If we start with many of our English Bible translations, it can sound like the Bible clearly says the Nephilim were “giants.”

But when we slow down and look at the Hebrew text itself, things are not that simple.

The word nephilim appears only three times in the Old Testament: Genesis 6:4 once, and Numbers 13:33 twice. That’s it. Nowhere are they directly defined as “giants,” “fallen ones,” or anything else. We have to pay careful attention to the context.

Genesis 6:4 and the Nephilim in Context

“The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men (gibbōrîm) who were of old, the men of renown.” (ESV)

A few key observations: Nephilim are treated as a known group: “The Nephilim were on the earth…” They are somehow linked to the union of the “sons of God” and the “daughters of man.” They are associated with “the mighty men” (gibbōrîm), “men of renown”—famous, powerful figures.

Genesis 6 never actually says “they were giants.” It ties the Nephilim to power, might, and fame, not directly to height. In the ancient world, very large warriors often became legendary, so size and might can go together—but the text doesn’t spell that out. For readers wanting to explore broader discussion of giants in the Bible, see for example resources from Biblical Archaeology Society or Answers in Genesis.

Numbers 13:33 and the “Grasshopper” Comparison

“And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.” (ESV)

Here, the Israelite spies report that they saw Nephilim in Canaan and link them with the “sons of Anak.” They felt like “grasshoppers” in comparison—clearly evoking extreme size or overwhelming power. This is the strongest biblical passage that pushes interpreters toward “giants.”

Even if the spies are exaggerating out of fear, their comparison implies extraordinary stature or might. This fits with later mentions of giant‑like opponents such as the Anakim, Rephaim, and figures like Og of Bashan and Goliath. Some archaeological and background discussion of these “giant clans” can be found at Associates for Biblical Research.

How Modern English Bibles Handle “Nephilim”

Because the Hebrew word is rare and debated, English Bibles handle it differently. Some keep the Hebrew term “Nephilim” (ESV, NIV, CSB), often with a footnote: “Or giants.” Some older translations render it “giants” directly (KJV, NKJV).

So the Bible itself gives us a strange, rare term—nephilim—with strong associations with might, renown, and a fearsome presence, plus one passage where human observers feel tiny, like grasshoppers, beside them. But it does not define the word as “giants” in a dictionary‑like way. To understand why many Bibles still choose “giants,” we have to look at the word itself and then at how ancient translators read it.

Does Nephilim Mean “Fallen Ones” or “Giants”? The Word Itself

If you’ve heard people say, “The Hebrew proves Nephilim means ‘fallen ones,’ not ‘giants,’” the reality is more complicated. The root of the word leans one way, but the form and usage are odd enough that we can’t be dogmatic.

The Hebrew Root Naphal – “To Fall”

Most scholars agree that nephilim is related to the Hebrew root naphal, which means “to fall.” That’s why many teachers and popular books say Nephilim = “fallen ones.” That reading fits some big biblical themes, like rebellion and “fall” from a proper place and the context of Genesis 6 (a world filled with violence and corruption).

But if you try to form a normal Hebrew noun meaning “fallen ones” from naphal, nephilim is not what you’d expect. As one answer on Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange summarized (drawing on Hebrew grammarians and Michael Heiser’s work), you’d expect something more like nophlim (“those who fall”) or nephulim (a regular passive “fallen ones”). Instead we get nephilim, which doesn’t fit cleanly into standard patterns.

As that Stack Exchange summary notes, if you start by assuming nephilim means “fallen ones” and then work backwards to make the grammar fit, you’re “begging the question”—assuming what you’re trying to prove. So the root idea “fall” is very plausible, but the exact form nephilim is linguistically odd if it’s just Hebrew for “fallen ones.”

The Aramaic Naphil as “Giant”

There is another route. In Aramaic (a language closely related to Hebrew and used widely in the exilic and post‑exilic period), we actually do find the noun naphil with the meaning “giant.” This has led some scholars to suggest that Nephilim may be an Aramaic loanword brought into Hebrew. Later editors in a time when Aramaic was common (like the Babylonian exile) could have imported the term and then “Hebraized” its ending.

In that case, the underlying word naphil would mean “giant,” not “fallen,” and the Hebrew form nephilim would preserve that meaning while being shaped to sound like a Hebrew plural. This is one of the key arguments summarized in that Hermeneutics Stack Exchange discussion: the Aramaic naphil gives real linguistic support for “giants” as a lexical meaning, not just a guess based on myth. For a popular‑level overview of the “giants” view, you can see articles like GotQuestions on the Nephilim.

