The Quickening (Acceleration of Earthquakes)
For fresh, daily content, check out The Blog
As it Was in the Days of Noah - Movie (12 Minutes)
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep man in everlasting ignorance. That principal is condemnation before investigation."--Edmund Spencer
"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him" (Proverbs 18:13).
It Sounds Like Something From a Sci-Fi Film, But...
By: Michael Kelley (The Bible Study Now Institute) - December 29, 2009
Aliens and UFOs are real and hostile. They pretend to be something that they are not. The mystery behind the Roswell incident in 1947 is not necessarily what happened, but the mystery is, why is it still Classified to this day, 62 years later, at a higher classification level than our most Top Secret Nuclear warheads if it was just a "weather balloon", as they say.
This subject on UFOs and Alien Encounters is a very touchy subject, especially within the Christian community, much like the subject of Dinosaurs. And, there is so much deliberate disinformation and hoaxes that it takes a lot of time to sift through and separate fact from fiction. However, even when one has thrown out all the hoaxes and disinformation, we are still left with an overwhelming number of sources that are reliable. Would you remain strong in your faith if, one of these days, flying saucers were to appear all over the world at once and Giant "men" were to come and say "We are your creators who seeded this planet." We hope this page will help you grow in your faith and be strengthened in your faith in Jesus Christ.
Notice, the first two verses of Genesis 6 are a single sentence.
"And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.... 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." (Genesis 6:1-2; 4).
- Alien Encounters Conference - Dr. Chuck Missler and Dr. Mark Eastman
- Sid Roth Interview with Dr. Chuck Missler
- The Secret Alien Agenda - Tom Horn and L.A. Marzulli on Prophecy in the News
- Apollyon Rising 2012 - Tom Horn on Prophecy in the News
- Transhumanism - Tom Horn (Science and Supernatural Conference)
- In Whose Image - Sharon Gilbert (Science and Supernatural Conference)
- The Black Awakening - Russ Dizdar (Science and Supernatural Conference)
- UFOs and Human Mutilations - Butch Witkowski (MUFON Investigator and 27-year veteran homicide detective).
- Human Mutilations - Butch Witkowski on Acceleration Radio with L.A. Marzulli (Wed. July 14, 2010)
- UFOs and the Great Deception - L.A. Marzulli on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory (Tuesday, August 17, 2010).
- Imminent Deception - Preparing for Battle with Roz - Stan Deyo on the book of Daniel (November 17, 2010)
- Bird Deaths - Preparing for Battle with Roz - Stan Deyo and Larry Taylor (January 5, 2011)
- Cattle and Human Mutilations - Chuck Zukowski and Butch Witkowski with L.A. Marzulli (Wed. February 23, 2011)
- Separating Truth From Deception, Watching for Rapture - Roundtable Discussion with Jim Wilhelmsen, Rob Skiba, Augusto Perez, hosted by Barry Meyer (End Time Talk Radio)
Resources For Further Study:
UFOs and Aliens
by Michael Kelley - December 29, 2009 - Edited November 3, 2011
Why do they seem to communicate via telepathy? Well, have you ever noticed that in the Bible, whenever an angel appears to someone, they always speak? Most of the time they say, "Fear not" or "Peace be unto you". However, the fallen angels never speak to people in the Bible when they come upon someone, and the people never seem to be able to move. It would seem that we, mere mortals, cannot interact with the angelic race, unless the angel allows it by speaking to us. Fallen angels obviously do not want to break that hold that they have on a person, so they choose not to speak and communicate telepathically.
Why do the aliens always seem to attack Christianity and no other religion? Why do they always feel the need to tell the abductee that Jesus really wasn't the Messiah (Christ). Why would they travel so far just to tell us that He really wasn't the Son of God, and that the work of the cross was unnecessary. Why not give us the cure to cancer or end world hunger. What is their reason for attacking Christianity?
As for the year 2012, we do not know for sure if this is when these beings will make their return to earth and begin their deception. However, most everyone knows about the ancient Mayan calendar and the year 2012. Yet, the Mayan calendar does not end in 2012, it just starts over (or, the beginning of a new time). However, what is amazing is that it is not just the Mayans who speak of the year 2012.
