Archive for October, 2011

There is a vast amount of evidence that convinces me that the Script is true. I believe that the best interpretation of the evidence assures us that the writer, or writers of the early chapters of Genesis, recorded the information just the way it happened.

It is true that we sometimes use the word “day,” to mean “time,” rather than a 24 hour day. In Genesis 2:4, the Hebrew word “yowm,” is translated in that way. The writer however, seems to have anticipated that the “days” of creation would be mistaken for vast periods of time. I think that’s why chapter two focuses on affirming the belief that “day,” as used in chapter one, was a literal day.

Genesis 2:4-6 reads as if plant life had not experienced growth before the creation of man. You wouldn’t expect much growth if plants were created on the third day, and man on the sixth. It doesn’t sound like plants were created full-grown. Also, the sun was not created until the fourth day, and there had been no rain. If you interpret the creation days to be periods of millions of years, then you’ve got a problem with the order of creation, and also Genesis 2:5.

I recognize that it may be easier for some to believe an interpretation that attempts to reconcile evolutionary beliefs with Christianity. That belief doesn’t fit the facts or the Script as well. Rather, the facts have undergone much reorganization in order to fit the evolutionary interpretation. I don’t want to undermine someone’s faith, but trust in the evolutionary time scale hides much of the evidence supporting the Bible. It forces the reader into a figurative interpretation of much of the Script, and weakens the believer’s position.

I had to see through the evolutionary deception to a certain degree before I could believe anything else. Once I understood that the process for assigning ages to fossils is not rock solid, I took a closer look at the evidence. When I did so, I had to admit that belief in evolution depends as much on “faith” as any other belief. It is only the methods of teaching, and censorship of other ideas, that cause it to seem so real.

I’m well aware that I’m not going to win many people to my position. The Script predicts just the opposite. It predicts that a “strong delusion,” will be believed by most people. The Script tells us the reason for the delusion. It is because many people are desperate to have something to believe other than the truth. Evolutionism is part of that delusion. If only they could realize how wonderful the truth is. The desire to believe something else could begin to fade.

Some Bible critics think they see contradictions between the first two chapters of Genesis. They think chapter two has plants and animals created after man, and so on. That concept is very shallow. Genesis 2:5 does not deny the earlier creation of plant life. It simply states that it had not spread over the earth. It says that the plants had not grown. There are some difficulties in translation, but nothing more than that.

I’m by no means a translator, but I can see the Hebrew language flows very different from English. Very often, if the sentence isn’t restructured, and connecting words added, then the reading is very difficult. If connecting words aren’t added to the translation, then your mind must sometimes supply them. All translations, and even revisions, must reconstruct the sentences to some degree. Sometimes a meaning can be obscured in that process.

Hebrew words express great ideas using few letters. They are like tiny seeds that grow into great trees. For that reason alone, we should not permit our minds to leap to conclusions concerning the meaning of a verse. The Hebrew word “siyach,” in verse 2:5, is such a word. It isn’t the usual word for plant, and it’s only used to mean shrub-like growth. “Siyach,” with the same spelling is used elsewhere to mean talk, pray, commune, muse, communication, and meditation.

The root of the word holds the idea of something rising up, and is probably the origin of our words “say,” and “see.” Using the broader meaning of the words in the first part of Genesis 2:5, the meaning can grow. “Every plant of the field before it was on the earth,” can mean that all plant growth of the wild was in temporarily suspended existence. The Hebrew word “terem,” in 2:5 implies a suspended process. It’s where we get our words “interim,” and “term.”

The root of siyach is very similar to “shay,” a Hebrew word for gifts, or presents. The siyach is Elohim’s way of “saying it with flowers.” Beyond their beauty, many of the blossoms become fruit that sustain us. The shell of a seed is its gift wrapping. The earth, and all that it holds, was made for us. It’s something we should love and appreciate. I think that Adam and Eve watched in wonder as the greenery unfolded upon the earth. The mist watered the ground, and the sun drew the plant from the seed.

Millions of years of evolutionary struggle, suffering, and death, did not precede the creation of man. These things did not give birth to man, and that is not the way through which God made man. There was a literal day in which God created man, and there was a day when man fell. Whether directly or indirectly, the fall of man has given birth to the struggle of devolution.

Read Full Post »

Where was Eden? Geologists have established to a reasonable degree that the land mass of India was once part of Africa. They believe the continents of the earth were once part of one huge land mass. The southern lands of that super-continent are called Gondwana. India was once connected to Africa in what is called Eastern Gondwana, south of what is now Arabia.

If science is right about this, which I think they are, that would explain the mystery of the four rivers of the second chapter of Genesis. The description of the four rivers doesn’t fit the topography of the Middle East today, but place India where it once was, and the pieces all come together.

The Gulf of Eden (Aden) is located in the general area where India was once connected. The city of Aden on the north shore is an ancient city. Built within an extinct volcano, some stories place its origin in prehistory. Somewhere in time, these places were given these names for some reason. I think it’s because men searched for Eden after Noah’s flood, and this was the closest they could get.

Even the name “India,” derived from a word meaning “river,” bears a resemblance to the word “Eden.” Eden is gone, and much of it is probably under the ocean. Some of its soil may now be in the Himalayas, raised by the force of the collision of India with Asia. The Ganges river, which the ancients thought was the Pishon of Genesis, now has its headwaters in the Himalayas.

