Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9049 total)
104 online now:
DrJones*, jar, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), nwr, PaulK (5 members, 99 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: Coragyps
Post Volume: Total: 887,675 Year: 5,321/14,102 Month: 242/677 Week: 47/54 Day: 0/4 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was Adam Packin' Heat?
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 22 of 120 (678814)
11-10-2012 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by arachnophilia
10-30-2012 3:03 PM


Re: shadows, etc.

Modulus writes:
shadow in Hebrew is tselem, which is translated as 'in his own image' in Genesis. Though that's probably heresy

"shadow" is öÅì. "image/idol/photograph" is öìí (depending on vowels). they are almost certainly related words, but it's not quite accurate to say one is the other.

god making man in his own image is P's reinterpretation of J's much more direct symbolism, where yahweh literally breathes into the man's nose to make him alive. instead of the man containing the very essence of god, man is now a "shadow" of god. P is reworking a much larger J creation epic, of which we only have a small portion left, condensing and sanitizing J's scandalous assertions.

He provided Adam with male genitalia because He knew that He would later create Eve.

there's the interpretation that adam was a hermaphrodite, and that god split adam, but that comes from a conflation of the two separate stories.

Modulus writes:
shadow in Hebrew is tselem, which is translated as 'in his own image' in Genesis. Though that's probably heresy

"shadow" is öÅì. "image/idol/photograph" is öìí (depending on vowels). they are almost certainly related words, but it's not quite accurate to say one is the other.

god making man in his own image is P's reinterpretation of J's much more direct symbolism, where yahweh literally breathes into the man's nose to make him alive. instead of the man containing the very essence of god, man is now a "shadow" of god. P is reworking a much larger J creation epic, of which we only have a small portion left, condensing and sanitizing J's scandalous assertions.

He provided Adam with male genitalia because He knew that He would later create Eve.

there's the interpretation that adam was a hermaphrodite, and that god split adam, but that comes from a conflation of the two separate stories.

NOTE:

Man HAS managed to form a mental IMAGE of "Father Nature" by understanding of His Laws and creation.

Gen. 1:26 And God, (Father Nature, Reality), said, Let us, (i.e., his Natural Laws, together, in pan-en-theistic expression of the Spirit of God: [Gen 1:2]), make man, (through the process of gradual evolution ending in the finished Adam i.e.; Jesus),... Let us ((i.e., his Natural Laws) make man, (as a reflection of Reality, in his mind, able, through Truth, to imminently reflect the "I am" of this existence: [John 14:6]), IN OUR IMAGE, (after the spirit of our orderly panentheistic organization): and let them, (men as the Dominant species on earth to this day), have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by arachnophilia, posted 10-30-2012 3:03 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 23 of 120 (678817)
11-10-2012 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by arachnophilia
10-30-2012 3:08 PM


Re: Egyptians, hermaphrodites, similar but not the same

Modulous writes:
Or perhaps it was one of the famous jewish puns?

probably, yes. more accurately, it's "rib" or "side". the idea being that woman was taken from man's side, only to return to it (as man was taken from the dirt, and returns to the dirt).

That way leads to madness, amateurs should stay away from trying to figure out Hebrew (or indeed, make stuff up).

truer words have not been spoken.

Gen. 2:21 And the LORD God, (Father Nature), caused a deep sleep, (a progressive series of evolutions), to fall upon (him, an eponym for a whole species concurrent with Ramaphitecus Man and Sahelanthropus tchadensis), Adam, (to psychologically change him), and he (evolved over many millions of years as if he had) slept: and he, (the Universal Power, in time), took one of his (psychic) ribs, ([Hebrew: Tsela; a side of a person, figuratively, "a door."]), and closed up the flesh (of this psychic facility) instead (separating Human Intuition from the other Freudian faculties) thereof (within the mind of man);

Gen. 2:22 And (with) the rib, ([Hebrew: Tsela; a side of a person, figuratively, "a door."]), which the LORD God, (Father Nature), had taken from man, (the facility of Human Intuition), made he a woman, (and he also created the Anima dominant in her, that source of human Intuition so powerful in woman), and brought her, (The Big Mother Principle: [see Dr. Tessa Warshaw]), unto the (psyche or soul of) man.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by arachnophilia, posted 10-30-2012 3:08 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Eli, posted 11-10-2012 7:20 PM kofh2u has responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 26 of 120 (678857)
11-10-2012 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
03-01-2006 3:26 PM



A question for the literalists --
Did Adam have twigs and berries beneith his fig leaf?

