Chronology of Creation in the Bible... it doesn't start in Genesis!

page: 3
53
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
An interesting take to make your point; however the real conspiracy is in the jist of it all, and that is the very beginning. God saw and corrected to keep it short, and he saw all (that he created) was very good. Now it is at this point (satan), as people point to as the evil one; again however the snake tells the truth (about the fruit of the tree) and it gets verified (again escaping death the very same day)and ticks off god (who is supposed to be ALL knowing). The two people did indeed see(knowledge as the snake said they would, without impending death) and god couldn't find them(when he came calling) to begin with, then punishes woman and man forever more (for disobeying & eating the fruit; not by death as previously threatened). (God saw all that he created and saw it was good) but I guess he overlooked some things, being all knowing and his hand was forced to make corrections.
Secondly; the time line;
A day is as a thousand years to god. So the plan was to create and then rest; nevermore to do anything, yet this same god is continually giving orders and literally destroying entire civilizations (tribes) woman, children and those we pregnant just in case. He also taught these chosen people how to not only attack and fight, but ambush which is simply deceiving and taking advantage. Again, from a god who claims to be able to will people to do according to his will, and is the purest form of good and honest. All this and more is in Said bible; which by the way was conceived by Constantine (Pope) after assembling his best writers so they could come up with one book, one religion to fit everyone's needs and observe their holy days as well. Giving him ultimate power and a following with the minimal resistance.
I could go on and on, but the point is made. It is documented fact, and readily available on line or in your bibles to verify all of the previous stuff.

The latest skeletons found are approx a million years or so old, and man's tenure here on this planet is well documented well beyond 5000 or so years for the people who believe in a marketed god because they are told to, no other reason than less resistance while handing power to those who simply claimed it. The whole point being that the timeline and motives like the OP stated are way off, in every respect.




posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Thanks for sharing.

If true, we are at a large disadvantage from the get go. The question is, why would God toss satan down here, giving him/her rule over this earth, and then expect us to turn out to be what pleases him/her? I guess one could argue that is what Jesus is fulfilling, but how are we supposed to grow spiritually if the ruler of our world hates us, and sets the world up to be almost totally against us? Why would God do that to his own creation that he/she loves?



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Gumerk
 


How could we learn to choose between right and wrong if we lived in a world where everything was perfect? Where everything was good and evil had no way of meddling in our affairs. How would we learn or discover anything if all the answers and solutions to the universes problems were handed to us?



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Gumerk
 


If one looks closely at the original text found in the Dead Sea Scrolls Deteronomy 32: 8-9


When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples
according to the number of the sons of G-d.

For the L-RD's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance.


This is refering to the 70 nations after the Flood. What this appears to mean is that G-d didn't give the powers and principalities (The Dragon) their authority until after the Flood.

So in some sense, humanity seems to have lost some authority or stewardship over the earth. In place of that, the powers and principalities have been given authority over the nations and the earth. Well almost all nations, as Jacob (Israel) belongs to G-d and Michael is Israel's chief prince.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I like your theory here. I have a similar theory myself. I believe that the six days of cretion were all different in their duration. I believe that the first day was actually very short, maybe even seconds or minutes. I also believe that the Earth may have been Terra formed or recreated from its first state. My chemistry professor says that the Earth is the remnant core of a long dead star. This would account for the existance of so much Uranium on planet Earth. I am a Christian though so recretion or Terra forming of this remnant core of a dead star would seem what is going on in Genesis. If the Universe is in fact 13 to 14 billion years old then in the beginning, the Earth was part of a star being manufactured in its core. Many stars emit water signatures so the occurance of an excess of water on Earth is also consistent with this idea.

I believe that God manufactured the Earth in the core of a star and after the star exploded and died, the Earth was left behind being without form and void. The Earth was then Terra formed by God with design. He gathered all the actinide material (Uranium, Thorium, ect.) and created vast caverns in the depths of the crust where the waters were stored, these caverns were lined with the very hot actinides in order to heat the waters below so that they would percolate to the surface and water the Earth. The Earth was a hydroponic tank. I also believe that a large body of water was suspended high up in the atmosphere in order to pressurize the oxygen below. This had to be done by an external source if it existed.

Today I hold that the Genesis is an account to give testimony to the birth of the Hebrew people starting with Adam. I find it kind of wierd that Genesis accounts for the existence of plant life before star light and this flies against the theory of the Earth being the remnant of a dead star. I do however believe the geological evidence and that the Earth cannot be young, so, I have to believe that Genesis is just an accout of the beginning of the Hebrew family.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
John 1:1
1 In the beginning was the Word

that being said it appears before god was there was the word
this is strange to me


Super,
The verse continues...."and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him and for Him and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."

