Jump to content
IGNORED

Pre-Adamic World: Fact or Fiction


SavedOnebyGrace

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, BeyondET.

Well, by definition, a "wind" is "the perceptible natural movement of the air, especially in the form of a current of air blowing from a particular direction." In meteorology, we read at www.weather.gov,

"Wind is simply air in motion. Usually in meteorology, when we are talking about the wind it is the horizontal speed and direction we are concerned about. For example, if you hear a report of a west wind at 15 mph (24 km/h) that means the horizontal winds will be coming FROM the west at that speed."sh

From physics through www.d.umn.edu, we learn that wind is "momentum":

"Wind has two attributes: direction and magnitude. Wind, as atmospheric motion, is a form of momentum, and momentum implies both direction and magnitude (Stringer 1972:20)."

So, if one looks up "How is momentum related to force?" One will find,

"Force (F) is equal to the change in momentum (ΔP) over the change in time (Δt). And the change in momentum (ΔP) is also equal to the impulse (J). Impulse has the same units as momentum (kg*m/s or N*s)."

These units are read, "kilogram-meters per second" or "Newton-seconds." And, the formula suggested is...

F = ΔP/Δt.

So, ultimately, a wind is the FORCE behind the horizontal air flow from an area of high pressure to an area of low pressure, where "high" and "low" are relative to each other.

God obviously (to me, anyway) exerts His FORCE on all of His Universe, but in the Creation account of Genesis 1, He is exerting a LIGHT force on His initial "canvas" before He begins His "masterpiece."

I don't believe we should use wind from weather.com for our definitions. Your use of science out of context appalls me. To be an engineer or scientist, one must understand the terms we use. To use modern science to explain these Hebrew words. It's like saying "God is Light" means God is 299,792,458 meters per second!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  9
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,605
  • Content Per Day:  1.07
  • Reputation:   2,452
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/28/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/28/1957

3 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

Correct me if you need to, but YHWH breathed life into animals as well as mankind. So both mankind and animals that breathe air have souls.

Shabbat shalom, Saved.One.by.Grace.

Exactly so. Animals, too, are referred to as "nafshiym," "air-breathing creatures" or "souls." Even in Genesis 1, "whales" or "great sea creatures" are called (or included with) "every-soul":

Genesis 1:21 (KJV)

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

ויברא אלהים את־התנינם הגדלים ואת כל־נפש החיה ׀ הרמשת אשר שרצו המים למינהם ואת כל־עוף כנף למינהו וירא אלהים כי־טוב׃

We also see this in ...

Genesis 2:19 (KJV)

19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

ויצר יהוה אלהים מן־האדמה כל־חית השדה ואת כל־עוף השמים ויבא אל־האדם לראות מה־יקרא־לו וכל אשר יקרא־לו האדם נפש חיה הוא שמו׃

So, yes, if they breathed air, like the land animals and the sea going mammals, they were a "nefesh," a "soul."

  • Well Said! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  118
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  2,869
  • Content Per Day:  1.22
  • Reputation:   816
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/01/1968

1 hour ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

This is what I was asking you!

I know there's alot in the bible on all three, spirit, soul and body used in many ways. I probably couldn't find a solid answer.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  6
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  4,265
  • Content Per Day:  2.91
  • Reputation:   2,302
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  05/03/2020
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, David1701.

Yes, that's a reasonable conclusion. Corpses still have growing fingernails and hair for several months after the person is deceased. When a person "gives up the ghost," or "breathes his last breath," the body's cells continue to function for a while, even though the whole creature is without function enough that the person could not continue to be called "alive."

People's finger nails don't grow after death. The skin tends to retract giving an appearance it grows.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  72
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  10,240
  • Content Per Day:  7.08
  • Reputation:   13,250
  • Days Won:  99
  • Joined:  05/24/2020
  • Status:  Offline

7 minutes ago, teddyv said:

People's finger nails don't grow after death. The skin tends to retract giving an appearance it grows.

This is true. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  118
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  2,869
  • Content Per Day:  1.22
  • Reputation:   816
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/01/1968

25 minutes ago, teddyv said:

People's finger nails don't grow after death. The skin tends to retract giving an appearance it grows.

