In The Beginning ... ?

I have kind of an off-the-wall theory about evolution vs. adaptation vs. creationism vs. catastrophism vs. mutation.

We all know the ancients from around the world called the planets “the gods” and themselves the sons of the gods. And I’m not a bible thumper by any stretch, but even genesis speaks of the daughters of man marrying the sons of the gods. I also don’t believe in co-incidence, so the root word “gene” heralded in the title of that first chapter of the OT is quite intriguing. Like what did they know and when did they know it?

My theory concerns the possibility that life existed on an undetermined number of planets in the far distant past with highly advanced civilizations and they designated earth as a penal colony to house the worst of their belligerents and incorrigibles. This would explain the disparate races and physical traits of the inhabitants of earth, for which there seems to be no other explanation.

So once the rejects of the outlying planets had been banished to earth, a protective shield was thrown up to prevent all possibility of escape, the Van Allen Belt. For believers in the authenticity of the moon landing, although I do not subscribe to it, I do respect your right to believe. Nevertheless, the Van Allen belt is undoubtedly there and we (life forms) have not gone back to the moon or anywhere else in all these years. Manned space missions still today remain within low earth orbit.

There is another similar theory bouncing around in my head that varies somewhat from the one above, that perhaps the inhabited planets were doomed to destruction by planetary collisions (catastrophism) and survivors were forced to relocate to earth. But how could they pass through the belt. or why would they throw up a shield, if it wasn’t already there, unless to keep others out?

The fact that well over 90% of human DNA replicates primate DNA could easily be explained if the males who came from “the gods” mated with female earth primates (daughters of man?), thus the mixed blood offspring would “mutate” or “evolve” over thousands of subsequent generations to become homo sapiens, each carrying the particular traits of their home planets in their genes as well as that of the primates, while primates that did not interbreed would remain un-evolved. Other interplanetary species that came to earth may have not been able to "adapt", such as possibly Neanderthal. I haven’t yet figured out if otherworld female belligerents mated with male primates, but then who knows what a belligerent female will do.

And who could blame the more nature loving dark skinned offspring of the gods for driving those with lighter skin out of Africa, at least if our forebears were as pushy to own all the resources as they are today. Okay, I’m kidding. Well, maybe.

Few people are saying much about the coming (and current) catastrophic death and mutation we will soon have to acknowledge via Fukashima and other nuclear hazards, not to mention oil spills and corexit. But its impossible not to think that surviving animal and human life forms must mutate and evolve drastically again over the next millennium.

Okay, I left creationism out. It just wouldn't fit anywhere.

reply to post by frazzle

The two creation accounts in Genesis are only summaries...
...the more complete account of which is contained in an older manuscript The Book of Job.

In The Book of Job you will find not only a more complete creation account in the later chapters...
...but also a detailed description of the role of the Sons of God.

I think science and Religion are just two sides of the same coin.

I would say that based on ancient teachings and esoteric history, Human beings are the crowning achievement of the cosmos. We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.

The bible's story of creation is full of truths that are veiled beneath the surface. If you dig a little deeper you see that most biblical scholars agree that "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" the word God is actually translated as plural or The Gods.

Also the Bible describes creation on a scale of time that is impossible for humans to conceive. Esoteric traditions teach that the earth has gone through three major epochs of evolution to get where we are today.

the first epoch was our vegetable phase, then mineral, then animal.
that is why if you were to extract a human nervous system from the body it would resemble roots of a tree or a tree itself.
As matter became more dense our bones hardened, then mammalians grew limbs so that we could transition onto land and learn to work together and co create.

the earth has been around 4 billion years and ancients knew this information that is why they viewed all biology as astro biology.
They knew that a great platonic year lasts about 25,920 years, the same amount of breaths we take each day on average. there is so much more to cover but people will probably just try to mach me and tell me i'm crazy but do the research the information and facts speak for themselves.

Okay, I left creationism out. It just wouldn't fit anywhere.

reply to post by frazzle


That was a genious idea because creationism has nothing to do with the evolution of earth

Cran

reply to post by frazzle

You might also be interested to know that the writer C.S.Lewis understood that there were 'Great Spirits' associated with the overseeing and management of the planets. Great brooding timeless beings.

reply to post by cranspace

Is Creation the same as 'Creationism'?

Originally posted by cranspace

Okay, I left creationism out. It just wouldn't fit anywhere.

reply to post by frazzle

 

That was a genious idea because creationism has nothing to do with the evolution of earth

Cran

lol yet another hack who has probably never even spent time honestly dedicated to studying theology or history for that matter..

anyone one goes out of their way to directly or indirectly bash another persons beliefs is just insecure with their own and clearly have not lifted the veil of true reality.

