Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Adam, only 6,000 yrs old?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I ran across this on the Internet. Some are saying that" The Adam "that was formed is only 6,000 yrs old. There were other Men on the Earth before this Race was created? They claim this was the Caucasian race? Does anyone else have any Ideas on this?
Also I ran across a verse in the Bible. Jer.31 verse 27 I will qoute what it says here.
" Behold, The days come, saith the Lord that I will sow the house of Israel an the House of Judah with the seed of MAN an with the seed of BEAST"
Jonah 3 verse 8 " but let MAN an BEAST be covered with sackcloth an cry mightily unto God.."
Who were these people that were" Beast? "There are many other places that are mentioned in the Bible.
Adam
Now this talks about the Adam race that was only 6,000 yrs old. They say China an Africa had an earlier Man thats 70,000 yrs old.
If this is so then the " Flood" was not globel, an this would explain some of the Early Man bones found.
To me it sound logical. Christian claim that Man has only been on the Earth for 6,000 yrs , Science says different.
Also theres the " Missing Link" could maybe all this fit together?
If this subject has been mention before I missed it. Sorry. Any info or feed back would be great!





posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chasrac64 They claim this was the Caucasian race? Does anyone else have any Ideas on this?


This should raise flags about the source. For most of the older peoples were dark, not Caucasian. Sounds like a racit site..... off to read it now

yup.


Look I like the Stars and Bars as much as anyone, but these folks need to realize that Christ was COLORBLIND.

[edit on 27-8-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:38 PM
link   
One of my good friends has a fine collection of arrowheads and other native American artifacts.

The Smithsonian has verified some of his findings as stone cutting tools, a rare stone tomohawk head and some beautifly detailed arrowheads officially dated as far back as 10,000 years ago.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:41 PM
link   
I dont think it sounds like a racist site at all. Ed you have to study the word " Adam" It means " Ruddy, to blush in the face. David was said to of been described like this in the Book of Samuel. Ch.16 verse 12. They said he was " Ruddy"
Who do you think These " Beast " like people were in the Bible?
I have never heard it put this way before, so I thought it would be an Interesting subject.
I have heard that " Adam= Mankind, but never seen it put this way Ed.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

One of my good friends has a fine collection of arrowheads and other native American artifacts.

The Smithsonian has verified some of his findings as stone cutting tools, a rare stone tomohawk head and some beautifly detailed arrowheads officially dated as far back as 10,000 years ago.



I also thought that The Indian Race was here for along time. I always believed that these were the Lost Tribes. I dunno why I feel this.
They are also considered " The Red Man"
Could they Then had been "Adams" ?



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chasrac64
I dont think it sounds like a racist site at all. Ed you have to study the word " Adam" It means " Ruddy, to blush in the face. David was said to of been described like this in the Book of Samuel. Ch.16 verse 12. They said he was " Ruddy"
Who do you think These " Beast " like people were in the Bible?
I have never heard it put this way before, so I thought it would be an Interesting subject.
I have heard that " Adam= Mankind, but never seen it put this way Ed.


Well that might be true, but I hold no credence to the idea that Jesus was white...it just isn't true. Jews look like Arabs.......at least the middle eastern ones do.

As for the beast, it could be the corrupt bloodline?

[edit on 27-8-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Whos The Corrupt " Bloodline" ? any ideas here? If the Corrupt Bloodline is " Beastly Men" then who were they an where are they now?



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   
ReaD gEN 6:4 and the book of Enoch.

I am not sure if that is the same in the verse in which we are speaking though. Just keep in mind that Jesus was not white, he was Jewish.



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 12:24 AM
link   
Whos saying Jesus was white? I didnt read that In that page? Anyone should know that he was A Hebrew man. so that would make him of that origin right? who saying he was " White"?



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 12:26 AM
link   
We have to remember that the church used the holy texts to teach the masses.

I honestly believe that specific details of this manner proclaiming superiority of one race or tribe over another were added by the church to justify the acceptance of slavery and servitude.



