Pre-Adamic World: Fact or Fiction

[BeyondET]

2 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

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.

I agree on the fossil finds. It would be impossible to track an accurate material list.

99% of all life that has ever been on earth is extinct. Most all of it turned to dirt recycled deep inside earth. Not saying there hasn't been finds but compared to what has been on earth like the grains on the beach.

DNA is interesting its not living per say its a biological piece of paper sort of, that stores vast amounts of information, building blocks of cells etc.

The human cell is living moving doing the info its been given to do. In the case of skeletal muscle stem cells they have no idea the lights went out upon departure of life in the vessel as a whole that pertains to human life.

And as well the human body is basically a ecosystem, half the life in or on has nothing to do with human life in a sense, half alien. it's complicated for sure, though man is from the 99% dirt and part of the 1% of life today.

Edited January 7, 2023 by BeyondET

[Guest]

On 1/7/2023 at 1:01 AM, Retrobyter said:

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!

Genesis 1:3 proves that darkness was in existence before God created light because he separated light from darkness. This was after he created the heavens and earth.

You are reading much into Genesis 1:1 that is not specifically mentioned in the Hebrew text. I've been accused of adding text after Genesis 1:1, before Genesis 1:2. Isn't that what your doing with your analysis of Genesis 1 and 2? It seems like we both have been expanding the focus of this thread. Let's both try to the everything back to Genesis 1:1-3 if we can. I know I wandered when I brought up the soul. Whatever is profitable I am in favor of continuing. I don't want to stifle the wonderful conversation we all are having.  

God Bless You, Retrobyter

Edited January 8, 2023 by Saved.One.by.Grace

[Retrobyter]

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

Genesis 1:3 proves that darkness was in existence before God created light because he separated light from darkness. This was after he created the heavens and earth.I

Shabbat shalom, Saved.One.by.Grace.

I agree that darkness was in existence before God created light, but He did not create the heavens and the earth in Genesis 1:1.

Genesis 1:1, like much of Hebrew literature, is a SUMMARY of what is to follow. Hebrew literature usually begins with the main points, and then it goes into the details.

When one doesn't know this, it can make for much confusion.

If you will look carefully at the text, God created the actual "shaamaayim" on Day 2. He crreated the actual "erets" on Day 3. This is seen in the fact that He NAMES them then!

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

You are reading much into Genesis 1:1 that is not specifically mentioned in the Hebrew text. I've been accused of adding text after Genesis 1:1, before Genesis 1:2. Isn't that what your doing with your analysis of Genesis 1 and 2?

Not at all. See, all I'm doing is a little textual investigation. What you're doing is truly adding text. Many will even take Jeremiah 4 to support their view, when Jeremiah 4 has NOTHING to do with Creation! Jeremiah 4 is the prophet Yirmeyahuw LAMENTING the destruction of the Land when Nebuchadnezzar's troops razed much of the fields and crops in their conquest of the Land.

Just because the writer of the book used the words "tohuw v'Vohuw," which happen to be seen in Genesis 1:2, that fact does NOT mean that they are talking about the same thing! These are just two words that were fairly COMMON to use in the Hebrew language, and they were linked together with the vav- connective, as is ALSO VERY COMMON!

This is why I say that when it comes to reading the "Old Testament" prophecies, it is best to read the WHOLE book in a single sitting, if possible! To do so will give a person a much clearer picture of what the author was saying! Last month, I read Isaiah and Ezekiel that way. It took me 6 hours to read OUT LOUD the book of Isaiah. (I'm home alone much of the time.) My plan is to read Yirmeyahuw's prophecy in one sitting on one day and then read through his Lamentations the next this month. It not only CAN be done, it SHOULD be done! To read the prophets this way is the best way to actually hear FROM GOD through that prophet!

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

It seems like we both have been expanding the focus of this thread. Let's both try to the everything back to Genesis 1:1-3 if we can. I know I wandered when I brought up the soul. Whatever is profitable I am in favor of continuing. I don't want to stifle the wonderful conversation we all are having.  

God Bless You, Retrobyter

I like the interchange as well, but remember the PURPOSE for Genesis 1 and 2. It was to introduce the reader to the CREATOR GOD, YHWH! His Name, HaShem, is to be revered, but it was ALSO to be spoken! David used the Name quite readily and often!

So, back to Genesis 1:1-3: Genesis 1:1 is a summary of what is to follow, and then the Author (God through Mosheh) draws out the details, beginning with verses 2 and 3.

Edited January 7, 2023 by Retrobyter
it's Shabbat!

[David1701]

14 hours ago, Vine Abider said:

Typo - "earliest" (that maybe was Freudian)

Yes, I know.  I was joking.

[David1701]

11 hours 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."

<sigh>

I know.  I've said that this is true a few times already.  The issue was why this is the case.

The reason that the other poster gave was that Adam's cells were alive, before God breathed into him.  The speculation is that this is the reason why people's cells live on for a while, after the spirit leaves the body.  It might be true that this is the reason, but we can't be certain.

[Guest]

19 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shabbat shalom, Saved.One.by.Grace.

I agree that darkness was in existence before God created light, but He did not create the heavens and the earth in Genesis 1:1.

So you believe God created or was living in darkness. Where do you see that elsewhere in scripture?

