Giants, Enoch, and the 3 Top Misconceptions about Revelation
with Dre Binley
Anthony Delgado and Dre Binley explore the controversial topic of giants, with Anthony affirming their biblical and symbolic significance while noting the importance of reading Scripture within its full cosmological framework. He argues that giants represent tyranny and rebellion against God, and that their meaning is more theological than archaeological. The conversation then shifts to Revelation, where Anthony cautions against rigid interpretive systems, preferring to read the book as a symbolic narrative that combines myth and history to reveal the conflict between earthly kingdoms and Christ’s kingdom. He contrasts covenant theology with dispensationalism, affirming one consistent people of God and highlighting how Revelation ties into the broader biblical story. They discuss common misconceptions—that Revelation is scary, entirely future, or unnecessary—and reframe it as deeply pastoral and hopeful, especially when read through chapters 21–22. Finally, Anthony emphasizes that his interest in giants, Revelation, and related texts is ultimately about the gospel: God’s plan to redeem, transform, and restore humanity into his eternal family through Christ.
Dre Binley: I haven’t yet covered the huge, complicated topic of giants on my podcast—what they were, whether they literally existed, and the views Christians hold about them. Some even claim they still exist. Should we go there?
Anthony Delgado: We can. I actually spent the first nine episodes of the Biblical Re-Enchantment podcast on that topic. From a biblical-theological standpoint—reading the Bible’s own narrative to interpret its meaning—I think we should believe that giants existed. But to stay consistent with the biblical storyline, I also think we should accept its full cosmology, which includes a young creation and even a flat earth. That sounds shocking, but here’s why: the Bible’s narrative is intentional in what it communicates. To deny parts of it undermines the theology built on it. For example, if you assume there were people before Adam and Eve, you unravel Paul’s teaching that Adam is the first man, the one compared to Christ. The biblical story depends on Adam being created in righteousness and filled with God’s Spirit.
So we believe the biblical storyline, even if we hold it in tension with science. I think science teaches an old earth and a round globe, and I don’t see that as deception. But when reading Scripture, I want to understand the Bible’s cosmology—a three-tiered universe of heaven above, earth in the middle, and the underworld below. That cosmology is theological, helping us discern how to order our lives under heaven rather than under the earth. Genesis 1 isn’t mainly about explaining how God created but declaring who created: Yahweh made all things. That’s the point.
When it comes to giants, their role in the narrative is symbolic as well as historical. People resist believing in giants because we don’t see anything like that today. Maybe some were only seven feet tall—something common now. But in the literature, giants are depicted as sexually immoral, tyrannical rulers, even cannibalistic, because that represented the most terrifying form of oppression in the ancient world. Their portrayal reflects the worst kind of tyranny. So I’d say, do we still see tyrannical leaders today? If so, those are giants. That’s how we should understand their symbolism.
Should we expect archaeologists to uncover giant skeletons? Maybe, maybe not. It doesn’t change the meaning. The giants are meant to teach us about tyranny and rebellion against God.
Dre Binley: That’s an important point. It’s a spiritual principle—learning from examples of tyranny and how to combat them with God’s help. I’m glad you explained it, because I’ve avoided trying to. But I do hope, in future episodes, to dive more into those topics—like how we think about the three-tiered heaven in a modern context, or how different Christians understand giants. Not to tell listeners which view to take, but to at least open the conversation. Did you have anything else to add?
Anthony Delgado: I have volumes more, but that’s probably enough for this podcast. I’ll just link to my book and podcast for anyone who wants to go deeper.
Dre Binley: Perfect. So I’d like to ask you more about Revelation. You have much more background in ancient context than I do. Do you lean toward any particular interpretive lens? For example, there’s the idealist, preterist, historicist, futurist or literalist approaches, and then the debates over tribulation timing, whether it’s cyclical or linear, physical or metaphorical. How do you read Revelation?
Anthony Delgado: The first thing I do is try to avoid lenses—or systems. If pressed, I’d say I lean amillennial, covenantal, with elements of idealism and partial preterism. But I think the danger of claiming a system is that you end up forcing Scripture through it. One of my presuppositions when reading the Bible is that I won’t fully understand it—that’s what keeps me coming back. Subscribing to a rigid system puts blinders on.
My church background shaped this. I grew up in a Baptistic, Bible church environment—very fundamentalist and rules-oriented. Later it shifted toward a megachurch model, which was essentially another form of fundamentalism, focused on self-help and practical tips. Both made everything about what you do rather than who Christ is. While most leaders would have identified as premillennial dispensationalists—reading Left Behind and showing us A Thief in the Night movies—I was never really taught eschatology. I thought those movies were nonsense. I read Scripture as a teen and just didn’t see that picture there.