Jesus said He is The Word.
"I am the word, the truth, and the light..."
John 14:6
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
John 1:14



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by katoomer3
Please explain in a logical way how "we" believe "blindly" in evolution. First off, as this has been said many times before... the theory of evolution is observable and supported by the majority of scientists in related biological/anthropological fields.


Kat,
A principal tenet of the theory of evolutiuon as it is commonly discussed is, well, you know, "evolution", i.e. that simple life forms evolve into more complex life forms. That complex species evolve from less complex different speciies.
Yet such transformation has never been observed or duplicated in a laboratory from what I have read. Just saying....
Here is one tome that discusses these issue. You can google away on your own about this and find the same I believe.

edit to attach
www.conservapedia.com...

[edit on 30-12-2009 by pumpkinorange]



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by pumpkinorange
 


Its interesting that the Chosech or Outer Darkness upon the face of Tehom could not understand or comprehend the Light in John 1. Keep in mind this "darkness" isn't normal darkness.

Its the same darkness that would extinguish light and that the ancient Egyptians could feel. Exodus 10:21

Then the L-RD said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand toward the sky so that darkness will spread over Egypt--darkness that can be felt."


The outer darkness that G-d dwells in. 2 Chronicles 6:1

Then said Solomon, The L-RD has said that he would dwell in the thick darkness.
Psalm 18:11

He made darkness his secret place; his pavilion round about him were dark waters and thick clouds of the skies.
2 Samuel 22:12

And he made darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies.
1 Kings 8:12

Then Solomon said, “The L-RD has said that he lives in thick darkness.
Deuteronomy 4:11

And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness.


It appears to be the same outer darkness in the Gospel of Matthew that seems to function like the veil in the temple, as a barrier to the holiest of holies.

Some people get confused by Revelations 22, which describes the New Jerusalem that descends from G-d and the Heavens in Rev 21. That is something completely separate.

[edit on 30/12/09 by MikeboydUS]



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeathShield
reply to post by Gumerk
 


How could we learn to choose between right and wrong if we lived in a world where everything was perfect? Where everything was good and evil had no way of meddling in our affairs. How would we learn or discover anything if all the answers and solutions to the universes problems were handed to us?



Fair enough. Wouldn't that make God and satan teammates though? Good and evil working together for mans spiritual education? Also, Jesus came into the world to be a sacrifice for mankind. Doesn't this mean we couldn't save ourselves? I suppose that still takes faith though, and there is still the evil to learn these lessons from. A little help or nudge doesn't hurt in my opinion. Thanks..Gum



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Locoman8
 


I am glad you where the one to offer your impressions on this subject matter, simply due to the fact that if I had posted such a thing, every freak who with their GOD hatefilled views would have said I was a nut.

I have been posting here for several years, and I fully agree, 100% with the premise you have placed here for consideration.

Anytime I have mentioned Genesis, I have tended to refer to it as the Genesis Account, simply due to the obvious problems found in Genesis in the first place.

1st: When considering Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, we have an immeadite problem.

In the Begining, GOD created the Heavens and the Earth.

In the balance of the Genesis Account, we clearly see one thing is repeated. To paraphrase, And GOD saw, it was good.

He created the Firmament, and it was good. He Recreated man on the 6th day, and it was good.

GOD never creates Waste/Void/Desolation/Without Form. This is the realm of the Fallen and their leader.

No, the problem in Genesis 1:2 is the Translators themselves. They erred in their application of the Original Text into English.

The King James 1611 Bible clearly says,


1:2 And the earth was without form, and void


But a review of the Original langauge, indicates a perfectly acceptable translation could also have applied indicating.

Genesis 1:2 And the Earth became a waste and a desolation, which of course, several posters have sort of already adressed, in an alternative manner.

Genesis 1:2 covers the War that occured between GOD and the Fallen. It was the outcome of that event, that turned the world into that waste and desolation, which could have the appearance of being without form and void, but this was not how it was originally created.

Scripture is fairly clear also, that we are currently in the Second Earth Age. If this is the second, then there must have been a first.

We also see other "Curious" mannerisms expressed.


Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:....


Now man, is expressed as something that was a "familiar" Speices.

It could have indicated, Let us Create an upright form with independent thought and call it Man.

No, I am fairly certain, Man was here in the First Earth Age, and in all likelyhood, resembled what Evolutionist base the premise of their faith in. In reality, we STILL and ALWAYS WILL have a MISSING LINK, until Evolutionists sit down and calmly realize, the Genesis Account is clearly noting why there is a missing link.

GOD and the Angels made a better man on the 6th day. And GOD also gives him a strange thing to do.


Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,....


You do not replenish, a "NEW" Creation. No, 6th Day man was a Re-Created spieces, and told to replenish the Earth.

But I would like to suggest, we actually have a bit of a 'flow' problem in Genesis.

Genesis 1:1 is the First Creation.
Genesis 1:3 through to Genesis 2:3 is the RE Creation
Genesis 2:4 is the second Creation of a Specific Man. The Gardener.

