The 974 generations before the Creation of Adam

a reply to: UNIT76

yeah i am not comfortable with the brother thing either. i think it would be better stated as sons of god. as divine creations, were all the angels brothers? i don't think so??? jesus was god and the only son of god in an actual fully human body (begotten). meaning he was the creator that the jewish rabbis called jehovah or yahweh in their writings. he was the guy that confused the languages at babel, who warned the noah figure about the impending flood and told him how to build an ark to survive it, and so on. i'm not saying jesus was an angel though, don't misunderstand me, i'm just indicating that a son of god and another son of god, are not necessarily brothers. satan was a son of god, an angel of some sort, but he was not the brother of enki, in other words.

originally posted by: UNIT76
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

you lot have your # together.. can you please take a look at this one day?
it seems like i'm only going to need one last little shove here

i use this.
www.eliyah.com...

consider also, that jesus tells the rabbis, pharisees and saducees, that the father in heaven is actually a nice guy, who knows how to and is willing to, give his children good things if they ask. what's open to interpretation there is - what is the definition of good things. it varies depending on the person asking. like a woman in africa with a dirt floor in her home, might ask for even nicer dirt floor, whereas a woman in australia might ask for sun baked tiles for her floor and a woman in a royal household might ask for gold encrusted floors and a woman in some super advanced society somewhere else in the universe, might ask for self-cleaning, self-polishing, fragrant, floors that make soothing sounds when you walk on them and massage your feet as well. lol.

what does it mean by GOOD THINGS? it's clearly not jesus' style to suggest good things are gained by material wealth. must mean things of the spirit. solomon asked for wisdom instead of riches and god gave him both, it says. the riches nearly ruined him, the wisdom rescued him from the brink.

a reply to: undo

thanks, i use to own that concordance but lost it in the move, never thought to seek an online version (a bunch of aggressive catholics once scoured it looking for what might've been underlined)

i'm going over some of that old stuff again, mostly it's the genetic engineering & sitchin's dirty handprints that keeps me dubious (like that outfit who got onboard the swastika a few decades ago)
..what they end up tying to sell out of it just stinks to high heaven

i really appreciate your feedback here, can you or seede get us up to speed on malki tzedek? (melchizidek) something tells me he's going to pop up soon enough?


here's (some of) the relevant info

In Jer4:23-26 the prophet Jeremiah revealed what may have happened.
He used the same phrase as in Gen 1:2-‘I beheld the earth and lo, it was without form, and void’ v23.

Jeremiah implied there was a pre-Adamic existence of inhabitants and cities. He wrote ‘I beheld the mountains and hills being moved’, the fruitful places wasted, ‘and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger’ v26.

The key verse is v25, ‘I beheld.. there was no man’. It suggests that man was completely gone from the earth. God had once destroyed the earth before Adam was created.

Scientists say that the original earth is about 4.5 billion years old, based on radiometric age dating of meteorite material, on the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.

The age of the universe is placed at 14 billion years old. Since Adam, 6000 years ago, at no time was there no man living on the earth, even after the great Noahic flood, when all perished except only 8 people.

Jeremiah revealed a pre-Adamic civilization. Something happened between Ge1:1 and 1:2. This is called ‘the gap theory of creation’!

from this website

here's another website digging into the backstory..
..i've heard a lot of this stuff before, if i start seeing ads for berkey water filters i'm out

a reply to: UNIT76

I have only done a small study on Melchizedek. i vaguely recall doing a short etymology research as well, but not enough to really say i know any more about than you do. i find it odd, however, that he and his priesthood just appear out of nowhere and vanish again. methinks that means he's got a different name before hand, and after, and we just don't know what that is. names were kind of wishy washy in the bible. old testament moreso than new.

like have you ever read michael s. heiser's "what is an elohim" paper? consider the names of god in the creation chapters are primarily that word (elohim), yet it was also applied to the dearly departed, angels, other gods, and so on. a very fluid word. also, many bible characters names were not birth names, but titles. that means ziusudra may have been called noah in the bible, although i have a bit of an argument with myself on that subject.

for example, the flood texts in genesis are double layered, just like the creation texts. there's a layer about a global cataclysm and a layer about a pretty bad flood that wasn't global but required the barnyard animals and people be evacuated. i theorized the global one is the one you see referenced earlier in chapter 1 verse 2 -- the earth became tohu and bohu. and somehow, the two cataclysms were melded together.

p.s. add this to my post above. i just happened to recall as well, my moses theory (that's what i call it in my head). here goes:

moses was raised in pharaoh ahmose's household. the egyptians were descendants of ham, one of noah's sons. it's likely that egypt, sumer, and akkad, shared a nearly identical history of the world leading up to the flood . however, by the time moses is there, many generations have passed and now the story from the egyptian perspective has taken on its own language variants, metaphors and cultural variants.