Here's why I ask...

Adam was created in God's image, but why would God, a unique being, have genitalia?

Literally, we understand that God is not a physical presence but a spirit thing, similar to the same stuff which thoughts are made from.

God's son is Truth, which is an ideal, not a person, even though one can be under the spirit of Truth, Like Martin Luther King was.

This is probably not immediately acceptable to you, but for argument's sake, my point is that in the light of that definition, god made Adam capable of imagine the Truth, which is reflection of the force behind the ever unfolding Reality that is almighty god.

Add to this the literary criticism that suggests Genesis chapters 2 and 3 are actually about the on going evolution of man's psyche which is dramatized as occurring inside head of earliest man.

Eve is his Anima, differientating itself from from the Libido, which is Adsm.
The Tree of nowledge of good and evil is the Self, and the snake is the Superego, rebeling against authority as it is understood now to so do.

The rest of the story fills in all the psychological details, but perhaps you see my general interpretation well enough already.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 03-01-2006 3:26 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 27 of 120 (678859)
11-10-2012 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Eli
11-10-2012 7:20 PM


Re: was Adam packin heat

This is nonsense.

It makes sense in the framework of Theistic Evolution which understands Adam to represent the first species of mankind, which was followed by a series of 22 now extinct humans in our ascent to Modern Homo sapiens:

Gen 5:2 says god called them, the man and his wife, the "Adamites,"... i.e.; a species:

Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Eli, posted 11-10-2012 7:20 PM Eli has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Eli, posted 11-10-2012 10:38 PM kofh2u has responded
 Message 29 by Admin, posted 11-11-2012 9:02 AM kofh2u has not yet responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 30 of 120 (678899)
11-11-2012 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Eli
11-10-2012 10:38 PM


Re: was Adam packin heat

Again you bring up subjects that you cannot even define.
Theistic evolution makes no claim or has no condition that necessitates Adam being the first species of man. The bible doesn't say anything about "Adamites" either.

It might be worth your while to learn that there are vastly more than 22 species of hominids.

Don't go away yet.
I have messaged the Admin to discover why I am being censored and unable to respond to your lack of understanding on this matter and how it is relevant to the discussion of Adam, Theistic Evolution, and the genealogy of 22 "begats" in Genesis.

If granted equal opportunity to speak with you wise educated science minded people I have much to tell you.

Please wait and see if fairness will prevail and I shall teach you many different points of view which you have not yet discussed and never have even considered.

Edited by kofh2u, : typo


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Eli, posted 11-10-2012 10:38 PM Eli has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Eli, posted 11-11-2012 1:42 PM kofh2u has responded
 Message 32 by Admin, posted 11-11-2012 4:53 PM kofh2u has responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 33 of 120 (679059)
11-12-2012 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Admin
11-11-2012 4:53 PM


Re: was Adam packin heat

Posts: 11023

From: EvC Forum

Joined: 06-14-2002

Member Rating: 9.3

Send Private Message

Admin Posts Only

(3)

Cheers/Jeers:

Message 32 of 32 (678931)
11-11-2012 4:53 PM

Reply to: Message 30 by kofh2u
11-11-2012 10:14 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: was Adam packin heat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I said in my PM response to you, if you can put claims like this on a scientific basis:

kofh2u writes:
Gen. 2:21 And the LORD God, (Father Nature), caused a deep sleep, (a progressive series of evolutions)...

.......
Then go ahead. Otherwise please do not participate in this thread, or in any thread where you're making unsupported and unscientific claims, such as those where you're introducing numerological arguments.