Originally posted by knightsofcydonia

Originally posted by cranspace

Okay, I left creationism out. It just wouldn't fit anywhere.

reply to post by frazzle

 

That was a genious idea because creationism has nothing to do with the evolution of earth

Cran

No, actually he's right. Evolution doesn't have anything to do with how life was created, just how it progressed.

Us Christians must be able to intelligently debate the facts, or it makes us all look bad.

lol yet another hack who has probably never even spent time honestly dedicated to studying theology or history for that matter..

anyone one goes out of their way to directly or indirectly bash another persons beliefs is just insecure with their own and clearly have not lifted the veil of true reality.

edit on 8-6-2012 by knightsofcydonia because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-6-2012 by knightsofcydonia because: (no reason given)

No, actually he's right. Evolution doesn't have anything to do with how life was created, just how it progressed.

Us Christians must be able to intelligently debate the facts, or it makes us all look bad.

Interesting posts everyone, thanks for your input.

Its important to remember that there are no verifiable facts, only passed down stories from the ancients. So every theory is open to debate and mine was made up out of whole cloth as, I think, are many others.

reply to post by knightsofcydonia

lifted the veil of true reality.

Really the truth is out there i do not have to lift any veil to find it
As you pull one over yourself with words such as
Catastrphism
Creationism
I am no wordsmith but i would not make a catyclismic error as this
Besides in the beginning
There was only me

Cran

reply to post by troubleshooter


In The Book of Job you will find not only a more complete creation account in the later chapters...
...but also a detailed description of the role of the Sons of God.

That's singular, not plural. Monotheism vs. polytheism, and obviously there's no mention by Job of the planet gods the pagans of many cultures around the world had worshipped since who knows when. In a way, you could say the belief systems went through their own evolution with the introduction of "a one true God".

Originally posted by KnawLick

Originally posted by knightsofcydonia

Originally posted by cranspace

Okay, I left creationism out. It just wouldn't fit anywhere.

reply to post by frazzle

 

That was a genious idea because creationism has nothing to do with the evolution of earth

Cran

No, actually he's right. Evolution doesn't have anything to do with how life was created, just how it progressed.

Us Christians must be able to intelligently debate the facts, or it makes us all look bad.

lol yet another hack who has probably never even spent time honestly dedicated to studying theology or history for that matter..

anyone one goes out of their way to directly or indirectly bash another persons beliefs is just insecure with their own and clearly have not lifted the veil of true reality.

edit on 8-6-2012 by knightsofcydonia because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-6-2012 by knightsofcydonia because: (no reason given)

No, actually he's right. Evolution doesn't have anything to do with how life was created, just how it progressed.

Us Christians must be able to intelligently debate the facts, or it makes us all look bad.

edit on 8-6-2012 by KnawLick because: Screw the requote up...

your response is incorrect actually. There was no "beginning" and there is no "end" the universe is something that always has been and always will be.

Evolution is 1. A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form.

Evolution has EVERYTHING to do with how life was created.


cre·a·tion (kr-shn)
n.
1.
a. The act of creating.
b. The fact or state of having been created.
2. The act of investing with a new office or title.
3.
a. The world and all things in it.
b. All creatures or a class of creatures.
4. Creation The divine act by which, according to various religious and philosophical traditions, the world was brought into existence.
5. An original product of human invention or artistic imagination:

pro·gres·sion (pr-grshn)
n.
1. The process of progressing; progress.
2. Movement from one member of a continuous series to the next.
3. A continuous series; a sequence. See Synonyms at series.
4. Mathematics A series of numbers or quantities in which there is always the same relation between each quantity and the one succeeding it.
5. Music
a. A succession of tones or chords.
b. A series of repetitions of a phrase, each in a new position on the scale.

I agree with some of your OP and think it's a valid theory. I'm not so sure about the Earth being a penal colony part though.

I do however believe that the human race may have been much more advanced in the past. And that we have a history which has been hidden from us.

As far as humans inhabiting other planets. There seems to be only one likely possibility in our solar system. That would be Mars. For humans to be able to survive the planet needs to be in that "sweet spot". Where the temperature and conditions needs to be just right for liquid water and an oxygen rich atmosphere to exist.

Earth is a much larger planet than Mars. It doesn't really make sense to me that Earth would be a penal colony. Many scientists believe that young stars increase in size and temperature as they get older. So it is possible that Mars was originally in that "sweet spot" and the Earth was still a frozen planet.

As our solar system warmed over the centuries perhaps our ancient ancestors escaped their dying planet and came to Earth. Rebuilding their lost society and culture. Leaving behind clues to our catastrophic past.

I'm not sure which planet we might have inhabited first. Or where our true origins began. But, I also believe that it's possible that our ancient ancestors may have inhabited both Earth and Mars at the same time for a certain period of time. All this is just speculation but it seems very plausible to me.

reply to post by knightsofcydonia


There was no "beginning" and there is no "end" the universe is something that always has been and always will be.