Many ancient civilizations across the earth that had no contact with one another, speak of the year 2012 as a time when their "gods" will return. For a list of these ancient civilizations, please read my article "2012: a thread of truth?" One such "god" that many are familiar with is the
Mayan, King Pacal (carving pictured right), who was said to have been 10 to 12 feet tall. Yet, more amazing than his height is what is pictured upon the top of his sarcophagus. We cannot know for sure what the Mayans were trying to depict in this picture, and many say that it was just a picture of him ascending into the Mayan afterlife. However, due to Pacal's height, we should already have red flags raised to the possibility of him being a Nephilim, so it is at least worth considering.
The sarcophagus of King Pacal (pictured right) shows Pacal in some sort of "ship". It looks very much like he is sitting in a "cramped ship", and his hands are at some sort of "controls", and his feet seem to be pressed against some "pedals". Now, whether this is the true nature of the picture cannot be determined, but it is very possible that the Mayans were trying to depict something that they did not fully understand the technology of. How else would they depict a being in a "spaceship"? This was thousands of years before man had any way of flying at all. It is very possible that King Pacal was, indeed, a Nephilim.
Two trademarks of an occult is that they deny the deity of Christ and they deny the work of the cross. People who have had encounters with aliens always come back saying they were told that Jesus wasn't really God, or that the aliens inhabited Jesus' body during the crucifixion, or that the aliens helped in the resurrection. As Christians, we need to call a Timeout and look at what Paul said:
"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned" (Galatians 1:8).
"Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve" (1 Corinthians 15:1-5).
The work of the cross is everything. "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved, it is the power of God" (1 Corinthians 1:18).
The Increasing UFO Wave - NephilimFree
Return of the Nephilim - Dr. Chuck Missler
Politics, Prophecy and the Supernatural by L.A. Marzulli
L.A. Marzulli on the Anasazi
Alien Agenda and the Mark of the Beast
Abductions and the Name of Jesus
Mischievous Angels or Sethites?
The following is from www.KHouse.org. The Fair Use Law allows us to teach from it without violating copyright laws.
by, Dr. Chuck Missler
Why did God send the judgment of the Flood in the days of Noah? Far more than simply a historical issue, the unique events leading to the Flood are a prerequisite to understanding the prophetic implications of our Lord's predictions regarding His Second Coming.1
The strange events recorded in Genesis 6 were understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, as well as the Septuagint translators, as referring to fallen angels procreating weird hybrid offspring with human women-known as the "Nephilim." So it was also understood by the early church fathers. These bizarre events are also echoed in the legends and myths of every ancient culture upon the earth: the ancient Greeks, the Egyptians, the Hindus, the South Sea Islanders, the American Indians, and virtually all the others.
However, many students of the Bible have been taught that this passage in Genesis 6 actually refers to a failure to keep the "faithful" lines of Seth separatefrom the "worldly" line of Cain. The idea has been advanced that after Cain killed Abel, the line of Seth remained separate and faithful, but the line of Cain turned ungodly and rebellious. The "Sons of God" are deemed to refer to leadership in the line of Seth; the "daughters of men" is deemed restricted to the line of Cain. The resulting marriages ostensibly blurred an inferred separation between them. (Why the resulting offspring are called the "Nephilim" remains without any clear explanation.)
Since Jesus prophesied, "As the days of Noah were, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be,"2 it becomes essential to understand what these days included.
Origin of the Sethite View
It was in the 5th century a.d. that the "angel" interpretation of Genesis 6 was increasingly viewed as an embarrassment when attacked by critics. (Furthermore, the worship of angels had begun within the church. Also, celibacy had also become an institution of the church. The "angel" view of Genesis 6 was feared as impacting these views.)