As I grew in theology, I remained skeptical of that tradition and ended up closer to the early church fathers and early Reformers. I think I’d fit well with either group. To me, the real question isn’t simply whether Revelation is literal or metaphorical, but how myth and history interact. Myth doesn’t mean false—it means something not easily explained in physical terms. History, meanwhile, traces events and patterns. Biblical writers often mythologized events to convey theological truth.
So when Revelation describes beasts rising from the sea, the point isn’t that we should fear the ocean. It’s symbolic, like in Daniel, where beasts represent empires. In Revelation, the imagery of beasts combines Daniel’s visions, showing that all the world’s tyrannical kingdoms unite in opposition to God. It’s not about one literal government, but the collective kingdom of the earth set against the kingdom of Christ. If you force Revelation into either a purely literal or purely metaphorical reading, you miss the point. The beasts represent the devil’s kingdom on earth, contrasted with God’s kingdom.
Dre Binley: That’s a really good way to say it. If you were to describe covenant theology for someone unfamiliar, in one or two sentences, what would that be?
Anthony Delgado: Strong stance on the consistency of the people of God. But it does change how you read things. For example, in Revelation, if you’re a dispensationalist, you won’t tie the images there back to the Old Testament unless you insist they belong only to a future dispensation. That forces you to say Daniel’s prophecies weren’t for his own people at all, but only for some far-off generation. It makes Daniel sound like he was preaching things that meant nothing to his audience, which seems nonsensical. That’s one reason I’m sensitive to this issue.
Dre Binley: Yeah, I naturally lean toward there being one people of God and one story unfolding through history. But I haven’t dug deeply into both arguments, so it’s interesting to hear about.
Anthony Delgado: Some dispensationalists, especially progressive dispensationalists, try to work around the “two gospels” problem. They’ll say Israel’s adherence to the law was an expression of faith that saved, which makes sense within their framework. I wouldn’t call all dispensationalists heretical—I have many faithful brothers and sisters who hold that view. But when you’re trying to talk biblical theology and the overarching narrative of Scripture, it’s difficult to have a unified conversation with someone on the other side of that divide.
Dre Binley: Because the whole narrative takes on a different shape.
Anthony Delgado: Exactly. It becomes apples and oranges.
Dre Binley: I’ve been listening to the Naked Bible Podcast, Dr. Michael Heiser’s podcast. It sounds like he talks about covenant theology favorably. Would you say that’s true?
Anthony Delgado: Yes. I don’t know if he ever used that exact term on the podcast, but he was clearly anti-futurist when it came to Revelation, and he strongly affirmed one people of God. As an Old Testament Semitic scholar, it would be difficult for him to devote his life to the Hebrew Scriptures and not see them as essential to the whole story. So yes, his teaching leaned covenantal.
Dre Binley: And we see that in the early Christians who were Jewish. They didn’t abandon their faith—they integrated it. To them it was all one story, just as John demonstrates in Revelation.
Anthony Delgado: Absolutely. That’s why Paul can talk about the relationship of man and woman and reference Adam and Eve. If Scripture weren’t meant to be read as one grand narrative, that comparison wouldn’t make sense.
Dre Binley: I look at Yahweh—the God above all gods—showing up in history by choosing one undeserving people and saying, “Here’s what we’re going to do.” From there it extends outward, because that’s his character. He reveals himself as quick to love, slow to anger, and faithful. Those traits stand in stark contrast to the surrounding nations’ gods, which the patriarchs were familiar with before they came to follow Yahweh. It’s a beautiful story.
Anthony Delgado: It really is.
Dre Binley: As you think about the book of Revelation, and I’m sure you’ve taught from it at church and had conversations with people about it, what are some common misconceptions that people tend to have?
Anthony Delgado: I’d been asked for years to preach through Revelation and always refused. But in Bible studies people would ask, “Why do you believe that?” and I realized a big misconception is that people find Revelation scary. I discovered several in our church had never even read it—not because they didn’t read their Bible, but because they assumed it would be frightening. My response was, “No, it’s actually hopeful.” So I preached through it years ago. Those sermons are on my website, though not on our church’s site anymore. My goal was to show that Revelation begins very pastorally with encouragement and warnings to the churches, then develops into a recapitulation of the Old Testament narrative, moves into the New Testament, and ends in chapters 21–22 with the eternal kingdom of God coming down to earth. It’s an incredibly hopeful narrative that teaches more about our eternal hope than almost anywhere else in Scripture. If someone finds it scary, I encourage them to start with chapters 21 and 22, then go back to the beginning so they can read with the end in mind.