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Ok Ed, because he was from the Line of Adam. Gottcha. I see where you are getting this, but then there could have been alot of interbreding maybe?
I am White, but have Indian an Irish blood in me



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

We have to remember that the church used the holy texts to teach the masses.

I honestly believe that specific details of this manner proclaiming superiority of one race or tribe over another were added by the church to justify the acceptance of slavery and servitude.







Good point. fallen, never thought about this! so maybe this is just a church doctrine your saying because the Kings in them days were the rulers of them days. very good point.
Ok, How about the Adam that was formed in an Image of Elohims, were these like Aliens? The Ones that came down from Heaven?
So this mean I have like Alien or Angel whatever you all call these things that came down? could have been huh? would this explain the Missing link? where Darwin when you need to ask him a few things?



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Amorites an the Hitties? does anyone know? Ed you seem to know the Bible pretty well, who were these groups?



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Science indicates that man evolved over time but "divine intervetion" may have sped up the process
a bit.

So how could the church explain " divine intervention " or selective breeding to the masses
if they didn't understand the science that would make it possible.


The Bible implys strongly that earlier and purer DNA made it possible for humans to live
for 3-500 years, but the purity was corrupted one way or another to drasticly shorten
our life span.



[edit on 28-8-2005 by FallenFromTheTree]



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chasrac64
I ran across this on the Internet. Some are saying that" The Adam "that was formed is only 6,000 yrs old.

6,000 years ago is 4,000 BC. The Sumerians were writing about their kings and giving a list of who ruled when as early as 3,000 BC. These are called "king lists" and they go back much farther than 4,000 BC
www.answers.com...


There were other Men on the Earth before this Race was created? They claim this was the Caucasian race? Does anyone else have any Ideas on this?


The fact is that this is just plain Bad Science. Races are not the same as species -- they're color variations. To give you a good example, think of a Siamese cat and a Persian cat. They're both felis domesticus -- and we're all homo sapiens. There are some variations in the eyesockets of the skulls that mark differences in races as well as the "cracks" (sutures) where the bones of the skull grow together... and we know that Caucasians are far older than that.

Humans as genus 'homo' has been on the Earth for well over a million years. If you count Australopithecus (our oldest human ancestors), the line goes back over 5 million years.



Also I ran across a verse in the Bible. Jer.31 verse 27 I will qoute what it says here.
" Behold, The days come, saith the Lord that I will sow the house of Israel an the House of Judah with the seed of MAN an with the seed of BEAST"
Jonah 3 verse 8 " but let MAN an BEAST be covered with sackcloth an cry mightily unto God.."
Who were these people that were" Beast? "There are many other places that are mentioned in the Bible.


Argh. The Bible is a book, and combining those two phrases to make something is about as logical as taking a sentence from HARRY POTTER AND THE HALFBLOOD PRINCE and a second sentence from HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE and making a conclusion on those two sentences.

Each "chapter" of the Bible is a book written by a different person.

Each "chapter" was written at different times.

They may refer to each other, but they don't connect.

The Jeremiah quote is actually part of a section of praise and talks about "increasing" men and animals and resources for Israel.

The Jonah quote is part of a rant that Jonah delivered to the king of Nineveh, saying "you are awful and evil people and are worshipping your own gods instead of our wonderful deity and if you and every living thing in your land doesn't suddenly convert, our deity will send horrible things to you."


If this is so then the " Flood" was not globel, an this would explain some of the Early Man bones found.


There isn't any evidence for a global flood.


Also theres the " Missing Link" could maybe all this fit together?

There isn't a missing link.



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Who were these people that were" Beast?

If you notice, the hebrew creation myth has adam and eve living in paradise, but then they are cast out into the nasty regular world. They have some kids, and one kid, cain, goes off to live in the wild wastelands, but soon enough is living in the cities. The general impresion I get is that the creation myth is the creation of the ancestors of the myth tellers, not all humanity. Adam and Eve are the first hebrews (or whoever actually made up the myth), not the first humans ever. Its just that all other humans are beastial and subhuman, compared to the tribe telling the myth.

