It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Creationist Myth - 500,000-Year-Old Stone Tools, Butchered Elephant Bones Found in Israel

page: 10
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo
that's why the text says Adam KNEW his wife and she begat. notice it doesn't say adam had sex with his wife. that's because it means the same thing. the big presto chango was we went from being copies of elohim, to being procreators who made our own copies.


What is the difference between KNEW and self aware? I just think it is a great metaphor of when man became man. Elohim (God) crated life and at one point man became man.
edit on 24-3-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

the problem is, that's not what the text says. it doesn't say man became self aware suddenly, it says man became a procreator, a sexual being. why else would they suddenly notice each other's nudity? why not each other's freckles or some other aspect of being self aware? today we call those hormones. before they became procreative, sex didn't mean anything, as new male and female adam were copied in the image of elohim (plural, some were male, some were female) and so the physiology necessary for procreation, wasn't present, and therefore, naked meant nothing. the whole "eyes were opened" thing is not because they were blind before that, but because they didn't have sexual urges and so were not stimulated by each other's appearance. it all fits perfectly once you come to terms with it.


edit on 24-3-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 02:22 AM
link   
the tree of knowledge of good and evil, the serpent, and the tree of life are symbolic language alright. In the bible trees represent people. and Serpent is a title of office of Satan.

tree = Hebrew word # 6086: `ets (ates); a tree (from its firmness) from # 6095:`atsah (aw-tsaw'); a primitive root; properly, to fasten (or make firm), ie: to close the eyes. figuratively: The spine giving firmness to the body (The body is the trunk, and the arms and legs are the limbs).

Rev 12:9
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. (KJV)

Isa 61:1-3

3 To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified. (KJV)

(For more instances of trees being used symbolically for men in the Bible, See also: [Isa 65:16-25], [Jere 17: 7-10], [Eze 31:1-14], [Dan 4:18-28], and on it goes. . . .)




outside the garden mankind had been in existence for two unknown periods of time rendered as "days." they just were not in the garden. this is why cain had someone to marry and so on.

to understand what went on in the garden you need to know that when it comes to sex the Hebrew people frequently revert to euphemisms and figures of speech.

I and others assert that the sin that Eve participated in (and Adam also for that matter) involved sex. Also that was not the first sin. the first sin took place in between verse one and verse 2 of the creation narrative.



2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree*1 which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it*2, neither shall ye touch*3it, lest ye die.

Explanations from above verse: *1 fruit of the tree = Hebrew word # 6529 periy- fruit, in a wide sense: a) fruit, produce (of the ground), or b) fruit, offspring, children, progeny ( used of the womb), or figuratively c) fruit (of actions). *2 eat of it = Hebrew word #398; 'akal (aw-kal'); This word has many uses, among which, one use means to lay with a woman (which is a sexual act). *3 touch = Hebrew word # 5060; naga` (naw-gah'); Properly, to touch, ie: to lay the hand upon (for any purpose); euphemism for: to lie with a woman.


also you need to look at similar instances of touch through the bible to see it very often had to do with bumping uglies.


6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes*1, and a tree to be desired*2 to make one wise*3, she took*4 of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Explanations from above verse: I think you will find that this is certainly no ordinary tree, for it wasn't a tree at all, it was satan. *1 pleasant to the eyes = Hebrew word #2530; chamad: To desire, to covet, to take pleasure in, to delight in, to be desirable, to delight greatly, to desire greatly, desirableness, preciousness.*2 desired = Hebrew word # 8378 ta'avah (tah-av-aw'); from 183 (abbreviated); to yearn for, to lust after (used of bodily appetites) a longing; by implication, a delight (subjectively, satisfaction, objectively, a charm): a desire, a wish, longings of one's heart; lust, an appetite, covetousness (in a bad sense), to covet, to wait longingly. *3 make one wise = Apple trees don't make you smart. But satan can fill your mind with evil 'wisdom' and evil thoughts! *4 took = Hebrew word # 3947 laqach (law-kakh'); a primitive root; to take (in the widest variety of applications): to take, to lay hold of, to receive, to marry, to take a wife, to take to or for a person, to procure, to get, to take possession of, to select, to choose, to take in marriage, to receive, to accept.



3 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled*1 me, and I did eat. (KJV)

Explanations from above verse: *1 beguiled = Hebrew word # 5377 nasha' (naw-shaw');a primitive root; to lead astray, i.e. (mentally) to delude, or (morally) to seduce: to beguile, to deceive utterly (infinitive).

