Questions on Genesis

[JoeMo]

10 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

May I ask where you got this idea that their construction methods were "crude?"

Just an assumption, given the time frame.  Isn't it a fair assumption that progress runs forward, not backward?  They didn't have any machines to help them; they relied totally on human muscle.  Or did aliens help the Egyptians build the pyramids? If we had these advanced construction techniques then, how did we lose them for thousands of years?

[B/W Photodude]

11 hours ago, Kevin H said:

Lets not forget that there were probably names left off (because that's how ancient genealogies were done), as well as periods of where a first born would be named after his paternal grandfather, you could have several generations of the same two names, but they are listed once in ancient genealogies.

So, if I am reading you right, you are suggesting the Bible to not be accurate. Do you have any solid information to back up the idea that names were left off? Or same names for different individuals being merged into one. Keep in mind, the genealogy of Jesus is listed all the way to Adam.

[B/W Photodude]

On March 17, 2018 at 6:14 PM, JoeMo said:

 As I'm reading on in Genesis, one question it seems that she completely ignores is who were the Nephilim (or giants) mentioned in Genesis 6?  Given the timing of their appearance in the Bible, they were a BIG part of the reason for the flood and a big reason that God commanded the Israelites to utterly destroy certain ethnic groups in Canaan after the exodus. 

My "literal" read of the passage without my Christian preconditioning would be that fallen angels copulated with human women to create a super race that God never intended to exist.  With my Christian preconditioning, I understand that that probably sounds ridiculous.  If someone has an EGW passage that addresses the Nephilim, please let me know.

I do not really think she "ignored" the "Nephilim." You can find many stories in the Bible that she never wrote about. She should not have had to carry around a spoon to feed everyone so that they would not have to do their own diligence in Bible study. I believe she did speak to the height of Adam.

Lately, you will see many articles regarding "Nephilim" skeletons. However, the following article reviews some of these claims and discusses them in the age of Photoshop:

https://www.thoughtco.com/giant-human-skeletons-found-in-greece-3299810

I find the whole idea of demons and human women producing offspring ludicrous, but easy top believe if you slept thru biology class. Angels are spirits and not biological (carbon based units!) entities. They have no DNA to contribute to offspring. If so, then Satan gets elevated to a God level in creating new creatures.

[B/W Photodude]

On March 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Gregory Matthews said:

I ran across one Internet website that proclaimed that at the time Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden they had given birth to 63 sons and daughters, with a total  population of people expelled as 1,647.

There would be a huge problem with this if it were true. I see no where in Scripture where Adam & Eve had much time left in the Garden after the fall and certainly not enough time to have that many children. It would seem to be that they are saying that Adam & Eve had many children before they fell. The problem there is, you would then have a mixed population of fallen and unfallen  people. The unfallen should still be with us as they would be entitled to the Tree of Life and no sentence of death. Don't see any unfallen ancient tall shining people walking on the earth, not to mention the verse that says all have sinned. 

However, I could see Eve having had many many children. How could she care for so many? That is what older children are for!

[JoeMo]

1 hour ago, B/W Photodude said:

Angels are spirits and not biological (carbon based units!) entities. They have no DNA to contribute to offspring. If so, then Satan gets elevated to a God level in creating new creatures.

There are several instances where angels took on flesh.  An example is the angels that came to visit Abraham before destroying Sodom and Gomorrah. How do you know they don't have DNA?  How do you know that DNA is incompatible with human DNA?  If the "sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6 weren't heavenly beings (like the "sons of God" mentioned in Job - same Hebrew words) then who were they?  Maybe you have a more viable literal interpretation.  They certainly aren't the same as the "sons of God" mentioned in the NT.

[B/W Photodude]

2 hours ago, JoeMo said:

There are several instances where angels took on flesh.  An example is the angels that came to visit Abraham before destroying Sodom and Gomorrah. 

If the "sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6 weren't heavenly beings (like the "sons of God" mentioned in Job - same Hebrew words) then who were they?  Maybe you have a more viable literal interpretation.  They certainly aren't the same as the "sons of God" mentioned in the NT.

I understand that they appeared to Abraham to have flesh, but until we get a biopsy of their flesh with lab results showing the presence of DNA, I will stick to my original conclusion that they are spirits of a very different order than humans.