Spelling Details in Numbers 13:33

In Numbers 13:33, one of the occurrences of nephilim is spelled with an extra letter yod—a mater lectionis, a consonant used to mark a long vowel. That spelling points toward a pronunciation like nēphîlîm, which again doesn’t line up neatly with a straightforward Hebrew passive form from naphal.

On its own, that’s not a slam dunk, but it adds to the pile of evidence that the word is linguistically unusual and that we shouldn’t pretend we can “solve” it with a simple dictionary entry.

What We Can and Can’t Say About the Lexical Meaning

Putting the pieces together, the root naphal (“to fall”) is clearly in the background, making “fallen ones” thematically attractive. The actual noun form nephilim is irregular if we treat it as a simple Hebrew passive from naphal, while Aramaic evidence for naphil meaning “giant” gives real support to a “giants” sense in Hebrew.

Many careful scholars today will say something like this: “fallen ones” is possible and may echo a theological idea, “giants” has strong support from the broader Semitic language family and from how ancient translators understood the term, and the etymology is uncertain enough that we should hold our conclusions with open hands.

Which brings us to the key turning point: how did ancient translators, much closer to the language and culture, actually render nephilim?

Why Ancient Translators and Traditions Chose “Giants”

The main reason “giants” appears in so many Bibles is not because of modern fantasy or Hollywood. It’s because the earliest major translation of the Old Testament—the Greek Septuagint—and the larger biblical context push strongly in that direction.

The Septuagint: Nephilim as Greek Gigantes

When Jewish scholars translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek (the Septuagint, usually abbreviated LXX) a couple of centuries before Christ, they had to decide what to do with nephilim. In both Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33, they translated it as gigantes (plural of gigās).

In classical Greek, gigantes refers to “giants,” but more broadly it can also carry the sense of powerful, earth‑shaking beings. Still, for ordinary Greek speakers, the word naturally suggests very large, mighty figures. So from at least the 2nd–3rd century BC onward, Greek‑speaking Jews were reading Genesis 6 and Numbers 13 with the word “giants” right there in their Bibles.

This matters because these translators were native speakers of ancient Hebrew and Aramaic, lived much closer to the culture and interpretive traditions than we do, and their choice tells us how they thought a Hebrew reader would understand nephilim. As one answer on Hermeneutics Stack Exchange put it, the LXX is not just “tradition”; it is early, informed exegesis by people who knew the language well.

Numbers 13:33 and Giant‑Like Opponents in Israel’s Memory

The Septuagint’s choice of gigantes flows especially from Numbers 13:33: “We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.” Even if the spies are afraid and exaggerating (and the rest of the narrative suggests they are), their language is chosen to paint a picture of overwhelming size and strength.

In the ancient world, powerful warriors and unusually tall people tended to be remembered as “giants,” whether or not they were twenty feet tall. Later in Israel’s story we meet Og king of Bashan, whose bed is described in Deuteronomy 3:11 as unusually large, giant‑clans like the Rephaim and Anakim (Deuteronomy 2–3; Joshua 11:21–22), and Goliath of Gath, described as far taller and stronger than average (1 Samuel 17—depending on textual tradition, around 6½ to 9 feet tall).

These figures become linked in Israel’s memory. The land of Canaan is remembered as a place where very large, battle‑hardened warriors lived and were associated with old, fearsome peoples like the Anakim and Rephaim. The spies’ “grasshopper” metaphor, in that cultural setting, naturally points toward the language of “giants”—even if their fear magnified the threat in their own minds. For a contrasting skeptical perspective on “biblical giants,” see, for example, the discussion at the National Center for Science Education: “Giants and Biblical Literalism”.

Second Temple Jewish Literature and Giant Traditions

During the Second Temple period (roughly 500 BC–AD 70), Jewish writers expanded the Genesis 6 story. Non‑canonical works like 1 Enoch and Jubilees are not Scripture, but they show us how many Jews in that time understood Genesis 6 and the Nephilim.