If you notice also, the inuit of the artic, the word inuit means 'the people' or something like that. I think that this jives with the above, the inuit certainy knew about other types of people, they simply considered them inferior. All tribes look upon other tribes as less special, as non-central to the world and its history, and as rather ultimately un-human. These other references to man and beast mixig amoung the tribes and co-existing with the tribes, seems to confirm this.

Its another example of one of the problems of taking a myth that is thousands of years old out of its original context and putting it into a modern one, it doesn't make sense.



edsinger
Jews look like Arabs.......at least the middle eastern ones do.

Also, the people that were originally telling these stories probably looked nothing like the people that live in those lands now. The arabs are a group that existed in the deserts of the arabian penninsula, they expanded to the rest of the middle east a long time ago. Before that, there had been other expansions. There's been a lot of changing ethnicities in that region, as with the rest of the world. What I think is most intersting is that

  1. The Semitic Languages are part of the African Language Group
  2. The semetic Languages are closely related to the elammite group, and thru this possibly the dravidic-harrapanan languages

I also think that there are descriptions of the native sumerians being derided by one of the peoples that invaded them as being very dark skinned, and the sumerians are thought to have spoken a semitic-elamite type of language.

Now, language doesn't really have anything to do with ethnicity, just look at the numerous ethnicities that speak spanish, or english. Heck, even in england there are celts, picts, italians (via rome), germans, danes, vikings (normans) and french.

But, given no other information, perhaps the people that orignally told this myth were more like the sumerians and harrapanans than anything else, so perhaps they looked like southern indians more than modern palestinians and yehudis.


A temple dancer?

The orignal jezebel?

Adam? Noah?


*shrugs* Thats how I tend to think of it anyways, not very logical in the end tho.


fallen from teh tree
were added by the church to justify the acceptance of slavery and servitude.

This is easily refuted by seeing that the orignal texts, which 'the church' has nothing to do with, had this language. It was not added by the church.

The Bible implys strongly that earlier and purer DNA made it possible for humans to live for 3-500 years, but the purity was corrupted one way or another to drasticly shorten our life span.

The bible implies nothing of the sort and offers no explanation for why the really remote patriarchs are able to live for so long. It says nothing about dna or any sort of logical mechanism about it at all. THe bible probably has really long living patriarchs and also giants and the like because all cultures allways think that things were better in teh remote past. In the golden age, where men were heroes and everything they did was huge.



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Well if it was not the church or those employed to translate the original texts, then perhaps the authors were influenced by their perception of fact at the time.

I can't help but wonder what has been added, left out, hidden or detroyed by our esteemed
ancestors.



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chasrac64 Ok, How about the Adam that was formed in an Image of Elohims, were these like Aliens? The Ones that came down from Heaven? So this mean I have like Alien or Angel whatever you all call these things that came down? could have been huh? would this explain the Missing link? where Darwin when you need to ask him a few things?



No, I do not think they are aliens, I think they are angels. There are both good and bad (1/3).

I think that the 'we' in the create man story shows the plurality of God, yes the Trinity. One God, three persons.....

But the Angels can yet be seen today and I think they are directly related to the UFO and Alien phenomenon today. It is a faciniating subject.

Just a short example..

INCUBUS - A spirit or demon thought in medieval times to lie on sleeping persons, especially women, with whom it sought sexual intercourse.

SUCCUBUS - In folklore, a female demon thought to have sexual intercourse with sleeping men.


Now you look at the UFO abduction cases, they almost always have a sexual aspect to them, rapes and what-nots. In the 1400's this was a common theme.

THere is even a thread here about them,


Incubus & Succubus Spirits








Originally posted by Chasrac64Amorites an the Hitties? does anyone know? Ed you seem to know the Bible pretty well, who were these groups?