Another misconception is that Revelation is entirely about the future. I think very little of it is. As an idealist, I believe the bowls of wrath, trumpets, and scrolls (up until the seventh in each set) describe the way the world is now: life lived in the tension of belonging to God’s kingdom while still dwelling in the land of the enemy. These passages warn us to remain faithful to the one who will bring all the troubles of this world to their conclusion on Judgment Day. Even these visions can be read hopefully, since they point us toward purification, cleansing, and the final destruction of temptation, evil, and sin.
A third misconception is that Revelation is unnecessary. That usually stems from the “all future” view—why worry about something that hasn’t happened yet? But most of Revelation is about being faithful today. Even its vision of eternal hope is meant to shape the way we live now. Biblical hope isn’t, “I sure hope it all works out.” It’s knowing how the story ends, which empowers us to live faithfully today. Revelation isn’t unnecessary—it’s deeply pastoral. Readers don’t have to see it as all future or all scary.
Dre Binley: Those are great points. I think of my friends with anxiety disorders who avoid Revelation because it triggers existential thoughts about life being cut short or all the problems in the world. It’s like the rest of the Bible—it’s not easy or fluffy. When someone is in a healthier state of peace in the Lord, that might be a better time to read it. But like you said, starting with chapters 21 and 22 is a good solution.
Anthony Delgado: That’s right—just start there.
Dre Binley: You could even meditate on those chapters for a month or two since there’s so much there. I also think about how most church messages are crafted for majority thinkers, while anxious people worry too much about whether they’re sinning. I like to remind them that sometimes it’s just the anxiety talking.
Anthony Delgado: And we live in a world where anxiety is becoming the new norm. That means the church needs to develop a way to address it.
Dre Binley: Right.
Anthony Delgado: I think the scriptures have the answer.
Dre Binley: The traditional advice is, “Don’t be anxious.”
Anthony Delgado: Right, and Jesus does say that. But what he’s really calling us to do is embrace the hope that heals our anxiety. If that’s where someone is at, they need to focus on the things that bring hope.
Dre Binley: How could John handle all this as he witnessed it? Because he walked with the Lord of love and had a strong confidence.
Anthony Delgado: Easy for him to say, though. He was boiled in oil and God preserved him. I haven’t had that experience—just kidding.
Dre Binley: People can compare themselves to John and feel inadequate. But like you said, it’s not that nothing in Revelation has happened and everything is only future. It’s more beneficial to find ourselves in the story, even if just in some layer or cycle of it. We live in a world influenced by the beast, the same way Rome or Babylon were beastly powers. We see those patterns in our world, and the question is how can we be faithful, like the churches addressed in the opening letters of Revelation? That faithfulness to the end—there’s nothing new under the sun.
Anthony Delgado: Exactly.
Dre Binley: I have a personal question. There seems to be a growing number of North American Protestant Christians becoming more open to the “woo-woo” side of things—the unseen realm. We mentioned the podcast Blurry Creatures earlier, and maybe Michael Heiser has contributed to this shift. People are recognizing that Scripture presents more than just “one God and nothing else.” Yes, there is one God, the sovereign ruler over all, but around us is a diverse and powerful unseen realm: gods, watchers, angels, demons. Some even take seriously the idea of giants—hybrid creatures like you mentioned earlier. So what do you think is causing this openness to the weird stuff? And why does it seem to be concentrated in one stream of Christianity? For example, when it comes to giants, it’s often Reformed pastors like Doug Van Dorn. Have you heard of him?
Anthony Delgado: Yes. I’m a Reformed Baptist like Doug Van Dorn and John Moffitt. There’s definitely a spectrum within the Reformed Baptist world. Broadly reformed, you won’t find as much emphasis on the spirit world among strict Westminster Presbyterians or RCA Reformed, but in the Reformed Baptist world you will. Baptists are historically very spiritually minded—we even own the phrase, “the devil made me do it.” There’s always been a latent spirituality that has opened Baptists to embracing this.
Within the Reformed Baptist world, I see three general approaches. First, you have the Van Dorns and Moffitts, who strongly affirm the divine council worldview: these other beings are real, should be called “gods,” though they are not God. They emphasize the reality of the spiritual world. Second, you have those who follow Calvin and Luther in interpreting passages like Psalm 82 as referring to human rulers rather than divine beings. This is a minority tradition, but it has a long history, even in Second Temple Judaism, and is seen in John 10. Third, you have voices like Jim Hamilton, who acknowledge lots of spiritual realities but deny a council of rebellious beings in the Old Testament.