But none the less, you have done a great job in assembling together these Scriptures and presenting this in a Timeline.


reply to Solofront

Do you think that during the recreation of the earth, god expanded the earth, to thin out the atomosphere, etc...to make way for present lifeforms we have today?


Although anything is possible, why would this need to occur. Prior to the Flood, we had a barrier refered to as Heaven or the Firmament, which held the "higher" pressures for things such as Dinosaurs, and more specifically FLYING Dinosaurs, to live and be mobile. Not to mention the Flora/Plant life, which was considerably larger than what we see occur today.

And after the flood, we have devolved into the present lifeforms we are today.


Reply ot TheMythLives
...Could Lucifer also have the power to create things as well since he has the power to grant anyone he wishes leadership over the entire earth? I know it is impossible for you to know the answer, but your speculations and theories are quite interesting. I would like to know what you think about that...


May I suggest you review the following testamony of JOB.

Job

A great tale of Love and Loyality to GOD. But Satan appears to have been given the authority to have several things occur, which seem to include Earth Studies and Climate/Weather Control


Reply to Safandjaro
Allright, an interesting explanation. But why would God create a new species Man and a new earth in the middle of the enemy's base. If satan was cast unto earth. Why not leave this rock alone.


I think you missed the problem. My intro here discusses what this Earth became, and I believe this could not have been left alone, so to speak. It needed to be refreshed.

There is also another consideration, which is expressed within the Book of Enoch. The Fallen, are no longer "Physical Concerns" since they have been effectively dealt with during the flood.

Enoch Chapter 10

I hope this helps in answering your question.


reply to MikeboydUS

reply to post by Gumerk
For the L-RD's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance.

Well almost all nations, as Jacob (Israel) belongs to G-d and Michael is Israel's chief prince.


You make an interesting notation, but I think there is more in respects to this, which tends to be either overlooked or outright ignored either due to some intent or through a lack of comprehension of GOD's Word.


Isaiah 19:25 Whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.


Egypt is his people.
Assyria the work of his hands.
and Israel his inheritance.

Two of these three people, tend to be overlooked in respects to having an association and affiliation to GOD. Things like this SHOULD NEVER be overlooked.

I look forward to seeing where this leads to, and I would suggest if anyone who seemingly has difficulties with this topic only NEEDS TO ASK. It appears quite a few posters have a pretty good grasp on this subject matter.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Shane
 


The replenish error.

In the Hebrew it doesn't mean refill, technically the old meaning of replenish also only meant "to fill".

Male' (maw-lay), means to fill.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Wow!

This thread does show how dum people are.

It is well know that there are a lot of books missing from the bible I think there were 5 before Genesis. These books are termed the Apocrypha, and you will find there are a lot of them. They didn't make the cut because of politics.

The Book of Enoch should be before Genesis:

www.sacred-texts.com...

A lot of the Bible is missing, most of the missing bit put the whole of organised religion in bad light. The Gospel of St. Thomas is one of the one that rips the church a new hole.

If you have really researched the bible, you will notice references to books and gospels that are missing.

It's threads like this that make me HEADDESK, and want to run away from this sight screaming their all loons.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by gstrange42
 


So run for the hills why don't you? I have an NRSV bible with the Apocrypha in it. One problem with the Apocrypha is how much of it is contradicting to the rest of biblical scripture. Some books are good for historic facts such as the 4 books of the Macabees. The 2 extra chapters of Daniel do nothing but confuse the reader because the story flow is broken. You have to understand that there were many people in Israel who used names of great biblical writers to give their literature credibility. This is quite evident in the "Lost books of the bible" which are new testament additions such as the gospels of Mary, Thomas, Judas, the Infancy, the Apostle's Creed, the lost gospel of Peter, etc... Most of these books were written after the first century by catholic priests and early catholic fathers. If you read what we have presently as the Holy Bible, you'll find Peter instructing that all scripture of the Old and New Testament shall not be changed. Not one dot of the i or cross of the t. Paul tells Timothy that all scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, for direction. Don't believe everything that was written in that time. These books we have today as the Holy Bible have withstood the test of time.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Dalo321
 




Now it is at this point (satan), as people point to as the evil one; again however the snake tells the truth (about the fruit of the tree) and it gets verified (again escaping death the very same day)and ticks off god (who is supposed to be ALL knowing). The two people did indeed see(knowledge as the snake said they would, without impending death) and god couldn't find them(when he came calling) to begin with, then punishes woman and man forever more (for disobeying & eating the fruit; not by death as previously threatened). (God saw all that he created and saw it was good) but I guess he overlooked some things, being all knowing and his hand was forced to make corrections.


The snake spoke decievingly by telling the truth in a lieing way. They would not die immediately by eating the fruit.... but they would lose the immortality God bestowed upon them and they would age and die eventually. It's because of this that mankind has to suffer death.