For example, in 1 Enoch 7–8, the “Watchers” (rebel angels) descend, take human women, and have offspring. These offspring are described explicitly as enormous, violent giants who devour everything, then turn to bloodshed and even cannibalism. Whatever we make of the details, this tradition clearly reads Genesis 6 as describing hybrid offspring and understands those offspring as both physically gigantic and morally monstrous.

Jude and 2 Peter in the New Testament echo this Watchers tradition when they mention angels who sinned, left their proper dwelling, and are now in chains (Jude 6; 2 Peter 2:4–5). They do not feel the need to correct the “giant” association. For a narrative‑style exploration of this tradition and related ideas, see the episode “Unveiling the Nephilim” from the Weird Stuff in the Bible podcast (transcript here).

Early Jewish and Christian Interpreters on the Nephilim

Writers like Philo of Alexandria and Josephus (1st century Jewish authors) and later early church fathers read benei elohim (“sons of God”) as angels and Nephilim as their giant offspring. Josephus writes in Antiquities 1.3.1 that “many angels of God accompanied with women, and begat sons that proved unjust… for the tradition is, that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants.”

He assumes a connection between the Nephilim, Greek giant myths, and real, unusually powerful, violent figures remembered from the past. Early Christian writers like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian also take for granted that Genesis 6 is about angels and giant offspring, even as they strongly condemn these beings as rebels, not heroes.

In other words, “giants” was not a later medieval fantasy reading. It was the natural way ancient Jews and Christians described these beings, given the biblical context and the LXX. At the same time, not all traditions agreed, and later views like the “sons of Seth” interpretation show that the debate continued—something surveyed in many modern overviews, such as teaching articles from various churches (for example, Woodside Bible’s summary on the Nephilim).

Which Translation Is Best: Nephilim, “Fallen Ones,” or “Giants”?

For modern Bible readers and teachers, we have three main options: translate the word (“fallen ones” or “giants”), transliterate the word (“Nephilim”), or use combinations that keep Nephilim in the text and explain “fallen ones/giants” in notes.

Strengths and Weaknesses of “Fallen Ones”

“Fallen ones” matches the obvious Hebrew root naphal (“to fall”), connects well with the theme of rebellion—beings who have fallen from their proper place, whether heavenly beings or powerful human rulers—and reinforces the moral corruption in Genesis 6, where both heaven and earth are in revolt against God.

But the actual form nephilim is not what you’d expect for a simple Hebrew “fallen ones,” and as the Stack Exchange discussion notes, you have to do some grammatical gymnastics to make it work. It does not, by itself, explain the strong size imagery in Numbers 13:33 (“we seemed like grasshoppers”). In practice, “fallen ones” works better as a theological description (fallen/rebel beings), not a tight lexical translation.

Strengths and Weaknesses of “Giants”

“Giants” matches how the Septuagint translators understood nephilim (gigantes), fits naturally with Numbers 13:33’s fear‑filled comparison and with the broader biblical pattern of unusually large opponents (Anakim, Rephaim, Og, Goliath), and lines up with the Aramaic naphil meaning “giant,” suggesting this sense was in circulation in ancient Semitic usage. It also follows a very long and deep interpretive tradition in both Judaism and Christianity.

Its weaknesses are that it can overspecify what the Hebrew text leaves somewhat open, in modern ears it can easily pull us into sensationalism or exaggerated claims rather than the sober biblical picture, and it may encourage readers to focus only on physical size and miss the spiritual and moral dimensions of the story. Some ministries warn against connecting Nephilim discussion to speculative ideas about modern “giant DNA” or conspiratorial narratives; for a short cautionary example, see GotQuestions on Nephilim today.

Why Many Modern Translations Keep “Nephilim”

This is why many careful modern translations have chosen to keep “Nephilim” in the main text and to use footnotes like: “Nephilim; traditionally, giants” or “Nephilim; possibly ‘fallen ones’.” That approach respects the fact that nephilim is a rare, debated term, avoids pretending that the meaning is fully settled, and still informs the reader of the two major streams of understanding: fallenness and giant‑like power/size.

For teaching, writing, and discipleship, using the word Nephilim and then explaining that the root likely involves “falling,” the traditions and early translations strongly point toward giant‑like mighty warriors, and Scripture itself never gives a dictionary definition, allows readers to feel the tension rather than smoothing it out. The ambiguity is not an accident; it forces us to read context carefully and to resist building entire belief systems on a single mysterious word.