The "sons of God" mentioned in Job were the heads from other worlds like Adam should have been from our world. The sons of God were human beings. Since Adam couldn't be there and no longer had dominion over this world, Satan decided to fill in for him.

[Kevin H]

6 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

So, if I am reading you right, you are suggesting the Bible to not be accurate. Do you have any solid information to back up the idea that names were left off? Or same names for different individuals being merged into one. Keep in mind, the genealogy of Jesus is listed all the way to Adam.

No I am NOT saying that the Bible is not accurate. What I am saying is that we cannot impose modern ways of making genealogical tables on the Bible. We need to follow what we both see in the Bible and how it was done by others at that time. Even the genealogy we get of Jesus in both Matthew and Luke are very different, and I agree that Matthew is most likely using Joseph's while Luke is most likely using Mary's (even thought both claim to be Joseph's.).  However as you compare the list to say who appears in other parts of the Bible you find both overlap and gaps. Matthew has it nicely divided in groups of 7s. This was a tactic used by Jews, understood by Jews as well as non-Jews back in Jesus day to make certain theological points. We think and use genealogies differently. As linguists compare Matthew's and Luke's lists with lists in the Old Testament there are different names that show up, different names that are not showing up and additional generations that would throw off Matthew's groups of 7 generations. Yet all of these made perfect sense to the Jews and others of Jesus' day despite the fact that it drives us crazy.

I believe that the Bible is very accurate, that each and every one of those people we find on the different lists are indeed real people who were members of their particular grouping. However, I see you as wanting to make additional demands of the text that appeals to modern culture but which was foreign to their culture and use. At times you seem  to want to follow what is popular in modern Christianity of people who have certain views about how inspiration should work so that they end up throwing temper tantrums that God has the audacity to actually work with the Bible writers in their culture and practices and understandings and I've seen and heard comments where they can become quite appalled that God did not force the Bible writers to cater  to us and our culture and our practices and our understandings.  After all doesn't God have foreknowledge? Surely he knew that one day we would exist so why on earth did he speak to the people in the days that the Bible was written in ways that they would understand, he should have seen it fit to force them to write for us only and for our culture only.

[JoeMo]

19 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

How do YOU know that they took on "flesh?"

With all due respect, how do you know they didn't?  Just cuz something sounds a little weird doesn't mean it's wrong.

 

18 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

The "sons of God" mentioned in Job were the heads from other worlds like Adam should have been from our world.

A Bible reference for this, please (not a quote from EGW).  My read of the Bible indicates that humanity is a unique creation in the universe.  That's why God's kingdom will be centered on earth; and earthly humanity will judge angels.

[8thdaypriest]

On 3/21/2018 at 3:23 PM, JoeMo said:

I'm only up to Genesis 10 in my read.  There is no indication that and "avenger of blood" existed that early in civilization.  To my knowledge, the concept was never even introduced until the time of the patriarchs.

Here's the first reference to "the avenger".  

Numbers 35:12 `They shall be cities of refuge for you from the avenger, that the manslayer may not die until he stands before the congregation in judgment. (NKJ)

This is in the commands just after the Exodus.  It appears to me, that murder was to be avenged by a member of the family of the murdered - slain, person.  The LORD was giving a command concerning how to deal with murder (or accidental killing), so that blood feuds would not divide Israel when the people came into the land.  Looks like blood vengance was around long before the command was given.  Seems it was part of ancient culture.   It spread into every culture.  It is seen today in gang warfare. 

[8thdaypriest]

On 3/21/2018 at 3:23 PM, JoeMo said:

"Cain made love to his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.

The text says "Cain was then building a city", but maybe it means that Cain began to build his city, or to build what eventually became a city.  How do we know what TYPE of "city" this was?  Maybe it was a center for some type of worship - like Jerusalem, or a family central meeting place.  

[8thdaypriest]

On 4/18/2018 at 4:42 PM, JoeMo said:

Interesting! So the rabbis did not think the flood covered the entire earth? 

There is a program on TBN, "Creation in the 21st Century".  They had a guest on recently, (used to work for Chevron as an exploration geologist) who has studied cores and such from all around the earth.  He also believes the flood covered most - but not ALL of earth's surface.   Name is Tim Clarey.  Has authored several textbooks, and other books on dinosaurs. 