Celsus and Julian the Apostate used the traditional "angel" belief to attack Christianity. Julius Africanus resorted to the Sethite interpretation as a more comfortable ground. Cyril of Alexandria also repudiated the orthodox "angel" position with the "line of Seth" interpretation. Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages. It is still widely taught today among many churches who find the literal "angel" view a bit disturbing. There are many outstanding Bible teachers who still defend this view.
Problems with the Sethite View
Beyond obscuring a full understanding of the events in the early chapters of Genesis, this view also clouds any opportunity to apprehend the prophetic implications of the Scriptural allusions to the "Days of Noah."3 Some of the many problems with the "Sethite View" include the following:
1. The Text Itself
Substantial liberties must be taken with the literal text to propose the "Sethite" view. (In data analysis, it is often said that "if you torture the data severely enough it will confess to anything.")
The term translated "the Sons of God" is, in the Hebrew, B'nai HaElohim, "Sons of Elohim," which is a termconsistently used in the Old Testament for angels,4 and it is never used of believers in the Old Testament. It was so understood by the ancient rabbinical sources, by the Septuagint translators in the 3rd century before Christ, and by the early church fathers. Attempts to apply this term to "godly leadership" is without Scriptural foundation.5
The "Sons of Seth and daughters of Cain" interpretation strains and obscures the intended grammatical antithesis between the Sons of God and the daughters of Adam. Attempting to impute any other view to the text flies in the face of the earlier centuries of understanding of the Hebrew text among both rabbinical and early church scholarship. The lexicographical antithesis clearly intends to establish a contrast between the "angels" and the women of the Earth.
If the text was intended to contrast the "sons of Seth and the daughters of Cain," why didn't it say so? Seth was not God, and Cain was not Adam. (Why not the "sons of Cain" and the "daughters of Seth?" There is no basis for restricting the text to either subset of Adam's descendants. Further, there exists no mention of daughters of Elohim.)
And how does the "Sethite" interpretation contribute to the ostensible cause for the Flood, which is the primary thrust of the text? The entire view is contrived on a series of assumptions without Scriptural support.
The Biblical term "Sons of Elohim" (that is, of the Creator Himself), is confined to the direct creation by the divine hand and not to those born to those of their own order.6 In Luke's genealogy of Jesus, only Adam is called a "son of God."7 The entire Biblical drama deals with the tragedy that humankind is a fallen race, with Adam's initial immortality forfeited. Christ uniquely gives them that receive Him the power to become the sons of God.8 Being born again of the Spirit of God, as an entirely new creation,9 at their resurrection they alone will be clothed with a building of God10 and in every respect equal to the angels.11 The very term oiketerion, alluding to the heavenly body with which the believer longs to be clothed, is the precise term used for the heavenly bodies from which the fallen angels had disrobed.12
The attempt to apply the term "Sons of Elohim" in a broader sense has no textual basis and obscures the precision of its denotative usage. This proves to be an assumption which is antagonistic to the uniform Biblical usage of the term.
2. The Daughters of Cain
The "Daughters of Adam" also does not denote a restriction to the descendants of Cain, but rather the whole human race is clearly intended. These daughters were the daughters born to the men with which this very sentence opens:
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. Genesis 6:1,2
It is clear from the text that these daughters were not limited a particular family or subset, but were, indeed, from (all) the Benoth Adam, "the daughters of Adam." There is no apparent exclusion of the daughters of Seth. Or were they so without charms in contrast with the daughters of Cain? All of Adam's female descendants seem to have been involved. (And what about the "sons of Adam?" Where do they, using this contrived dichotomy, fit in?)
Furthermore, the line of Cain was not necessarily known for its ungodliness. From a study of the naming of Cain's children, many of which included the name of God,13 it is not clear that they were all necessarily unfaithful.
3. The Inferred Lines of Separation
The concept of separate "lines" itself is suspect and contrary to Scripture.14 National and racial distinctions were plainly the result of the subsequent intervention of God in Genesis 11, five chapters later. There is no intimation that the lines of Seth and Cain kept themselves separate nor were even instructed to. The injunction to remain separate was given much later.15 Genesis 6:12 confirms that all flesh had corrupted His way upon the earth.