God saw good in his "re-creation" but his former angel Lucifer... now Satan, is the cause of evil and chaos due to his rebellion. God had to change plans but the all-knowing God was prepared. He had every contingency plan mapped out. If ___ happens then I'll place plan A in action. If ____ happens then I'll place plan B in action. The Goal has never changed..... just the road to that goal.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by pumpkinorange
A principal tenet of the theory of evolutiuon as it is commonly discussed is, well, you know, "evolution", i.e. that simple life forms evolve into more complex life forms. That complex species evolve from less complex different speciies.
Yet such transformation has never been observed or duplicated in a laboratory from what I have read. Just saying....
Here is one tome that discusses these issue. You can google away on your own about this and find the same I believe.

edit to attach
www.conservapedia.com...

[edit on 30-12-2009 by pumpkinorange]


A simple example is bacteria evolving antibiotic resistance or ability to digest nylon. Obviously its complexity increased in the process, because its capable of more.

Speciation (splitting of species, macroevolution) has also been observed both in wildlife and in a laboratory.

Try to learn from less biased sources like Conservapedia:
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
In the Hebrew it doesn't mean refill, technically the old meaning of replenish also only meant "to fill".
Male' (maw-lay), means to fill.


Yes, Male' means a lot of things, which is truthfully confusing, BUT it is inclusive of replenish, (to fill again / refill / restock / resupply / etc......).


4390 male' maw-lay' or malae (Esth. 7:5) {maw-law'}; a primitive root, to fill or (intransitively) be full of, in a wide application (literally and figuratively):--accomplish, confirm, + consecrate, be at an end, be expired, be fenced, fill, fulfil, (be, become, X draw, give in, go) full(-ly, -ly set, tale), (over-)flow, fulness, furnish, gather (selves, together), presume, replenish, satisfy, set, space, take a (hand-)full, + have wholly.



replenish [rɪˈplɛnɪʃ] vb (tr)
1. to make full or complete again by supplying what has been used up or is lacking
2. to put fresh fuel on (a fire)


These same words are echoed in the Noah account.


Genesis 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.


Taken in context of what is being noted to Noah and his sons, the verb usage of "replenish" seems appropriate, since they are infact refilling the Earth, based on their last 150 some years of work, and the end result.

I had never given this a second thought. The "meaning" seems fairly clear in this situation, but obviously, it isn't.

I still believe though, that this doesn't deminish the premise put forth. It is abundantly clear, the Genesis Account is a RE-Creation Story from Genesis 1:2 forward to Adam created on the 8th day (The day after the day of rest) found in Genesis 2:4.

Thanks for noting this and ensuring we are not just taking "my word" for something Mike.


Ciao

Shane

P.S. Reference Sources
1611 King James Index
Strong's
thefreedictionary



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by pumpkinorange

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
John 1:1
1 In the beginning was the Word

that being said it appears before god was there was the word
this is strange to me


Super,
The verse continues...."and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him and for Him and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."

Jesus said He is The Word.
"I am the word, the truth, and the light..."
John 14:6
"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
John 1:14


John 14:6: Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me."

But you are "orange" of course. The politics abound.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gumerk
Thanks for sharing.

If true, we are at a large disadvantage from the get go. The question is, why would God toss satan down here, giving him/her rule over this earth, and then expect us to turn out to be what pleases him/her? I guess one could argue that is what Jesus is fulfilling, but how are we supposed to grow spiritually if the ruler of our world hates us, and sets the world up to be almost totally against us? Why would God do that to his own creation that he/she loves?


Perhaps the Biblical deception is that (a) Satan trapped us here initially in the "Garden" away from God. God is the living world and universe and those things shape you instead of coddling you like in the "Garden". To be good and just in a dog eat dog world is meaningful. Being good and just in a convent is nothing. The serpent, part of the natural world, helped us escape from the spiritual slave master, showing us we are part and parcel of the natural world and a small part of and dependent on the living universe. Our ego (Satan) within us insists we are much more (chosen) and that is the deception. Dominion over the universe, everlasting life, was the deception of the Garden of Eden. You have this wonderful life and you are deceived into frittering it away for the promise of the next "wonderful life". Would you act differently if you knew this was it?



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Locoman8
 


Good post!~ I enjoyed the read!~



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   


I think you should see things from another perspective.


"
I've learnt that the world is 4.500 million years old. If you're very religious it's not 4.500 million years old it is 6.000 years old.

One of these is not correct.

Using simple logic here.

Now the science boys they've got anoraks, they've got glasses, they've got bunsen burner and petri dishes.
I've gotta go with them - 'cause they can bend glass.
...
And then if you're religious - the religious people they've got...

a book.
"





[edit on 31.12.2009 by HolgerTheDane]





top topics
 
53
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join