[8thdaypriest]

On 4/19/2018 at 11:16 AM, B/W Photodude said:

I find the whole idea of demons and human women producing offspring ludicrous, but easy top believe if you slept thru biology class. Angels are spirits and not biological (carbon based units!) entities. They have no DNA to contribute to offspring. If so, then Satan gets elevated to a God level in creating new creatures.

Demons can take the FORM of physical things, but I do not believe they actually BECOME physical.  For that - they would need to incarnate. 

[B/W Photodude]

25 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The text says "Cain was then building a city", but maybe it means that Cain began to build his city, or to build what eventually became a city.  How do we know what TYPE of "city" this was?  Maybe it was a center for some type of worship - like Jerusalem, or a family central meeting place.  

So few people in those days compared to today and they couldn't find unused" names?! Kinda confusing sometimes.

[8thdaypriest]

The belief that "Sons of God" (either fallen angels or created beings from other worlds) had sex with human women who bore offspring, and were then shut up in "the pit", comes mainly from The First Book of Enoch, an Apocryphal book.  A very small portion of 1Enoch was quoted by Jude, and Peter alluded to it (or both were using an as yet unnamed source). 

I very recently read through that book.  I prayed earnestly first.  Interesting read, to be sure. 

The Nephillim were 300 cubits tall (450 feet).  Really!  How could they possibly have sex with women?  In First Enoch, (and excuse me for being gross here) The Watchers = fallen Angels = Stars = Sons of God (used interchangeably) , "had penises like horses".   (Wonder how large horses were back then.)  How could human women possibly give birth to such large babies. 

The Nephilim would live 500 years?  Guess this was their lifespan - or the lifespan of their flesh.  Then their spirits leave their bodies, and are confined in the place of conscious torment, until the judgment.

The "stars" which disobeyed the Lord are bound in the place "under the earth" "until ten thousand years, the time of their crimes, have come to pass".  If they "lived" only 500 years, how did they commit crimes for 10K years?  Doesn't make sense. 

Another place says the spirits of wicked HUMANS go to a place of torment "whose souls are punished and bound there forever.  Thus has it been from the beginning of the world."

Does not agree with my understanding that the dead are unconscious.  No wonder the Catholics teach unending conscious torment in HELL.  They include the Apocryphal books in their Bible.

Angels are presenting the prayers of the saints before God.  I thought we have "one Mediator".

Writing with pen and ink was introduced by a fallen watcher named Penemue.  This caused many to go astray.  Really?  Writing with pen and ink was evil?  Personally, I believe that God introduced writing to preserve a record of history, of His law, and of His dealings with men.

In 60:1, Enoch is 500 years, 7 months, and 14 days old when he has a vision about judgment and sea monsters, etc. etc.

Genesis says Enoch was 300 when the LORD "took him" away, and he was never found afterwards.   Does Enoch receive this vision after he is in the heavenly realm?

 Enoch says the year is 364 days.  Wrong.  It's 365.25 days.  If Enoch is passing on what he was "told" by the "angel" named Uriel, who "guides all the seasons and the heavenly luminaries of the sky" then Uriel was wrong.  More likely, Enoch was actually written some time after 800 BC.  That is the time when the extra days were incorporated into calendars around the world.   Most probably a near earth fly by that pulled the earth into an elongated orbit.  I believe another one will pull the earth back into a 360day orbit, so the end time prophecies can be fulfilled.

If the Book of Enoch was actually written after 800BC, then it was NOT the vision of the original Enoch.

12 "portals of heaven" - the sun is directed through a new one of those 12 "portals" each month.   Doesn't fit with science.

81:1  "Enoch, look at the heavenly tablets"    This one sounds like Joseph Smith.  Sorry.

83:1-11  is Enoch's first vision.  He writes about "the abyss".   Seems he had heard of it.  Wonder where?   From demons.

86:1-6, 87:1-4, 88:1-3  The first fallen angel was named Azazel.  Raphael cast him into the abyss.  Really?  I thought Satan was the first fallen angel, and Christ will cast him into the Abyss.

There are four archangels.  There names are Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Phanuel.   In my Bible there is ONE Archangel (chief or head of angels).  His name is Michael - the Son of God.

I will stop here.   So many things seemed inconsistent with the rest of Scripture, or at least with my understanding of the Scriptures.  