I've more or less reached that conclusion, as well as gradual evolution, however Velikovsky offered a lot of evidence to show how catastrophic events may have altered evolution.

Originally posted by IpsissimusMagus
I agree with some of your OP and think it's a valid theory. I'm not so sure about the Earth being a penal colony part though.

I do however believe that the human race may have been much more advanced in the past. And that we have a history which has been hidden from us.

As far as humans inhabiting other planets. There seems to be only one likely possibility in our solar system. That would be Mars. For humans to be able to survive the planet needs to be in that "sweet spot". Where the temperature and conditions needs to be just right for liquid water and an oxygen rich atmosphere to exist.

Earth is a much larger planet than Mars. It doesn't really make sense to me that Earth would be a penal colony. Many scientists believe that young stars increase in size and temperature as they get older. So it is possible that Mars was originally in that "sweet spot" and the Earth was still a frozen planet.

As our solar system warmed over the centuries perhaps our ancient ancestors escaped their dying planet and came to Earth. Rebuilding their lost society and culture. Leaving behind clues to our catastrophic past.

I'm not sure which planet we might have inhabited first. Or where our true origins began. But, I also believe that it's possible that our ancient ancestors may have inhabited both Earth and Mars at the same time for a certain period of time. All this is just speculation but it seems very plausible to me.

Well hey, its the penal colony (or earth as a refugee camp) part of my theory that explains the various races of people inhabiting this planet. No one has a scientific explanation for that. And we ARE belligerant ~ it appears to be part of our genetic makeup.

I agree that advanced cultures inhabited earth in the fog of prehistory and that they may very well have destroyed themselves, time and time again. That also seems to be a genetic flaw.

I read this thing where it said life did not start on Earth.It got here via comets. It would make sense that life was delivered here via an asteroid with water and living cells on it. And when they find a world in the green zone it starts to evolve. So Alien life on other planets could look like us.

Originally posted by terry456
I read this thing where it said life did not start on Earth.It got here via comets. It would make sense that life was delivered here via an asteroid with water and living cells on it. And when they find a world in the green zone it starts to evolve. So Alien life on other planets could look like us.

edit on 9-6-2012 by terry456 because: (no reason given)

I don't know how that could work since comets and asteroids tend to burn and break apart in earth's atmosphere and even if the chunks did strike earth, what life form (even living cells) could survive the intense heat and the crash?

The fact that all living beings from the very oldest cultures to the one we're now living have been enraptured by the stars and the heavens and I see that as a form of homesickness ~ a longing to return to our roots.

reply to post by frazzle


Actually there is very very little difference between the races as far as DNA is concerned.
Location / environmental factors easily explain most of the differences IMO.

I believe the remaining differences can be explained by the level at which the different species of early hominids intermingled. Homo erectus and Neanderthals bred with each other eventually creating Homo sapiens.

Diversity exists in almost all the different species of animals. Look at reptiles, fish, birds, other mammals, even microscopic organisms.

en.wikipedia.org...


We even share a common gene pool with fungi.

Humans and mushrooms

We are nearly 100% alike as humans and equally closely related to mushrooms. Only a few tiny changes in our DNA structure set us apart, giving us our variations in eye, skin, and hair color. We are technically all related and we are similar to the mushroom. Some fungi can even move or seem to crawl. No plant can do that, but we can. This motility is achieved through flagella, a tail that whips just like the sperm cell. These are cells that have motility.

This is an interesting video series with some of the theories

Originally posted by IpsissimusMagus
reply to post by frazzle

 

Actually there is very very little difference between the races as far as DNA is concerned.
Location / environmental factors easily explain most of the differences IMO.

I believe the remaining differences can be explained by the level at which the different species of early hominids intermingled. Homo erectus and Neanderthals bred with each other eventually creating Homo sapiens.

Diversity exists in almost all the different species of animals. Look at reptiles, fish, birds, other mammals, even microscopic organisms.

en.wikipedia.org...

We even share a common gene pool with fungi.

Its those tiny changes ~ the devil in the details.

backintyme.com...
It often happens that an American who looks White and is seen as White actually has significant African DNA, and one who looks Black and is seen as Black has more than half European DNA. But most importantly, Hispanics are usually seen (and see themselves) as a third “race,” no matter what their DNA admixture shows.

So although we all share DNA with every living thing, mitochrondial DNA shows much that generic DNA tests cannot. And I'm fairly certain that science is only beginning to understand those details.

I haven't yet watched the video you linked but will do so momentarily.

reply to post by IpsissimusMagus


Okay, that video was very interesting, although it included as many admitted unknowns as any other theory and focused heavily on appearances, which can be entirely misleading. The clip made some good points, though, and I enjoyed watching, so thanks for posting it.