to the original manuscripts. even recent completely independent retranslations of the original manuscripts still miss the mark more than the KJV as far as I know. When it comes down to it the only way to be sure is to use a prepoliticization edition of the strong's exhaustive concordance when an issue comes up within the KJV. some of the mistranslations actually hide important parts of the salvation theme of the OT. The trouble in the garden didn't happen because Eve picked the wrong vegan eating plan in the garden. the earth was not created in a day or days. the flood was not global and hell is not eternal suffering it is quick but total destruction and nonexistence. Hell is not even in existence now (So the idea that evil people are in it crackling away on the barbie at this very moment is not biblical; every one thought to be currently residing in hell are instead in sheol ) and did not exist in the past and will come to exist briefly at the end of the Lord's day. Easter is not what Christ had in mind to commemorate his death and resurrection. and it goes on and on.