Beyond that, I actually encounter a lot of openness to divine council concepts outside Reformed Baptist circles. Michael Heiser himself was non-denominational, leaning toward Reformed polity but Arminian in theology. I find many Anglicans, Methodists, and others in sacramental traditions engaging this more openly than many Reformed Baptists. Some even hold strong rejections of Calvinism or penal substitutionary atonement, which I think leads in problematic directions, but the point is that the conversation is broader than one denomination.
In fact, I see greater acceptance in sacramental traditions like Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Anglicanism, and even some Methodists. Younger evangelicals are often drawn to those spaces because they resist a purely materialistic worldview. A pastor in a Reformed Baptist church may respond to spiritual questions with political or sociological analysis, which can leave people feeling the world is out of control. By contrast, sacramental traditions offer a framework where Christ’s authority is central—“all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to him.” That provides a spiritual grounding for hope in the eternal kingdom.
Dre Binley: That’s really interesting. Maybe I just hear more of it from Reformed folks, but you’re saying if I knew more Catholic theologians, I’d hear the same openness to the “weird stuff.”
Anthony Delgado: Yes. In those circles, especially Eastern Orthodoxy, it wouldn’t even be considered weird—it’s a normal part of conversation. It would also be much more normal in Catholicism, where it’s part of biblical education in the church.
Dre Binley: Well, that makes sense. I don’t know if this is related in your head, but in mine, I’m like, well, they have exorcists. So they need a robust theology and familiarity with those topics. They have to decide what they believe about the ranking or types of beings in order to engage in that.
Anthony Delgado: Right. In Protestantism we have Deliverance Ministries, but most people say, “I don’t think that’s quite right.” In Catholic and Orthodox traditions, though, it’s simply an integrated part of their theological framework. So yes, I think you’re right—exorcists are part of their internal structure.
Dre Binley: Oh, interesting. That’s a really cool answer. Thanks for shedding some light on that. I was reading interviews and books and kept noticing, “Oh, another person from the same denomination.” I wondered if that was a pattern, but maybe it’s just the circle I’ve found myself in at the moment.
Anthony Delgado: Well, I think I understand a little about your current church tradition. Those guys are on that Reformed Baptist spectrum.
Dre Binley: At Mariners, yeah. Personally, if they ever ask me this, I guess I’ll have to disclose it. I grew up Southern Baptist. My grandfather was a Southern Baptist pastor, my mom was a PK, and then my dad got saved through their family. Everyone just kind of became Southern Baptist from there. At first, though, I felt like I didn’t fit—especially being a female with leadership gifts that no one was really parsing out with me in an effective way. I grew up in Kansas, by the way.
Anthony Delgado: Oh, so yeah.
Dre Binley: In Kansas.
Anthony Delgado: Yeah.
Dre Binley: Then I went to college in Kansas—just logistics.
Anthony Delgado: Yes, I know your online school.
Dre Binley: I know, I’ve actually heard of that.
Anthony Delgado: Very progressive.
Dre Binley: Oh really?
Anthony Delgado: Well, no—I mean, there were only a couple of accredited online programs when I found it, and one happened to be in Kansas of all places. It felt so random to me as a lifelong Southern Californian. There was nothing like that here.
Dre Binley: Yeah, you’d think someone in LA would have come up with an online school first, but I guess Kansas jumped on it. Anyway, I got really sick and then was healed, and it made me rethink a lot of my theology on the gifts, healing, prayer, and leadership. It flipped a lot around for me, so in my late twenties and early thirties I dove deeper into those topics. After getting better, I worked at a non-denominational church where the staff was very diverse in how we approached those issues. Later, I surprised myself by landing at Mariners, but it feels exactly where I’m supposed to be. It’s funny how God doesn’t always put denomination at the top of the list when assigning you to a place in a season.
Anthony Delgado: And Baptist churches—while I don’t think Mariners is Southern Baptist—they’re generally Baptist in heritage.
Dre Binley: I feel like they were, or am I wrong?
Anthony Delgado: They may have been at a time. But even so, Ed Stetzer was there for a long time, and I don’t believe he currently identifies as Southern Baptist. He’s a member at Mariners and works at a Pentecostal seminary, and he’s historically Pentecostal. That just goes to show God doesn’t place denomination at the top of the list. I recently preached at a friend’s Assembly of God church, and I feel the same way. Denominations can unnecessarily bring division. They become a lens through which we read the Scriptures.
Dre Binley: Mm-hmm.