moses' mom, who got a job in pharaoh's household as his nanny, taught him the history of his people. so he learned about the events from creation to the flood, from the egyptian scholars, and from his mom, who would've been mesopotamian. her version would've been late akkad, earlier babylonian i think.

this may explain why it's a double layer as well.

i don't suggest that any of this indicts jewish people or hebrews or israelites.

oh one more thing lol
the reason i'm a bit iffy on noah being ziusudra is not because of the events, but purely name related. for example, if noah was the name of the leader of the group that survived the global cataclysm in chapter 1, verse 2, was that also true for ziusudra? are either of them the name of the person who survived the black sea flood? and if so, which one? what was the name of the person who lead the group from the global cataclysm? because that double layered escape from cataclysm (global / black sea flood) requires names for both events. if we assume the names of the people who survived the global cataclysm was generally the elohim templates the first adam males and females were copied in the image of, what were their names? because as i mentioned before, elohim is a fluid word.

relevant link
"so what exactly is an elohim?" - dr. michael s. heiser
www.thedivinecouncil.com...

a reply to: undo

hehe.. been there & done it (thanks though)
and studying demonology & the bible since all my friends were going to nightclubs, i think their nocturnal activities were entirely different from mine?
we tend to hit various walls from time to time but eventually steamroll right over 'em, don't we?
most of this stuff i can handle alright, we're living in the same world looking at the same things, dealing with the same issues (etc) we've sussed out what flying chariots are all about, what that pineal gland's supposedly all about, what all that symbolism in the architecture's all about (etc) it's been quite a journey & quite some time..

it's just this whole "son of God' business left to wrap up now.. is jesus christ the one & only, or can we stickytape all the other culture hero's onto him & essentially toss-out the bible? ..i'm a bit doubtful of that

the best example (i think) is how all of this 'alternative' accommodating(sic?) stuff is embedded in movies, books, etc
.. it's the same thing as being initiated by degrees, one doesn't necessarily understand what they're looking at (seeing & understanding are two different things)
they haven't been EDUCATING us all this time, they've been SEDUCING us

a reply to: UNIT76

Texti really appreciate your feedback here, can you or seede get us up to speed on malki tzedek? (melchizidek) something tells me he's going to pop up soon enough?

UNIT76
Melchizedek or Malki Tzedek (/mɛl.ˈkɪz.ə.dɪk/[1]); (Hebrew: מַלְכִּי־צֶדֶֿק malkī-ṣeḏeq)
Tradition tells us in Anthology that all of this started with Nimrod as the self appointed first king of men. It seems as though Adam gave Shem the priestly order of the tribes. This meant that Shem was to be the administrator of God’s permissive will to His creation. All civil and spiritual matters were to be governed from the seat of Adam through his son Shem. This was in all reality to become known as the priestly order. But Nimrod was a jealous and wicked man who wanted this authority and as that result he took control over the sons of Adam through murder and deceit. He then appointed himself as the royalty of God.

Abram’s father became second in command to Nimrod and known as viceroy of the kingdom. Now before Shem there was another king named Adoni-zedek who was regarded as lord of Jerusalem but was not ordained by Adam. Actually Tzedek means righteousness and Jerusalem was the center of education in that day.

So the whole problem in that day was a war of power and authotity between the five kings of the Sodom axis, who were allies to Nimrod and Chedorlaomer, and Abram. Abram loved his nephew named Lot and it was this that brought Abram into war with Nimrod. Nimrod took Lot captive in order to draw Abram into war and it did do just that. Abram slaughtered the five kings of Sodom and on his way back to his kingdom he passed by Jerusalem. This is where Shem came out to greet Abram and Abram gave Shem a tithe of his wealth in respect to his being the priest (Melchizedek in Jerusalem) of Adam.

But this was more than just as it seemed on the surface. It was this greeting and breaking of bread that Shem then passed the priestly authority of Adam to Abram (Abraham). This is why the psalmist declares -- Psalms_110:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. -- This is referenced to mean (By Christians) that the Messiah would be a priest after the order of Shem (Melchizedek). Shem was not a warrior nor did he offer blood sacrifice. He ran the academy of Adam to teach about the Creator from Jerusalem. In this likeness the Christian embraces Jesus. It is believed that it was on the mount of transfiguration that Moses (Lawgiver) and Elias (Prophets) gave their authority to Jesus as the priest after the order of Melchizedek.