We see the word "Beguiled" defined here, and it is far more than being tricked into munching on an apple. But the Ancient Hebrew language of the Old testament doesn't translate as well into English as the ancient Greek of the new Testament does. To really nail the point home as far as what occurred between Eve and the "serpent." Let's read an account of it in the Greek language of the New Testament book of 2nd Corinthians. Lets go into a new language, and let Apostle Paul teach us in the Greek language of the New testament exactly what happened to Eve in the Garden of Eden:

2 Cor 11:2-3 (Apostle Paul speaking)

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent*1 beguiled*2 Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. (KJV)

Explanations from above verse: Remember, we are now in the Greek language of the New Testament: *1 serpent = Greek word # 3789 ophis (of'-is); probably from 3700 (through the idea of sharpness of vision); a snake, figuratively (as a type of sly cunning) an artful malicious person, especially Satan: with the ancients, the serpent was an emblem of cunning and wisdom. The serpent who deceived Eve was regarded by the Jews as the Devil. *2 beguiled = Greek word #1818 "exapatao" (ex-ap-at-ah'-o); To seduce wholly. This was a sexual act. There can be no misunderstanding as to the meaning of what the serpent did to Eve, as there is only one meaning of the word 'expatao' in the Greek language.



Gen 3:14-15


15 And I will put enmity*1 between thee and the woman*2, and between thy seed and her seed*3; it*4shall bruise thy head*5, and thou*6shalt bruise his heel*7.


emnity between the serpent's seed and Eve's seed. wait. what? to be continued in the next post.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 02:45 AM
link   
so um.. what's up with all that then?

Cain. Cain was no son of Adam.

so Now the aftermath.


22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life*1, and eat, and live for ever:

Explanations from above verse: *1 the tree of life = Jesus is "The Tree of Life," although it was not yet time for Him to be revealed and to fulfill His prophecy.


In revelation Jesus is also referred to as a tree of life whose leaves are taken for healing every 30 days.

Back to the serpent's seed and cain.


Gen 4:1-2

1 And Adam knew*1 Eve his wife; and she conceived*2, and bare Cain*3, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD*4.

Explanations from above verse: *1 knew = Sexual intercourse. *2 conceived = Second conception (Abel). *3 Cain = Born first (serpents son). *4 = Read as: "I have gotten a son with the help of the Lord:" ('ish 'eth Jehovah). Eve had no idea what was going on here, she did not know that Cain was from the serpent (satan).

2 And she again*1 bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

Explanations from above verse: *1 again = Hebrew word # 3254; yacaph (yaw-saf'); a primitive root; to add or augment (often adverbial, to continue to do a thing). In other words, Eve continued in labor and had the second of twins.

OK, now If Eve bore Cain and then continued in labor and bore Abel, what do you have? Twins of course. And If Adam had her once, and the serpent had her once, and God told her that her punishment would be to bear children (plural, and most specifically male) in sorrow (not the pain of delivering children), and that her children's children would always be enemies, even murder! What do you have? What's shaping up here?

Cain and Abel were Fraternal Twins, born of two separate conceptions, by two different fathers. One, satan through the serpent; and one, God through Adam, and eventually 4000 years later, umbilical cord to umbilical cord would be born the Messiah Jesus Christ, whom satan would cause to be nailed to the cross (bruise His heels), crucified; but whom would eventually cast satan into the lake of fire (Hell) and eternal death (bruise his head).


cain and abel came of age at the same time and celebrated thier first sacrificial offering as men at the same time. in fact that led cain to murder abel. if they were not twins they would have had these offerings at least 9 months apart.

The generations adam do not contain Cain:


Gen 5:1-7

1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
7 And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters:


and in the NT the two geneaologies of Jesus one of them traces Jesus back to adam.

the bible also continues this rival bloodline thing through out the OT and into the four gospels where Christ calls his accusers kennites albeit by saying thier father is the devil; the father of murder and of lies.




edit on 24-3-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 02:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo

originally posted by: eisegesis

originally posted by: undo

originally posted by: eisegesis
a reply to: nenothtu

So what exactly was wrong in the OP again?


you can be a creationist and not be christian. there's also muslims, jews, ancient alien theorists and hindus, as well. have you ever read the mahabharata? even the ancient egyptians believed in creation.