Yea that's my bust on the nail and hair growth after death it's a myth, their dead stuff anyways even living lol.

I was reading today and learned skeletal muscle stem cells can survive in a human body for a whopping  17 days after death now that's alittle freaky 😄 

Edited by BeyondET
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  118
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  2,869
  • Content Per Day:  1.22
  • Reputation:   816
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  04/01/1968

Some interesting stuff on in the human body.

The body is a walking ecosystem born 100% human, die 50% alien. Half the life doesn't belong to human body lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  9
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,605
  • Content Per Day:  1.07
  • Reputation:   2,452
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/28/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/28/1957

14 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

I don't believe we should use wind from weather.com for our definitions. Your use of science out of context appalls me. To be an engineer or scientist, one must understand the terms we use. To use modern science to explain these Hebrew words. It's like saying "God is Light" means God is 299,792,458 meters per second!

Shabbat shalom, Saved.One.by.Grace.

Well, first God is not limited to the SPEED or VELOCITY of light. On the other hand, when Genesis 1 talks about making what we call the "sun, moon, and stars," you need to understand that the word "LIGHTS" were used instead.

But, one would be remiss not to understand the Hebrew words employed for "light" and "lights" in Genesis 1.

I'm going to give you the whole passage first, and then we'll zero in on the various words translated as "light" or "lights."

Genesis 1:3-5, 14-19 (KJV)

3 And God said,

"Let there be light":

and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light "Day," and the darkness he called "Night." And the evening and the morning were the first day.
...

14 And God said,

"Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth":

and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

I'm going to leave in the vowel pointing for those who are unfamiliar with the pronunciations:

וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֖ים יְהִ֣י אֹ֑ור וַֽיְהִי־אֹֽור׃
וַיַּ֧רְא אֱלֹהִ֛ים אֶת־הָאֹ֖ור כִּי־טֹ֑וב וַיַּבְדֵּ֣ל אֱלֹהִ֔ים בֵּ֥ין הָאֹ֖ור וּבֵ֥ין הַחֹֽשֶׁךְ׃

וַיִּקְרָ֨א אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ לָאֹור֙ יֹ֔ום וְלַחֹ֖שֶׁךְ קָ֣רָא לָ֑יְלָה וַֽיְהִי־עֶ֥רֶב וַֽיְהִי־בֹ֖קֶר יֹ֥ום אֶחָֽד׃ פ
...

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֗ים יְהִ֤י מְאֹרֹת֙ בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם לְהַבְדִּ֕יל בֵּ֥ין הַיֹּ֖ום וּבֵ֣ין הַלָּ֑יְלָה וְהָי֤וּ לְאֹתֹת֙ וּלְמֹ֣ועֲדִ֔ים וּלְיָמִ֖ים וְשָׁנִֽים׃
וְהָי֤וּ לִמְאֹורֹת֙ בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם לְהָאִ֖יר עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וַֽיְהִי־כֵֽן׃
וַיַּ֣עַשׂ אֱלֹהִ֔ים אֶת־שְׁנֵ֥י הַמְּאֹרֹ֖ת הַגְּדֹלִ֑ים אֶת־הַמָּאֹ֤ור הַגָּדֹל֙ לְמֶמְשֶׁ֣לֶת הַיֹּ֔ום וְאֶת־הַמָּאֹ֤ור הַקָּטֹן֙ לְמֶמְשֶׁ֣לֶת הַלַּ֔יְלָה וְאֵ֖ת הַכֹּוכָבִֽים׃
וַיִּתֵּ֥ן אֹתָ֛ם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם לְהָאִ֖יר עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃
וְלִמְשֹׁל֙ בַּיֹּ֣ום וּבַלַּ֔יְלָה וּֽלֲהַבְדִּ֔יל בֵּ֥ין הָאֹ֖ור וּבֵ֣ין הַחֹ֑שֶׁךְ וַיַּ֥רְא אֱלֹהִ֖ים כִּי־טֹֽוב׃
וַֽיְהִי־עֶ֥רֶב וַֽיְהִי־בֹ֖קֶר יֹ֥ום רְבִיעִֽי׃ פ

So, in Day One (Yowm 'Echaad ), God made "light" or "'owr," a singular, masculine word, and He separated "the light" or "haa'owr " from "the darkness" or "hachoshekh " and He gave the name "day" or "yowm " "to the light" or "laa'owr " and He gave the name "night" or "laaylaah" "to the darkness" or "lachoshekh."