Matthew 17:1-5
(1) And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
(2)And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. (3) And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. (4) Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. (5) While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

This is a long study and have shortened it to try to explain who and what Melchizedek was. In that era he was Shem and all of the priestly order up to Abraham became priests of Adam. This authority became transferred and confirmed from God by covenants from Abraham to Jacob. From Abraham to Isaac and from Isaac to Jacob (Israel) and from Jacob (Israel) to Judah. Judah is ordained this authority till the Messiah comes -- Genesis 49:10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. --

Now this is where Christians will differ. The oath of authority of transfer of the priestly order is believed by some Christians as to mean that Messiah did come and the authority was transferred on the Mt. of transfiguration to Jesus. Others will contend this and insist that it means when Jesus returns to set up His one thousand years reign. So you may make of this whatsoever pleases you. I believe that Jesus does now hold the priestly authority and that Judah has passed the sceptre of power to Jesus. Just my own belief of course.

Note that the word septre is not misspelled. The English rendition of sceptre is scepter.

a reply to: UNIT76

the x factor

a reply to: Seede

(malki tzedek; "my king is righteousness" ..something like that)

Shem (Hebrew: שֵם, Modern Shem Tiberian Šēm ; Greek: Σημ Sēm; Ge'ez: ሴም, Sēm; "renown; prosperity; name"; Arabic: سام Sām) was one of the sons of Noah in the Hebrew Bible as well as in Islamic literature. He is popularly regarded as the eldest son, though some regard him as the second son. According to some Rabbinic traditions, Shem was born without a foreskin (aposthia); which may indicate a basis for circumcision that predates the covenant of Abraham. There is however, no explicit indication of this in the Genesis text.

thanks, i needed that missing 'shem' part
..it's probably better if we just ignore that foreskin bit for now? /kicks it under the table

it seems like anything more to do with the pre-adamic civilization is going to be speculation or non-biblical at best?
from reading the bible, the only impression i'm left with is we are dealing with (for lack of a better term) "non-humans" (uhh, non-adams) ..bleh, maybe time to start looking into rahab once more

a reply to: undo

/laughs guts out
sounds like you took a peek at my crazy little video presentation?
thanks for the link (i think?) ..i'll check it out when i got some bandwidth..
and will eat my own head if the history channel ends up teaching me something

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

There is a book called The Urantia Book (www.urantia.org...) and it describes something very similar. It doesn't list it as so many generations, but does say the first humans evolved about 1 million years ago. Later in the book it discusses Adam and Eve and says that they arrived on Earth about 35,000 years ago.

www.urantia.org... (First human family)

www.urantia.org... (Adam and Eve)

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Sorry i can't remember where exactly but genesis does mention somewhere that there are many people living outside the Garden of Eden.

did any people live outside the garden of eden?
humans outside the garden of eden
where did cain get his wife?

here's a 60+ part series of bible study (conrad jarroll)
and here's the link where noone wants to talk about it

it's probably better if i just don't say anything about the urantia group..

originally posted by: McGinty
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Sorry i can't remember where exactly but genesis does mention somewhere that there are many people living outside the Garden of Eden.

Genesis 4:16 talks about how Cain left the Garden and went into the Land of Nod and found himself a wife.

originally posted by: UNIT76
did any people live outside the garden of eden?
humans outside the garden of eden
where did cain get his wife?

here's a 60+ part series of bible study (conrad jarroll)
and here's the link where noone wants to talk about it

it's probably better if i just don't say anything about the urantia group..

Why, do you have a problem with the Urantia Book?

a reply to: UB2120

wiki;

The Urantia Book (sometimes called the Urantia Papers or The Fifth Epochal Revelation) is a spiritual and philosophical book that originated in Chicago sometime between 1924 and 1955.

The authorship remains a matter of speculation. The authors introduce the word "Urantia" as the name of the planet Earth and state that their intent is to "present enlarged concepts and advanced truth."[1][2] The book aims to unite religion, science and philosophy,[3] and its enormous amount of material about science is unique among literature claimed to be presented by celestial beings.[4]

Among other topics, the book discusses the origin and meaning of life, mankind's place in the universe, the relationship between God and people, and the life of Jesus. It has been described as "a rich and complex moral narrative, equal parts Tolkien and St. Paul."[5]

The Urantia Foundation, a U.S.-based non-profit group, first published The Urantia Book in 1955. In 2001, a jury found that the English book's copyright was no longer valid after 1983.[6] The English text became a public domain work in the United States,[7] and in 2006 the international copyright expired.[a]

it's that "uniting" religion, science & philosophy i have a problem with..
didn't you read the crap i've been posting in here?
look for the parts about the reset

a reply to: UNIT76

No, I have not read your other posts. So I am not sure why the uniting of science, philosophy and religion would be a problem for you. Uniting would not necessarily be the word I would use, I would say inter-relatedness. There is so much division among people that believe it has to be one way or the other. The Urantia Book shows how they are diverse views of the same reality.