But the thread was specifically about creationist views interpreted from the Bible. I'm aware of what the general definition of creationism is.


well oddly enough, i found out that the sumerian version of creation is the same thing as the biblical version and the egyptian version. i also find hints in norse histories, that sound as if it is also the same thing. really, you can trace this all over the world except ancient china: around 3000 bc, all their ancient histories were destroyed.



You mean the Egyptian creation myth were Atum masturbated the world into existence?

No, creation myths are very different. They are also myths since no one was alive to see the creation of the world.


No matter how hard you want to believe. You should be more critical.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 03:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: eisegesis
You know what I just noticed, not one person on this entire thread wanted to talk about the archeological find.

That made me chuckle.



As it wa noted earlier, it's probably because you used this find for another purpose. So people followed you were you wanted to go : see the first three words of the title.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 03:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo

atum raised the mountain of creation from the abyss (nun)

enki raised the e.abzu temple from the abyss (abzu) and floated it over the water like a lofty mountain

elohim hovered over the face of the abyss (the deep)


edit on 24-3-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
No one ever suggests that Intelligent design may have used evolution as the tool to make man.


Err, that's pretty much the current position of the Catholic Church.

Some Catholics scholars go even further and say god is also some latent potential for complexity and life. The evolution of matter into more complex matter and into life is thus the result of god's will and also something absolutely not supernatural.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 03:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Develo

atum raised the mountain of creation from the abyss (nun)

enki raised the e.abzu temple from the abyss (abzu) and floated it over the water like a lofty mountain

elohim hovered over the face of the abyss (the deep)




Selective reading. Quite a stretch.

Put the whole myths if you are trying to make a point


"Abyss" means the void. Isn't it normal all creation always start with a void?
edit on 24-3-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo

well of course it is! but then i've read the universe was created by super massive black holes, which fits my theory elohim was interchangeable with this means of conveyance, such as the description in the book of enoch, of a super massive black hole he got to see first hand as a result of a little tour of the heavens he was taken on by the angel uriel. (who???). and in the book of ezekiel, when a hole opened in the sky, which first appears as a fiery whirlwind. oh yeah, you can't make this stuff up!



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 03:36 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

The world wasn't "created" by super-massive black holes. Maybe if you could link your source it would help clear out the confusion.

Also unfortunately, while your theory is thought-provoking, it relies entirely on tons of assumptions you will never be able to prove (elohim are aliens, humans were engineered, ...) so it's everything but a solid theory.

Actually, the study of the human genome shows it was created through natural evolution, not genetic engineering.


But I do enjoy a bit of sci-fi from time to time :p



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 03:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: mOjOm

the trees of the garden are metaphors for genetic inheritance. the serpent is dna. the tree of knowledge is the dna for genetic inheritance via procreation. we went from being elohim copies (sounds like clones) to procreators, where we created our own copies (to have knowledge or knowing meant to create/copy via sex, or procreate, to have intimate knowledge of someone = have sex). so knowing like gods, was the same things the elohim were doing, creatively - et. al, creating copies of ourselves. it's really obvious when you recognize the metaphors are trying to explain science.


I got a little difference view....

What if the garden of Eden was the animal kingdom? There is no good or evil there only innocence. Man at one point was a part of that world and then one day became self aware after eating from the apple of knowledge. This was the point that man could no longer walk naked and so put clothe on and had the ability to do conscious acts of good or evil, hence the reason for the serpent... The interesting part is once man left the Garden he could never go back to the world, so Eden is all around us and we are the only creature on earth that is not apart of it...

We can also say evolution, but that is a lot more boring....


glad some bright mind came to the same simple and elegant interpretation of these symbols.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

No matter what evidence you ewill bring to the table it won't matter. People that believe the bible is the infallible word of God will still keep finding ways to try to make scripture into fact.

One of my relatives told me that she dropped one of her online classes (humanities) becasue they were teaching alot of stuff that she did not believe in. I asked her, "Oh yeah like what?" She said well they keep saying that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and I just don't believe that."

I was shocked, I had always heard of people that believed the earth was 6,000 years old but I had never actually talked to one who admitted it.

I asked her, "What about starlight? What about things like the grand canyon and continental drift and all of the other overwhelming evidence that the Earth is far older than 6,000 years?"

She said yeah I don't believe in any of that either.

You can't argue with that kind of logic.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

Well you may be right about that - archaeology isn't my field so I don't know how they decide what's important and what isn't. If funding is limited, then they would have to make some hard decisions. As a bench scientist myself, I'm familiar with the challenges of allocating funding and prioritizing. So again, you're point is well taken.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 06:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: eisegesis

No matter what evidence you ewill bring to the table it won't matter. People that believe the bible is the infallible word of God will still keep finding ways to try to make scripture into fact.