AMORITES A people who occupied part of the Promised Land and often fought Israel. Their history goes back before 2000 B.C. They took control of the administration of Babylonia for approximately 400 years (2000-1595), their most influential king being Hammurabi (1792-1750). Their descent to Canaan may be traced back to 2100-1800 when their settlement in the hill country helped to set the stage for the revelation of God through Israel.
Abraham assisted Mamre the Amorite in recovering his land from four powerful kings (Gen. 14), but later the Amorites were a formidable obstacle to the Israelites' conquest and settlement of Canaan. They preferred living in the hills and valleys that flank both sides of the Jordan River. Sihon and Og, two Amorite kings, resisted the Israelites' march to Canaan as they approached east of the Jordan (Nu. 21:21-35); but after the Israelite victory here, Gad, Reuben and half of Manasseh settled in the conquered area. These two early victories over the Amorites foreshadowed continued success against other Amorites to the west and were often remembered in both history (e.g., Deut. 3:8; Josh. 12:2; Judg. 11:19) and poetry (Num. 21:27-30; Ps. 135:10-12; 136:17-22). West of the Jordan, the Amorites lived in the hills along with the Hivites, Hittites, and Jebusites (Num. 13:29; Josh. 11:3); but specific identification of Amorite cities cannot be certain since the term "Amorite" is used often as a very general name for all the inhabitants of Canaan, as is "Canaanite" (e.g. Gen. 15:16; Josh. 24:15; Judg. 6:10; 1 Kings 21:26). Five city-states in south Canaan formed an alliance instigated by the king of Jerusalem (Jebus, Jebusites) and intimidated an ally of Joshua, i.e. Gibeon. These "Amorites," as they are called in the general sense, were defeated by Joshua's army and the Lord's "stones from heaven" (Josh. 10:1-27). Amorites also were among those in the north who unsuccessfully united to repel the Israelites (Josh. 11:1-15). Later, two other Amorite cities, Aijalon and Shaalbim, hindered the settlement of Dan near the Philistine border (Judg. 1:34-36).
Amorite culture laid at the root of Jerusalem's decadence, according to Ezekiel (Ezek. 16:3,45); and Amorite idolatry tainted the religion of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms (1 Kings 21:26; 2 Kings 21:11). Despite the Amorite resistance and poor influence, they were subjugated as slaves (Judg. 1:35; 1 Kings 9:20,21; 2 Chron. 8:7,8). Their past hindrance is a subject of derision for the prophet Amos (Amos 2:9,10). See also Canaanites; Jebusites; Babylon; Syria; Sihon.

Daniel C. Fredericks

Roy L. Honeycutt





HITTITES AND HIVITES Non-Semitic minorities within the population of Canaan who frequently became involved in the affairs of the Israelites.
Hittite and Hivite peoples of Indo-European origin, identified within the population of Canaan (as "sons" of Canaan) in the Table of Nations (Gen. 10:15,17), seemingly infiltrated from their cultural and political centers in the north and settled throughout Palestine. Although the history and culture of the Hittites is being clarified, a problem exists with the so-called "Hivites," a name of unknown origin without any extra-biblical references. That they were uncircumcised (Gen. 34:2,14) would suggest an Indo-European rather than Semitic origin. The more acceptable identification therefore would be with the biblical Horites (Hurrians) whose history and character are well-known from extra-biblical sources and consistent with role attributed to them in the biblical text. The Septuagint reading "Choraios" (Horite) for the Massoretic "Hivite" in Gen.34:2 and Josh. 9:7 suggests this identification (see Horites; Hurrians).