My training and academic background has taught me that definitions are extremely important is science, and the place to begin and discussion or investigation.

To infer that The-Father-of-Everything, the creative Force behind the Cosmos we are born into is essential a "Father Nature" which Genesis Genesis introduces as "The Creator" hardly seems something that needs more than direct reading comprehension.

But logically, this idea is supported further on, when we read in John 14:6 that the Son of this "Creator God" is Truth, as personified ideal that presents itself in 32AD.

If the Son is Truth, then, logically, the Father must be the Force behind the ever unfolding Reality which moment by moment sires what is true is its wake.

Perhaps some would debate my understanding of scripture, but certainly not the connection between Gen 1:1 and John 14:6,... "I am the Truth, the way, life"...

Consider this thinking to be the premise by which I intend to teach the people here that Genesis is dead right, scientifically, and is an amazing pre-modern science exposition into things totally unknown to us before the last century or two.

People here may attack the premise, but must admit that like all Hypothesis, that is exactly what a premise means.
It is a position and a belief which must be supported by further investigation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Admin, posted 11-11-2012 4:53 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Admin, posted 11-12-2012 2:32 PM kofh2u has responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 34 of 120 (679062)
11-12-2012 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Eli
11-11-2012 1:42 PM


Re: was Adam packin heat

You have nothing to teach or offer.

Very unscientific.

Men like Wegener and Ohm and dozens upon dozens of other now highly regard but posthumously saluted men have had those very words throw in their face before the amazing insights they brought to our attention could be confirmed with enough evidence and HONEST intellectual openness to see the establishment punished one of their own.

However, this very common human attitude supports what took place in 32AD, when Jesus said his interpretations of scripture were The Truth, and the force of those pharisees made him "prove" that Truth will always rise again, if it is truth.

We saw Rev Martin Luther King, again in 1964, stand up and personify a whole movement that insisted the Truth was that "Separate but Equal" was a lie, and the Truth that civil rights were denied to all men in America must rise up again and again, in Civil War, in Watts, in a Million Man March in DC.

You are better than this Eli.
Be patient and open and reflective and above all, encouraging so the full impact and clear statement of a different point of view can reach you.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Eli, posted 11-11-2012 1:42 PM Eli has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Eli, posted 11-12-2012 10:02 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 35 of 120 (679066)
11-12-2012 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Eli
11-10-2012 10:38 PM


Re: was Adam packin heat

It might be worth your while to learn that there are vastly more than 22 species of hominids.

Perhaps,... the matters of Paleontology is still open to debate, but for now, I am using the most recent peer reviewed and academically published State-of-the-Art to be found in this book, in regard to the scientific facts as are available:

Book:

The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans
by G.J.Sawyer, (Author)

(Note that the number 22 does not imply any connection between some unknown but ill reported claim that there is something wrong about using numbers, i.e some kind of Numerology.
Nevertheless, when we come to discuss how Moses knew all this, 3362 years ago, the pattern of using certain numbers as a clue to discovery in that regard will bring up the coincidence that 3+7+12 = mathematically 22, the same number of letters in the Hebrew Alphabet.)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Eli, posted 11-10-2012 10:38 PM Eli has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Panda, posted 11-12-2012 10:25 AM kofh2u has responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 38 of 120 (679115)
11-12-2012 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Panda
11-12-2012 10:25 AM


Re: was Adam packin heat

Hilarious!
You are bat-shit crazy, but you at least made me laugh.
(I wonder what you people think when, eventually, everyone calls you insane.
Is it just simply a case of repeating to yourself: "It is not me! It is everyone else!"?)

LOL
Your response has me laughing too because I do not know whether youi are on the side of atheist scientists or the programmed indoctrinated Christian Creationists and ID guys.

Why I laugh is that, clearly, we are nearing that place where the Anti-thesis on the one side of the EvC Dialectic is at the breaking point with the theology of the Thesis on Creationism/ID, such as to usher in this Theistic Evolution Synthesis which will never be changed thereafter.