4. The Inferred Godliness of Seth
There is no evidence, stated or implied, that the line of Seth was godly. Only one person was translated from the judgment to come (Enoch) and only eight were given the protection of the ark. No one beyond Noah's immediate family was accounted worthy to be saved. In fact, the text implies that these were distinct from all others. (There is no evidence that the wives of Noah's sons were from the line of Seth.) Even so, Gaebelein observes, "The designation 'Sons of God' is never applied in the Old Testament to believers," whose sonship is "distinctly a New Testament revelation."16
The "Sons of Elohim" saw the daughters of men that they were fair and took them wives of all that they chose. It appears that the women had little say in the matter. The domineering implication hardly suggests a godly approach to the union. Even the mention that they saw that they were attractive seems out of place if only normal biology was involved. (And were the daughters of Seth so unattractive?)
It should also be pointed out that the son of Seth himself was Enosh, and there is textual evidence that, rather than a reputation for piety, he seems to have initiated the profaning of the name of God.17
If the lines of Seth were so faithful, why did they perish in the flood?
5. The Unnatural Offspring
The most fatal flaw in the specious "Sethite" view is the emergence of the Nephilim as a result of the unions. (Bending the translation to "giants" does not resolve the difficulties.) It is the offspring of these peculiar unions in Genesis 6:4 which seems to be cited as a primary cause for the Flood.
Procreation by parents of differing religious views do not produce unnatural offspring. Believers marrying unbelievers may produce "monsters," but hardly superhuman, or unnatural, children! It was this unnatural procreation and the resulting abnormal creatures that were designated as a principal reason for the judgment of the Flood.
The very absence of any such adulteration of the human genealogy in Noah's case is also documented in Genesis 6:9: Noah's family tree was distinctively unblemished. The term used, tamiym, is used for physicalblemishes.18
Why were the offspring uniquely designated "mighty" and "men of reknown?" This description characterizing the children is not accounted for if the fathers were merely men, even if godly.
A further difficulty seems to be that the offspring were only men; no "women of reknown" are mentioned. (Was there a chromosome deficiency among the Sethites? Were there only "Y" chromosomes available in this line?)19
6. New Testament Confirmations
"In the mouths of two or three witnesses every word shall be established."20 In Biblical matters, it is essential to always compare Scripture with Scripture. The New Testament confirmations in Jude and 2 Peter are impossible to ignore.21
For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell [Tartarus], and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 2 Peter 2:4-5
Peter's comments even establishes the time of the fall of these angels to the days of the Flood of Noah.
Even Peter's vocabulary is provocative. Peter uses the term Tartarus, here translated "hell." This is the only place that this Greek term appears in the Bible. Tartarus is a Greek term for "dark abode of woe"; "the pit of darkness in the unseen world." As used in Homer's Iliad, it is "...as far beneath hades as the earth is below heaven`."22 In Greek mythology, some of the demigods, Chronos and the rebel Titans, were said to have rebelled against their father, Uranus, and after a prolonged contest they were defeated by Zeus and were condemned into Tartarus.
The Epistle of Jude23 also alludes to the strange episodes when these "alien" creatures intruded themselves into the human reproductive process:
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Jude 6,7
The allusions to "going after strange flesh," keeping "not their first estate," having "left their own habitation," and "giving themselves over to fornication," seem to clearly fit the alien intrusions of Genesis 6. (The term for habitation, oivkhth,rion, refers to their heavenly bodies from which they had disrobed.24)
These allusions from the New Testament would seem to be fatal to the "Sethite" alternative in interpreting Genesis 6. If the intercourse between the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" were merely marriage between Sethites and Cainites, it seems impossible to explain these passages, and the reason why some fallen angels are imprisoned and others are free to roam the heavenlies.
7. Post-Flood Implications
The strange offspring also continued after the flood: "There were Nephilim in the earth in those days, and also after that..."25 The "Sethite" view fails to meaningfully address the prevailing conditions "also after that." It offers no insight into the presence of the subsequent "giants" in the land of Canaan.