Anthony Delgado: And Southern Baptists—or Baptists in general—are a big tent. There’s actually a lot of diversity, even if the stereotype looks like a cookie cutter.
Dre Binley: Right.
Anthony Delgado: But it’s broader than that.
Dre Binley: Yes, I agree. And I’m glad we don’t have to only be friends with people who are theologically identical to us. Last question, if you have time.
Anthony Delgado: I’m open—whatever you want.
Dre Binley: Okay. When you read Revelation—whether back when you were preaching through it or just reading personally—what are some of your favorite things about it?
Anthony Delgado: I would say the coolest part of Revelation, even before I felt like I fully understood it, was writing short stories about what I saw in it. That actually became an interpretive tool for me. I didn’t even realize why at the time, but I had a blog back in the early 2000s and wrote a short story called The Woman and the Dragon. I took Revelation 12 and fleshed out the narrative with more detail from what I was seeing as I read. I think I still have a printed copy somewhere. What’s interesting is that I didn’t have all the theological training then, but reading the story allowed my imagination to fill in the details. I think I was largely right in how I understood the narrative. That’s what imagery does.
In my circles, people often ask me onto podcasts as an “expert,” though I don’t know if that’s wise. I don’t present myself as an intellectual, but I do get asked technical questions. Sometimes I know the answers, but other times I don’t—and that’s okay. You don’t need to know Hebrew, Greek, or have eight years of formal education to understand the Bible. The Bible is full of imagery, story, and narrative. Imagery speaks in ways that affect people’s theology and understanding more powerfully than straightforward explanations. Revelation, in particular, should be approached as art rather than dissected purely through charts and technical metaphors. That’s how ancient people engaged with cosmology—they weren’t worried about scientific accuracy, but about how stories shaped their worldview, relationships, and daily lives.
If we approach Revelation this way, we’ll often find clarity. Over time, we’ll also begin to see the technical details fall into place naturally. People call Revelation the hardest book in the Bible to understand—I personally think Ezekiel is harder. But if we approach it like art, the way we approach other stories or poetry, it becomes life-giving. That’s my favorite thing about Revelation, along with the vision in chapters 21 and 22.
Dre Binley: Yes, that’s pretty good too.
Anthony Delgado: Yes.
Dre Binley: I can’t wait. I’ll probably cry when I reach that point in my study. That’s beautiful. I think it also reflects your gifting—teaching through creative communication, story, imagery, and symbols, much like Jesus did.
Anthony Delgado: That’s true. For example, here’s my copy of The Divine Comedy. That book isn’t really about heaven, hell, or purgatory in the literal sense. But when you read it as poetry, it reveals how theology and the world interact. It’s only a very modern impulse to read things purely technically.
Dre Binley: Yes, that’s our modern lens. And really the theme of this podcast has been about asking what lens we’re looking through. Can we just read the text and absorb the main message? I had a chance to talk with Dr. Adam Ayers, a missiological hermeneutics expert, and in his Revelation study he reminded his church that people weren’t dissecting charts in the first century. They listened to the whole book at once and drew out the main themes—stay faithful, endure Roman persecution, and remember that in the end Christ wins. It was about how to deal with martyrdom and loss. Those were the messages emphasized to the original hearers. So seeing it as mythological or narrative makes sense.
Your reminder helps me as I try to catch up with theology—I may think the technical side is the point, but maybe God has me looking at Revelation for different reasons. That’s calming to remember. Thank you so much, Pastor Anthony, for giving your time today. I’ll link to your website, book, and podcast. Is there anything else you’d like to share?
Anthony Delgado: I would just say that the biggest reason I care about the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Book of Revelation, First Enoch, and the giants is because I care about the gospel. These things open up a spiritual approach to the gospel that helps us understand the nature of what God is doing—inviting us into his family and his kingdom. He’s not just bringing us in as refugees, but as princes in his kingdom. He is dealing with the legal aspect of sin, but he’s also restoring us. In the Eastern tradition this is called theosis; we often describe it as glorification. God is not only forgiving our sins—he is transforming us into sinless, spiritual, eternal humans.
To see the fullness of this come together, especially in Revelation, is to see the spiritual fulfillment of all things God has been working since Genesis 3. For me, everything centers on the gospel and on what the story of Jesus accomplishes to bring us to that beautiful end.
Dre Binley: Wow, I love that. It’s like humanity the way it was originally designed.
Anthony Delgado: Yes.
Dre Binley: That will be a beautiful thing to see, and only God the way-maker could bring it about.
Anthony Delgado: Yeah, absolutely. Amen.