Once the scientists see that Genesis can as easily be supported by a more thorough and comprehensive reading, the Book of Genesis will have the certitude of factual basis for what was written 3362 years agpo.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Panda, posted 11-12-2012 10:25 AM Panda has not yet responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 39 of 120 (679120)
11-12-2012 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Admin
11-12-2012 2:32 PM


Re: was Adam packin heat

Science is not about what the Bible says. Science is about what we can glean from studying the natural world. This forum is for discussing how well the Bible can be reconciled with both science and itself (i.e., internal and external consistency).

So when I agree that 22 species as understood right now enumerate the links between modern man in our past evolution, and also show that Genesis parallels that same idea albeit, more acceptable to ancient readers, couching their life spans in terms of thousands of years, you suggest I am unaware that suggests that "the Bible can be reconciled with both science and itself????"

I do not understand your point here.

The consistency with which I have argued that the seven "days" are consistent with the seven eras, (as timed by the Geological Clock), and the Big Bang is essentially a simplified statement that agrees with the Gen 1:1, while the Flood of Noah refers to the extinction of all human species except modern man, 40,000 years ago, not 40 solar "days,"...
....and figurative "Ark" refers to the skull of a Noah of Modern Homo sapiens who contains all their visions mentally,...

.... and all people today are genetically related to one man who lived 40,000 years ago... you say I am not using science properly because it supports Genesis????

Is your rule that science is fine, as long as we use it to ridicule misunderstandings in the reading comprehension for the scriptures?

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Admin, posted 11-12-2012 2:32 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Admin, posted 11-12-2012 2:58 PM kofh2u has responded
 Message 45 by Eli, posted 11-12-2012 10:09 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 41 of 120 (679167)
11-12-2012 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Admin
11-12-2012 2:58 PM


Re: Moderator Request

Hi Kofh2u,
What I'm asking is very simple to understand. Please bring scientific support to your claims. Take an example from your second diagram. Enos was Seth's son, and this diagram says that Seth was an Australopithecus anamensis and that Enos was an Australopithecus africanus. What is your evidence for this?

If you have no evidence, please stop posting.

The analogy is there.
There is no "proof" that Australopithecus anamensis or Australopithecus africanus were actually links in our ascent, either.

There is simply the parallel analogy in science and Genesis that the ascent of man took place in twenty-two incremental steps.

Surely your science includes the concept of these two Hypothesis, one by science and this one, found in Genesis.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Admin, posted 11-12-2012 2:58 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 2846 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 42 of 120 (679168)
11-12-2012 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Admin
11-12-2012 2:32 PM


Re: was Adam packin heat

The two images are inconsistent with each other, the information they present regarding correspondences between our evolutionary ancestors and people from Genesis is made up...

All analogies are literary devices that are "made up."

What we can see... is that the last in this list of 22, there is Noah, who had three "sons" which supports the paleontology that identifies the three racial stocks of Caucasian, Negroid, and mongoloid.

This Noah is also supportive in this analogy because we have genetic evidence that all men today are related to just one man who lived 40,000 years ago.

We alsohave the evidence of hybridization taking place between these 22 predecessors BOTH in genetic research and in Genesis:

These correspondences supportr that the two lists are analogous and a valid interpretation of both scripture and paleontology.

Gen. 6:4 There were giants, (Homo Erectus of Methusaelian and Methuselahian kinds according to the bible), in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God, (that line of ascent which would not become extinct, Methuselahian links, through Seth, i.e.; Modern Homo Erectus), came in unto the daughters, (the sister species of Tubal-cain, Naamahians, a late stage Neanderthal type), of men, ("daughters" of the previous adaptation of the Methusaelian line of Cain, i.e.; Homo antecessor, derived through the line of Cain), and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men, (Neanderthals), which were of old, (powerful) men of renown (physical strength).

We have the support to this hypothesis in that a mass extinction took place 40,000 years ago, just as descibed in th estory about Noah.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Admin, posted 11-12-2012 2:32 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Admin, posted 11-12-2012 8:08 PM kofh2u has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021