One of the disturbing aspects of the Old Testament record was God's instructions, upon entering the land of Canaan, to wipe out every man, woman, and child of certain tribes inhabiting the land. This is difficult to justify without the insight of a "gene pool problem" from the remaining Nephilim, Rephaim, et al., which seems to illuminate the difficulty.
8. Prophetic Implications
Another reason that an understanding of Genesis 6 is so essential is that it also is a prerequisite to understanding (and anticipating) Satan's devices26 and, in particular, the specific delusions to come upon the whole earth as a major feature of end-time prophecy.27 We will take up these topics in Part 2, "The Return Of The Nephilim.")
If one takes an integrated view of the Scripture, then everything in it should "tie together." It is the author's view that the "Angel View," however disturbing, is the clear, direct presentation of the Biblical text, corroborated by multiple New Testament references and was so understood by both early Jewish and Christian scholarship; the "Sethite View" is a contrivance of convenience from a network of unjustified assumptions antagonistic to the remainder of the Biblical record.
It should also be pointed out that most conservative Bible scholars accept the "angel" view.28 Among those supporting the "angel" view are: G. H. Pember, M. R. DeHaan, C. H. McIntosh, F. Delitzsch, A. C. Gaebelein, A. W. Pink, Donald Grey Barnhouse, Henry Morris, Merril F. Unger, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Hal Lindsey, and Chuck Smith, being among the best known.
For those who take the Bible seriously, the arguments supporting the "Angel View" appear compelling. For those who indulge in a willingness to take liberties with the straightforward presentation of the text, no defense can prove final. (And greater dangers than the implications attending these issues await them!)
For further exploration of this critical topic, see the following:
- George Hawkins Pember, Earth's Earliest Ages, first published by Hodder and Stoughton in 1875, and presently available by Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids MI, 1975.
- John Fleming, The Fallen Angels and the Heroes of Mythology, Hodges, Foster, and Figgis, Dublin, 1879.
- Henry Morris, The Genesis Record, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids MI, 1976.
- Merrill F. Unger, Biblical Demonology, Scripture Press, Chicago IL, 1952.
- Clarence Larkin, Spirit World, Rev. Clarence Larkin Estate, Philadelphia PA, 1921.
- Matthew 24:37.
- Matthew 24:37.
- Matthew 24:37; Luke 17:26, as well as Old Testament allusions such as Daniel 2:43, et al.
- Cf. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 (where they are in existence before the creation of the earth). Jesus also implies the same term in Luke 20:36.
- A footnote in an edition of the famed Scofield Bible, in suggesting that "sons of Elohim" does not always denote angelic beings, points to one ostensible exception (Isaiah 43:6) but the term in question is not there used! God simply refers to Israel as "my sons" and "my daughters." Indeed, all of Adam's race are termed God's "offspring" in Acts 17:28 (although Paul is here quoting a Greek poet).
- The sons of Elohim are even contrasted with the sons of Adam in Psalm 82:1, 6 and warned that if they go on with the evil identified in verse 2, they would die like Adam (man). When our Lord quoted this verse (John 10:34) He made no mention of what order of beings God addressed in this Psalm but that the Word of God was inviolate whether the beings in question were angels or men.
- Luke 3:38.
- John 1:11, 12.
- 2 Corinthians 5:17.
- 2 Corinthians 5:1-4.
- Luke 20:36.
- This term appears only twice in the Bible: 2 Corinthians 5:2 and Jude 1:6.
- Genesis 4:18.
- Genesis 11:6.
- This instruction was given to the descendants of Isaac and Jacob. Even the presumed descendants of Ishmael cannot demonstrate their linkage since no separation was maintained.
- A.C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (Penteteuch), p. 29.
- Gen 4:26 is widely regarded as a mistranslation: "Then began men to profane the name of the Lord." So agrees the venerated Targum of Onkelos; the Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel; also the esteemed rabbinical sources such as Kimchi, Rashi, et al. Also, Jerome. Also, the famed Maimonides, Commentary on the Mishnah, 1168 a.d.