 

[JoeMo]

12 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The "stars" which disobeyed the Lord are bound in the place "under the earth" "until ten thousand years, the time of their crimes, have come to pass".

The "stars were the fallen angels; not their offspring.

13 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The first fallen angel was named Azazel.  Raphael cast him into the abyss.I thought Satan was the first fallen angel, and Christ will cast him into the Abyss.

Azazel was the first fallen angel to impregnate a human woman.  According to 1 Enoch, he was the angel that made the other fallen angels take an oath and form a pact with the other fallen angels to impregnate human women.  Azazel is locked up because he crossed the genetic barrier.  Satan is not locked up because - in spite of all his other evil deeds, - he never crossed the genetic barrier as Azazel did.

18 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

If the Book of Enoch was actually written after 800BC, then it was NOT the vision of the original Enoch.

I can't disagree with this statement.  How did Enoch's message cross the barrier of the flood?  How trustworthy is something that was allegedly passed down orally for millennia?  That being said, do these objections make the entire Book of 1 Enoch false?  I don't believe a lot of stuff EGW said; but I DO believe a lot of what she said, as well.  I don't throw the baby out with the dirty water in EGW's writings; and I don't throw out the baby with the dirty water in 1 Enoch, either.  Neither did Jude.

24 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

"Enoch, look at the heavenly tablets"    This one sounds like Joseph Smith.  Sorry.

EGW looked into the heavenlies and wrote what she alone saw in visions from God.  I guess I could say that sounds a lot like Joseph Smith as well.

[Gerr]

Gen. 5:4 already cited.

Edited April 21, 2018 by Gerry Cabalo

[JoeMo]

21 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

The Bible does not delve into such subjects for a reason. I believe we should follow that example.

The Bible does delve into it, just not in graphic detail.

"The divine beings saw how beautiful these human women were, so they married the ones they chose." Gen. 6:2 CEB

"Some of their daughters were so beautiful that supernatural beings came down and married the ones they wanted." Gen 6:2  CEV

"Some divine beings noticed how attractive human women were, so they took wives for themselves from a selection that pleased them." Gen. 6:2 ISV

I'm no Hebrew scholar, but some translations are clearer on this than others.

[TrevorL]

Greetings JoeMo,

6 hours ago, JoeMo said:

The Bible does delve into it, just not in graphic detail.

"The divine beings saw how beautiful these human women were, so they married the ones they chose." Gen. 6:2 CEB

"Some of their daughters were so beautiful that supernatural beings came down and married the ones they wanted." Gen 6:2  CEV

"Some divine beings noticed how attractive human women were, so they took wives for themselves from a selection that pleased them." Gen. 6:2 ISV

I'm no Hebrew scholar, but some translations are clearer on this than others.

I suggest that these translations are interpretive, and they are clear in only one sense, that they give a particular view. If they give the wrong view, then they have muddied the water. My understanding is that Genesis 3:15 speaks of two seeds, the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. Ultimately the seed of the woman who would overcome sin in all its manifestations is Jesus, the son of Mary and the Son of God. Another view of Genesis 3:15 is that we are introduced to Cain and Abel, and after this the division of the world into two lines of descendants, those of Cain and those of Seth, one following the ways of the flesh, and the other the ways of God. This latter group could be called the Sons of God, and I believe that this is what is being referred to in Genesis 6:2. It indicates that up until then the two groups lived separately and did not intermarry. The crisis of Noah’s day is when a large portion of the Godly descendants turned their back on the separation, and married descendants of Cain. The result was the children of these marriages became more rebellious than even the normal descendants of Cain. The end result was that only a few faithful were left in the earth, and by the time of the flood, God only separated and preserved Noah and his family. This view gives a smooth understanding of why only Noah and his family were left out of the presumably many descendants of the originally faithful line. Luke 20:34-36 indicates that Angels do not marry.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

[phkrause]

On 4/21/2018 at 7:53 PM, The Wanderer said:

I hope you realize there are some important differences?

Exactly!!