In Day Four (Yowm R-Viy`iy ), God made "m'orowt," a plural, feminine word with the mem- prefix meaning "from," technically meaning "[thing]s from light," in the expanse called "shaamaayim" or "skies," which is a dual, masculine word, btw, because there are two "skies," the daytime sky and the nighttime sky.

There would be "two great lights," "shneey hamm'orot hagdoliym," "the greater light" or "hammaa'owr hagaadowl " to dominate "the day" or "hayowm," and "the lesser light" or "hammaa'owr haqqaacon" to dominate "the night" or "hallaylaah." Then, almost as an afterthought, he adds, "and-(d.o.->) stars" or "v'eet kowkhaaViym," literally, "round objects."

Hebrew has names for the "sun" and the "moon"; they are "shemesh " and "yaareeach," respectively, but those names were not used in Genesis 1.

Now, let me add just one more thing for one to think about: Notice again how "round objects" or "kowkhaaViym " was added, almost as an afterthought? I believe that the actual "sun" and "moon" are lumped in with all these "stars" also. He literally made the LIGHT FIRST, and THEN he made the "sources" of that light! Would a HIGHLY EFFICENT God make the sources and then wait 8.33 minutes for the light from the sun to get to earth? Would He wait an additional 1.28 seconds for the light to bounce off the moon and get to the earth? Would He wait 4.25 YEARS for light to get to the earth from the nearest star, Proxima Centauri?! Would He wait the millions and billions of years for the light from the galaxies? No! He created the light already EN ROUTE to earth, and THEN He created what would be called the "sources" of that light!

Now, think about it carefully: By what other means do scientists today conclude that the Universe is 13.7 BILLION YEARS old? What if God created all the light (because He IS light) INSTANTANEOUSLY all over the known Universe and THEN created the "sources" to sustain that light? Maybe the Universe is not so old after all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  9
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,605
  • Content Per Day:  1.07
  • Reputation:   2,452
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/28/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/28/1957

1 hour ago, teddyv said:

People's finger nails don't grow after death. The skin tends to retract giving an appearance it grows.

Shabbat shalom, teddyv.

Okay, I stand corrected. I looked up that "fact" and found you were right! Thank you.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  9
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  6,605
  • Content Per Day:  1.07
  • Reputation:   2,452
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/28/2007
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/28/1957

1 hour ago, BeyondET said:

Yea that's my bust on the nail and hair growth after death it's a myth, their dead stuff anyways even living lol.

I was reading today and learned skeletal muscle stem cells can survive in a human body for a whopping  17 days after death now that's alittle freaky 😄 

Shabbat shalom, BeyondET.

Yes, and I've read that DNA has survived (at least part of it) in fossils.

In Scientific American, an article by Stephanie Pappas, dated 12/7/2022, says,

"Until now, the oldest DNA ever recovered came from a million-year-old mammoth tooth. The oldest DNA ever found in the environment—rather than in a fossil specimen—was also a million years old and came from marine sediments in Antarctica. The newly analyzed ancient DNA comes from a fossil-rich rock formation in Peary Land called Kap København, which preserves sediments from both land and a shallow ocean-side estuary. The formation, which geologists had previously dated to around two million years in age, has already yielded a trove of plant and insect fossils but almost no sign of mammals. The DNA analysis now reveals 102 different genera of plants, including 24 that have never been found fossilized in the formation, and nine animals, including horseshoe crabs, hares, geese and mastodons. That was “mind-blowing,” Willerslev says, because no one thought mastodons ranged that far north."

One point that seems a little off: What are hares and mastodons if not mammals?

Technically, I believe that dating methods are not as accurate as scientists would like, and that these plants and animals were caught in the Flood of Noach's day.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...