- Exodus 12:5, 29; Leviticus 1:3, 10; 3:1, 6; 4:3, 23; 5:15, 18, 25; 22:19, 21; 23:12; Numbers 6:14; et al. Over 60 references, usually referring to the freedom from physical blemishes of offerings.
- Each human gamete has 23 pairs of chromosomes: the male has both "Y" (shorter) and "X" (longer) chromosomes; the female, only "X" chromosomes. The sex of a fertilized egg is determined by the sperm fertilizing the egg: "X+Y" for a male child; "X+X" for a female. Thus, the male supplies thesex-determining chromosome.
- Deut. 19:15; Matthew 18:16; 26:60; 2 Corinthians 13:1; et al.
- Jude 6, 7; 2 Peter 2:4-5.
- Homer, Iliad, viii 16.
- Jude is commonly recognized as one of the Lord's brothers. (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; Gal 1:9; Jude 1:1.)
- The only other use in the New Testament is 2 Corinthians 5:2, alluding to the heavenly body which the believer longs to be clothed.
- Genesis 6:4.
- 2 Corinthians 2:11.
- Luke 21:26; 2 Thess 2:9, 11; et al.
- The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Vol V, p.2835-2836.
Satan's Purpose in Producing the Nephilim
The following is from www.SteveQuayle.com. The Fair Use Law allows us to teach from it without violating copyright laws.
It was the purpose of Satan and his fallen angels to corrupt the human race and thereby do away with pure Adamite stock through whom the seed of the woman should come.
This would avert their own doom and make it possible for Satan and his kingdom to keep control of the planet earth indefinitely. It was said to Adam and Eve that the seed of the woman should defeat Satan and restore man's dominion.
Nephilim of Long Ago
The following photos are from www.SteveQuayle.com. The Fair Use Law allows us to use them to inform without violating copyright laws.
An article from Strand magazine (December,1895) reprinted in "Traces of the Elder Faiths of Ireland" by W.G. Wood- Martin mentions this fossilized giant discovered during mining operations in County Antrim, Ireland: "Pre-eminent among the most extraordinary articles ever held by a railway company is the fossilized Irish giant, which is at this moment lying at the London and North-Western Railway Company's Broad street goods depot, and a photograph of which is reproduced here. . . This monstrous figure is reputed to have been dug up by a Mr. Dyer whilst prospecting for iron ore in County Antrim. The principal measurements are: entire length, 12ft. 2in.; girth of chest, 6ft. 6in.; and length of arms, 4ft. 6in. There are six toes on the right foot. The gross weight is 2 tons 15cwt.; so that it took half a dozen men and a powerful crane to place this article of lost property in position for the Strandmagazine artist. Dyer, after showing the giant in Dublin, came to England with his queer find and exhibited it in Liverpool and Manchester at sixpence, sixpence a head, attracting scientific men as well as gaping sightseers."
Heights of Nephilim Compared to Modern Man
The following diagram and information associated with it are from www.SteveQuayle.com. The Fair Use Law allows us to teach from these without violating copyright laws.
Present day modern man which averages about 6-feet tall + or - several inches or more.
15-foot human skeleton found in southeast Turkey in late 1950's in the Euphrates valley during road construction. Many tombs containing giants were uncovered here. This pertains to the picture of the giant human femur above.
Maximinus Thrax Ceaser of Rome 235-238 A.D. This was an 8' 6" skeleton.
Goliath was about 9 feet + or - a few inches. I Samuel 17:4 late 11th century.
King Og spoken of in Deuteronomy 3:11 whose iron bedstead was approximately 14-feet by 6-feet wide. King Og was at least 12-feet tall, yet some claim up to 18.
A 19'6" human skeleton found in 1577 A.D. under an overturned oak tree in the Canton of Lucerne.
23-foot tall skeleton found in 1456 A.D. beside a river in Valence, France.
A 25' 6 " skeleton found in 1613 A.D. near the castle of Chaumont in France. This was claimed to be a nearly complete find.
Almost beyond comprehension or believability was the find of the two separate 36-foot human remains uncovered by Carthaginians somewhere between 200-600 B.C.