Hittites in the Bible Hittites appear among the ethnic groups living in urban enclaves or as individuals in Canaan interacting with the Israelites from patriarchal times to the end of the monarchy (Gen. 15:20; Deut. 7:1; Judg. 3:5). As a significant segment of the Canaan's population, these "children of Heth" permanently became identified as "sons" of Canaan (Gen. 10:15). In patriarchal times, the reference to King Tidal (in Hittite Tudhaliya II) in Gen. 14:1 is a possible link to early imperial Hatti. In Canaan, the Hittites established a claim on the southern hill country, especially the Hebron area. As a result, Abraham lived among this native population as a "stranger and a sojourner" (Gen. 23:4). He was forced to purchase the Cave of Machpelah from Ephron the Hittite as a family tomb, specifically for the immediate burial of Sarah (Gen. 23). Esau's marriage to two Hittite women ("daughters of Heth ... daughters of the land") greatly grieved and displeased his parents (Gen. 26:34,35; 27:46).
The geographical reference to "all the land of the Hittites" (Josh.1:4) on the northern frontier of the Promised Land may indicate a recognition of the Hittite/Egyptian border treaty established by Rameses II and the Hittites under King Hattusilis III of about 1270 B.C. Moses' listing of the inhabitants of the Promised Land included the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Hivites, and Jebusites (Ex. 13:5), a situation that was confirmed by the twelve spies sent to explore the land. They reported that Amalekites occupied the Negev, the Hittites, the Jebusites, and Amorites lived in the hill country, and the Canaanites were concentrated along the Mediterranean coast and the Jordan Valley (Num. 13:29; Josh. 11:3); thus the Hittites were doomed to displacement by the infiltrating and invading Hebrews (Ex. 3:8,17; 23:23; 33:2; etc.).
Devastation and pressures from the west by the Phrygians and the Sea Peoples brought another Hittite population to Canaan about 1200 B.C. Ezekiel recalled that Jerusalem had Amorite and Hittite origins (Ezek. 16:3,45). David purchased a threshing floor from Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sam. 24:16-25) whose name may suggest a Hittite noble status ("arawanis" in Hittite meaning "freeman, noble"). Later, the account of David's illicit love affair with Bathsheba indicates that Uriah and possibly other Hittites were serving as mercenaries in David's army (2 Sam. 11:3,6; 23:39). The Hittite woman among Solomon's foreign wives was probably the result of a foreign alliance with a neo-Hittite king of north Syria (1 Kings 10:29-11:2; 2 Chron. 1:17). Hittites together with other foreign elements appear to have been conscripted to forced labor during Solomon's reign (1 Kings 9:20-21).

Languages of the Hittite World Records of the Assyrian trade colonies in the "Land of Hatti" suggest an earlier sub-stratum of linguistic and cultural development in the vicinity of Kanesh. This non-Indo-European language also found in texts from the Boghazkoy archives has been called "Hattic." It appears to have been at least one of the languages spoken in central Anatolia before the coming of the Hittite-Luwian branch of Indo-Europeans.
For several hundred years Kanesh was the primary center of Anatolian affairs. Its role as a major Assyrian trading colony provided access to the Mesopotamian cuneiform system of writing. As a result, "cuneiform" Hittite became the "official" language of the empire (about 1600-1200 B.C.) for its historical annals, laws, and international treaties and correspondence. It was a spoken language only within the vicinity of Hattusas, the capital and center of Hittite officialdom.
Speakers of an Indo-European language appear to have arrived in Anatolia from the north shortly before 4000 B.C. and gradually spread southward. These northwestern Anatolian settlers between 4000 and 3000 B.C. spoke an early form of Greek. The impression in Central Anatolia is of a generally peaceful spread of influence and language from the south and to a lesser extent from the west of Indo-Europeans whose ancestors recently had arrived from southeastern Europe. As a result from 3000 to 2000 B.C. much of Anatolia was occupied by various Indo-European elements who spoke closely related languages that included Hittite and Luwian (the Arzawans). However, soon after 1800 B.C., the kings of Kussara on the eastern frontier of Indo-European Anatolia assumed control. They conquered Kanesh and other central cities and established their capital at Hattusas. Their language, by this time clearly an archaic form of Hittite, was written in a hieroglyphic script. The iconography of this hieroglyphic script clearly suggests western origins. Hieroglyphic Hittite continued as the principal spoken language throughout the imperial and neo-Hittite periods to about 700 B.C.

Hittite Old Kingdom The growing pressure of the Hurrians about 1780 B.C. forced a Hittite consolidation and the eventual establishment of their fortress



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Fallenfromtree, what do you mean by " Divine Intervention"?
Also, Indellkoffer: Theres no missing link, for real?
And Nydan, Only Man was thrown from the Garden
Gen:
Ch 3-23:24
Ed I have to read what just posted. alot about the Hitties.



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Do you mean the hitites? I have heard the lineage of the beast story, that supposedly eve bore satan a son or something and cain was the result of that union. Well to believe this, would mean there are a group of people walking around out there that are descended from satan.






top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join