19 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Genesis 1:1, like much of Hebrew literature, is a SUMMARY of what is to follow. Hebrew literature usually begins with the main points, and then it goes into the details.

When one doesn't know this, it can make for much confusion.

Or when someone assumes this, leads one to erroneous assumptions.

19 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

If you will look carefully at the text, God created the actual "shaamaayim" on Day 2. He crreated the actual "erets" on Day 3. This is seen in the fact that He NAMES them then!

I've looked at the text quite closely and have arrived at a much different understanding, like multiple theologians before me. Your position seems unorthodox to me. You're changing the text to fit your theology, not letting the text speak for itself, by letting scripture translate scripture.

19 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Not at all. See, all I'm doing is a little textual investigation. What you're doing is truly adding text. Many will even take Jeremiah 4 to support their view, when Jeremiah 4 has NOTHING to do with Creation! Jeremiah 4 is the prophet Yirmeyahuw LAMENTING the destruction of the Land when Nebuchadnezzar's troops razed much of the fields and crops in their conquest of the Land.

When did I bring up Jeremiah 4?

19 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Just because the writer of the book used the words "tohuw v'Vohuw," which happen to be seen in Genesis 1:2, that fact does NOT mean that they are talking about the same thing! These are just two words that were fairly COMMON to use in the Hebrew language, and they were linked together with the vav- connective, as is ALSO VERY COMMON!

So you dismiss bible passages which don't support your viewpoint.

19 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

This is why I say that when it comes to reading the "Old Testament" prophecies, it is best to read the WHOLE book in a single sitting, if possible! To do so will give a person a much clearer picture of what the author was saying! Last month, I read Isaiah and Ezekiel that way. It took me 6 hours to read OUT LOUD the book of Isaiah. (I'm home alone much of the time.) My plan is to read Yirmeyahuw's prophecy in one sitting on one day and then read through his Lamentations the next this month. It not only CAN be done, it SHOULD be done! To read the prophets this way is the best way to actually hear FROM GOD through that prophet!

Thanks for the advice.

19 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

I like the interchange as well, but remember the PURPOSE for Genesis 1 and 2. It was to introduce the reader to the CREATOR GOD, YHWH! His Name, HaShem, is to be revered, but it was ALSO to be spoken! David used the Name quite readily and often!

So, back to Genesis 1:1-3: Genesis 1:1 is a summary of what is to follow, and then the Author (God through Mosheh) draws out the details, beginning with verses 2 and 3.

What is the meaning of Hashem? Answer The short answer is that Hashem means "The Name" in Hebrew. When reading the Torah or praying, Jews who come across the name of God (transliterated into English as YHWH) will substitute the word Adonai. In other contexts and in casual conversation, Jews who encounter God's name will substitute Hashem instead. We also know that Exodus 20:7 reads, “You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name” (cf. Deuteronomy 5:11). This command in Scripture is the reason that Jews use Hashem in place of YHWH. The word translated “misuse” carries the idea of speaking (or writing) the name of God in an “empty,” “worthless” manner. Observant Jews are concerned about potentially blaspheming God by misusing His name. According to one Jewish tradition, a person who says God’s name while in a state of sinful impurity is in danger of death.

The rabbi Rashi taught that God allowed His name to be pronounced “only in the place to which the Shechinah comes, and that is in the Temple in Jerusalem. There permission was given to the priests to mention the Explicit Name when they raise their hands to bless the people” (from Mechilta, Sifrei, Num. 6:23, Sotah 38a). [exerted from Got.Questions.org]

We disagree, needless to say.

Edited January 8, 2023 by Saved.One.by.Grace

[BeyondET]

12 hours ago, David1701 said:

<sigh>

I know.  I've said that this is true a few times already.  The issue was why this is the case.

The reason that the other poster gave was that Adam's cells were alive, before God breathed into him.  The speculation is that this is the reason why people's cells live on for a while, after the spirit leaves the body.  It might be true that this is the reason, but we can't be certain.

We are ecosystems half alien already, life is complicated.

Edited January 8, 2023 by BeyondET

[Vine Abider]

16 minutes ago, BeyondET said:

We are ecosystems half alien already, life is complicated.

Perhaps, but when we find ourselves in overly complicated/anxious thought, remember that life in spirit is simple (i.e., the simplicity in Christ; 2 Cor 11:3).

Edited January 8, 2023 by Vine Abider

[BeyondET]

26 minutes ago, Vine Abider said:

Perhaps, but when we find ourselves in overly complicated/anxious thought, remember that life in spirit is simple (i.e., the simplicity in Christ; 2 Cor 11:3).

Indeed nice analogy 👍

I'm still kind of floored about learning of the half alien thing, organisms that live in and on the body that is separate from human life. Few years back scientist thought it was 75% of life in the flesh was alien they trimmed that down to 50% these days.

Edited January 8, 2023 by BeyondET

[The Barbarian]

6 hours ago, BeyondET said:

I'm still kind of floored about learning of the half alien thing, organisms that live in and on the body that is separate from human life. Few years back scientist thought it was 75% of life in the flesh was alien they trimmed that down to 50% these days.

In almost every one of your cells (sperm cells are an exception), there are countless mitochondria which reproduce on their own, with bacterial DNA.    They are endosymbionts which evolved to become obligate partners in eukaryotic cells.   They are of a separate ancestry.