One of my relatives told me that she dropped one of her online classes (humanities) becasue they were teaching alot of stuff that she did not believe in. I asked her, "Oh yeah like what?" She said well they keep saying that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and I just don't believe that."

I was shocked, I had always heard of people that believed the earth was 6,000 years old but I had never actually talked to one who admitted it.

I asked her, "What about starlight? What about things like the grand canyon and continental drift and all of the other overwhelming evidence that the Earth is far older than 6,000 years?"

She said yeah I don't believe in any of that either.

You can't argue with that kind of logic.


This is exactly how I became interested in Creationism and the fraud they perpetrate. One of my nieces and her family are embedded in Ken Ham's cult. Critical thinking has been buried under layers of irrational explanations that they are taught not to question.

I'm always in deep doo doo with that branch of the family becaue my comeback is always that they are hypocrits. They avail themselves of modern technology i.e. - they have no problem getting an MRI or an xRay. They watch television and have iPhones, iPads and all the gizmos. And when I tell them that their belief system tells them that none of this stuff should work based on their interpretation of science, they get mad and go off in a huff. For example, MRI and ESR (which can be used for geologic dating) are similar magnetic resonance techniques based on the spin of nuclei. So I told her once that the next time the doctor tells her to get an MRI, she should tell him that it doesn't work. All you get is a glazed stare of a zombie.

Religion and faith are one thing. But cultism is something entirely different and I think it's dangerous because it fosters the sheep mentality of following a false prophet.
edit on 24-3-2015 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 06:29 AM
link   

edit on 24-3-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo

The false prophets once again. Did you catch the last line of the video? When he asks "Were dinosaurs on the ark" and the kids say yes, no, maybe - then he says "Sure they were. We don't know". It's the "we don't know" that blows his cover. These people know exactly what the goal line is - instill a cult mentality in young minds. Teach them not to ask questions. Tell them "you can't know these things". Enough of them buy into it then they are ripe for the next step which is a political movement.



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 06:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Develo

The false prophets once again. Did you catch the last line of the video? When he asks "Were dinosaurs on the ark" and the kids say yes, no, maybe - then he says "Sure they were. We don't know". It's the "we don't know" that blows his cover. These people know exactly what the goal line is - instill a cult mentality in young minds. Teach them not to ask questions. Tell them "you can't know these things". Enough of them buy into it then they are ripe for the next step which is a political movement.



Yes I did.

I personally think belief in creationism fits perfectly the definition of delusion, and thus that these nutjobs are deluded and a danger to American society.


delusion
dɪˈl(j)uːʒ(ə)n/Valider
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.





originally posted by: Phantom423
Tell them "you can't know these things". Enough of them buy into it then they are ripe for the next step which is a political movement.


Didn't this all started when marketers in the US started to use psychology for mass manipulation?

There certainly are many parallels between these guys strategy and how the industrial lobbies changed the American opinion on certain topics so much the beliefs are now different between the US and the rest of the world.


Just like many American believe now in creationism, similar efforts were made to make them believe:

- Smoking is not harmful
- Guns increase security
- Climate change doesn't exist


edit on 24-3-2015 by Develo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Develo


this is an excerpt from the show where the science team found super massive black holes were in the center of every galaxy they looked at. from this, they developed the theory that the galaxies were formed when super massive black holes began feeding on gas, which caused them to go into "active" phase (the ascending and descending jets of active galaxies, when a black hole is feeding), and in turn, they were creating the mass that constructed the galaxies around them. like a giant creative (and destructive) mechanism. a mammoth recycling plant.




posted on Mar, 24 2015 @ 07:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: Develo


this is an excerpt from the show where the science team found super massive black holes were in the center of every galaxy they looked at. from this, they developed the theory that the galaxies were formed when super massive black holes began feeding on gas, which caused them to go into "active" phase (the ascending and descending jets of active galaxies, when a black hole is feeding), and in turn, they were creating the mass that constructed the galaxies around them. like a giant creative (and destructive) mechanism. a mammoth recycling plant.


Ok now we agree.

It's exactly why I said black holes did not create the universe.

In fact all it says is that black holes help with galactic and stellar formation by creating movement inside nebulae.


Quite different from your initial claim. It happened quite "late" as far as the universe is concerned.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join