[JoeMo]

5 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Another view of Genesis 3:15 is that we are introduced to Cain and Abel, and after this the division of the world into two lines of descendants, those of Cain and those of Seth, one following the ways of the flesh, and the other the ways of God. This latter group could be called the Sons of God, and I believe that this is what is being referred to in Genesis 6:2. It indicates that up until then the two groups lived separately and did not intermarry. The crisis of Noah’s day is when a large portion of the Godly descendants turned their back on the separation, and married descendants of Cain. The result was the children of these marriages became more rebellious than even the normal descendants of Cain.

This is also a popular (probably the prevalent) interpretation of the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:2.  The Hebrew for this term is "bənê hāʼĕlōhîm". This same Hebrew term is used in Job 1:6, 2:1, 38.7, and in Deuteronomy 32:8 in the Dead Sea Scrolls.  in each of those verses, the "sons of God" are clearly supernatural beings.  Why would we make an exception for Genesis 6:2?  Just because it's a little weird for us?

[8thdaypriest]

Taking "wives" of all they chose - reminds me of ancient potentates who would take which ever women they fancied.  They did not usually "marry" them. 

Does EGW say that ALL descendants of Cain died in the flood of Noah? 

I would love to see just a few human skeletons among all the bones of dinosaurs and such, left by the flood.

[JoeMo]

17 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

There perished in the Flood greater inventions of art and human skill than the world knows of today. The arts destroyed were more than the boasted arts of today (Letter 65, 1898).  {1BC 1089.1}

The archeological evidence totally agrees with this.  IMHO, there is no way the pyramids could have been built to the grandeur and precision to which they are built without advanced technology - probably given to them by fallen angels. (I believe the pyramids were built by antediluvians; not Hebrews.  Carbon dating places the age of the pyramids at least 5,000 years ago.  Hebrews were employed making mud bricks; not quarrying and transporting unbelievably huge  blocks of precision cut stones.)

[Kevin H]

On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 12:29 PM, 8thdaypriest said:

Does EGW say that ALL descendants of Cain died in the flood of Noah? 

No she does not say that all of Cain's decedents died in the flood. Now we have to remember that it is NOT her job to tell us something like that. That would be a question of exegesis. She tells us that exegesis is OUR job that her job is to make APPLICATION to our day. May I recommend questions to ask about a topic before we should ask if Mrs. White gave us guidance on it:

1. Would this information be necessary to encourage Adventists to understand that God was still leading them in their Millerite experience and for them to not give it up as a false experience.

2. Would this information be necessary for the development of the Seventh-day Adventist church including things like information on how to evangelize a city?

3. Would this information be necessary for the development of our medical and educational work?

4. Would this information be necessary to deal with the 3 deceptions of Satan/the issues of the Great Controversy?

5. Would this information be useful in helping us how to make choices that encourage a Christ like character as opposed to making choices that can develop selfishness?

If your answers to these 5 questions are "No" then don't expect or wish that Mrs. White would say something about it. Not to say that it is not important, but that it would be a question on exegesis and not a question on application and that it is therefore our job not hers. (even when a superficial reading makes it appear that Mrs. White is doing an exegesis, unless there is something very important in the above 5 questions she is more than likely saying "As far as we are concerned this is what was happening."

Mrs. White tells us what visions do for her and what they do not do for her. What is her ministry and what is not her ministry. Interesting every attack against her is in the fields that she says is not her ministry and things that the visions do not do for her. Thus instead of proving her a false prophet, these attacks show her to be right.

Now the names on both lists indicate intermarriage between the 2 families, some times they may be two different people with the same name but others can be the same, we can especially see this in Lamech. who died at the young age of just a little over 7 hundred 70s, and indicates that no matter how you want to interpret the sons of god marrying the daughters of man, there was definitely a problem in the decedents of Seth marrying the decedents of Cain. 

[Kevin H]

On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 12:29 PM, 8thdaypriest said:

 would love to see just a few human skeletons among all the bones of dinosaurs and such, left by the flood.

This is making assumptions that may or may not be true.  As Seventh-day Adventists we understand things happening before creation week which are important in the issues of the Great Controversy. While Mrs. White DOES talk some more about this because it is important in the Great Controversy, it is implied in the words translated "Without form and void" and the waters of chaos.  While it is possible for man and Dinosaurs to have existed together and they being destroyed at the flood, we are also open to the possibilities that they may have played a role in the pre-creation week things that were going on here in helping the angels and beings on the other worlds decide what side of the Great Controversy to be on.