Why This Translation Question Matters for Following Christ

All of this might feel very technical. Why does it matter if we say “Nephilim,” “fallen ones,” or “giants,” as long as we love Jesus? It matters, not because your salvation hangs on this word, but because it teaches us how to read Scripture and how to see Christ in the whole story.

Nephilim at the Crossroads of Rebellion

Genesis 6:1–8 shows the world reaching a breaking point: human sin is spiraling out of control, violence fills the earth, the “sons of God” cross boundaries they were not meant to cross, and the Nephilim stand as visible symbols of that mixture of power and corruption. Whether we stress “fallen ones” or “giants,” the Nephilim represent a dark intersection between the heavenly and earthly realms and a picture of what happens when spiritual rebellion and human sin feed each other.

New Testament passages like Jude 6–7 and 2 Peter 2:4–9 look back at this episode, mentioning angels who did not keep their proper position, a world judged by the flood, and Sodom and Gomorrah judged for extreme sexual immorality. Peter and Jude are not asking us to become obsessed with the Nephilim. They are saying that God really judges rebellion—human and angelic—and also preserves a faithful remnant—like Noah. We should walk in humility and obedience, not in the arrogance of these “mighty ones.”

Christ the Faithful Son of God

Genesis 6 shows “sons of God” (whether angels or powerful rulers under heavenly authority) abusing their place: they take, corrupt, and destroy, using power to magnify themselves. In sharp contrast, the New Testament reveals Jesus as the true Son of God who did not grasp for power (Philippians 2:5–8), who took on flesh not to corrupt humanity, but to redeem it, and who “disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame” at the cross (Colossians 2:15).

Where the wayward sons fell, the true Son stood faithful. Where the Nephilim are associated with violence and terror, Christ is associated with peace, mercy, and victory over evil powers. Wrestling with nephilim teaches us to read the Bible slowly, in context, to listen to ancient translations and traditions without letting them overrule Scripture, and to hold mystery without panic, resisting wild speculation.

Let Translation Debates Drive Us Deeper into Scripture

If our study of the Nephilim does not lead us to greater trust in God’s justice and mercy, to deeper gratitude for Christ’s victory over sin and the powers, and to more careful, humble Bible reading, then we’re missing the point. Fascinating word studies like this should serve a bigger goal: to help us know the God who judges rebellion and yet provides rescue, to train us in slow, contextual Bible reading, and to remind us that every strange corner of Scripture ultimately points us, not to speculation, but to Jesus—the faithful Son of God who did not fall, who is no “giant” of terror, but the Savior who stoops low to lift us up.

Conclusion: Why “Giants” Isn’t Crazy—and Why “Nephilim” Is Often Better

Pulling the threads together, “giants” is not a random, myth‑driven translation. It grows from the Septuagint’s gigantes, from the “grasshopper” imagery of Numbers 13:33, from Aramaic naphil meaning “giant,” and from a long tradition linking the Nephilim to unusually powerful, often oversized warriors. “Fallen ones” rests on a real Hebrew root—naphal, “to fall”—and fits big biblical themes of rebellion and judgment. But the exact form nephilim doesn’t neatly match a standard Hebrew “fallen ones” noun, so we should be cautious about claiming the grammar “proves” that meaning.

Transliterating Nephilim and explaining the debate is often the most faithful approach. It lets the Hebrew word stand, alerts readers that this term is unusual and debated, and then allows teachers and study notes to unfold the two main lines of understanding—fallenness and giant‑like might—without oversimplifying. What remains uncertain is the precise etymology of nephilim (Hebrew only? Aramaic loanword? A blend?) and how much physical size versus spiritual “fallenness” the term originally carried in the minds of the earliest hearers.

What remains clear is that Genesis 6 places the Nephilim at a moment of deep spiritual and human rebellion, that God responds with righteous judgment and saving mercy (the flood and the rescue of Noah), and that the New Testament looks back on that rebellion mainly to highlight God’s justice and to prepare us to see Christ’s victory over all such powers. For further reading from a range of perspectives—conservative, skeptical, and popular‑level—you can survey resources like Biblical Archaeology Society, Answers in Genesis, various church blogs, and critical reviews such as those at the NCSE.

Handled well, the Nephilim question doesn’t drag us into conspiracy theories or speculation. Instead, it nudges us toward a more robust, historically aware, Christ‑centered way of reading the Bible’s strangest passages.