Africa, according to the models of the break-up of Gondwana, moved to the northeast. That would put Ethiopia closer to the area where the rivers of Eden originated, and perhaps right over the source. That area continues to be one of the sources of the Nile, which was believed to be the Gihon of Genesis. The gulf left by the shifting of India, could have reversed the direction of the flow of the Tigris and Euphrates.

Current science and the Bible are essentially in agreement concerning the division of the continents. The disagreement is about how long ago this happened. Modern science doesn’t think man existed that long ago, so how could anyone have written anything about it? Very likely, it wasn’t actually that long ago. The data is the data, but the interpretation of it is going to vary according to the beliefs that people hold.

Christians who accept an evolutionary world view won’t accept what I’m writing here. They put too much faith in secular science, but I’m not putting them down. I once had too much faith in science myself. Much of it depends upon what we’ve been taught, and who is in control of education.

Why wouldn’t the writer of Genesis 2:10-14 have simply used known rivers unless this is a historical account? Why provoke questions if it isn’t true? Moses is generally regarded to be the author of the first five books of the Script. Most likely he pieced Genesis together from ancient documents that once existed. That would explain why chapter two includes mention of Assyria and Ethiopia. That mention would serve to help locate the rivers.

Moses also spent much time in personal contact with Yahweh (Jehovah) Elohim (Exodus 6:3), so he would had other information to add. Whether Moses wrote the second chapter of Genesis, or simply added information, it is brilliant. It indirectly furnishes information that fits with data gained separately by scientific investigation.

Some evidence can be interpreted to favor another location for Eden. The Persian Gulf is not too far away. The dense tropical vegetation of Eden could be the source of the oil in the Arabian area. In a strange way, many different beliefs, ranging from the scientific, to the religious, to the mythological, may all contain elements of truth about these things. The Script holds the key to unlocking it all, and to understanding the underlying reality of the origins of life.

Read Full Post »

We don’t know exactly where the Garden of Eden was located. The information contained in the Script (the Bible) is usually as precise as it can be made, but in this case it doesn’t seem to be enough. The 2nd Chapter of Genesis gives a location for Eden, but the description only roughly matches the present topography of Earth.

That tells us there have been great geological changes since then. Noah’s flood happened between then and now, which would furnish a good explanation. The little geography lesson in the 2nd. Chapter should therefore be considered a testimony to the catastrophic extent of Noah’s flood.

The Garden of Eden had to have been a large place. The land also had to be in the highest altitudes of a large area of the earth. The Script tells us that a great river flowed out of Eden. Leaving Eden it was parted by the terrain into four smaller rivers. These rivers were yet large enough that, at the very least, they enclosed an area from Ethiopia (Cush), to the east of ancient Assyria. That’s roughly 2000 miles.

I’m not sure how much could be learned from their Genesis names. Pishon means dispersive, and probably indicates a large powerful river. The Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other ancient writers, identified the Ganges river of India as the Pishon. That is a very strange thing, because it doesn’t seem to be in the right place geographically. There may be a reason for that however, which I pray to get to later. Josephus wrote that the name “Pishon,” denotes a multitude.

Gihon is the second river named in Genesis. “Gihon,” comes from a word meaning gushing, or to break out. This has been believed by many, including Josephus, to be the Nile. It very likely is, although that name isn’t used in the Script, nor is the land of Egypt mentioned.

Josephus does mention Egypt, and says the name “Geon,” (Gihon) indicates that the river “arises from the east.” Today, the headwaters of the Nile are in the south, so that indicates some great geographical change also. Today, the Blue Nile, a tributary of the Nile originates in Ethiopia, and another tributary, the White Nile flows nearby. If Gihon is the Nile, it currently flows in the opposite direction to that of the other rivers.

The third river, in several versions of the Script, is called Hiddekel, which is another name for the Tigris River, as is “Diglath.” The Script says the fourth river is Euphrates, which means “rushing.” The four rivers originally flowed away from Eden in the same general direction. All of them except the Nile can yet be considered to do that, but their headwaters are very distant from each other.

The sources of the Euphrates, and the Ganges are around 2500 miles apart. If there’s any reason to think the Ganges is Pishon, then what has happened? It’s possible that these rivers could have reestablished themselves to a degree after a worldwide flood, or that other rivers could have been named after them. Again, I hope to give a good explanation later.

Traditionally, most people have believed that the Garden of Eden was near the junction of the Tigris and Euphrates in the Persian gulf area. Another favorite location is the mountain region of southwest Asia where these two rivers originate. There’s another possible interpretation that I believe fits the facts even better. I think the Garden of Eden was in the area where the Gulf of Aden is now. “Aden,” is the same name as Eden.

From here on, this is going to get a little complex. I want to be as clear as I can, because the second Chapter of Genesis is one of the most important of the Script. It confirms the view that Earth and life, including man, were created in a very short time. It also offers proof that a great catastrophic event happened within the era of man. These things are too important to rush, so I’m going to continue this next week if at all possible.

Read Full Post »

Elohim said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” It would be impossible to communicate the full meaning of that sentence. There are so many shades of meaning that books could be written about it. The meaning must be sensed in ways that seem beyond words.

The Hebrew word translated as image in that sentence is “tselem.” One of the meanings of “tselem,” has to do with shade. Thinking in color, we were intended to be shades and hues of Elohim. If you think of us in grayscale, we should be shades in the sense of comfort, or shelter from the heat. We could never think of ourselves as the complete picture, but icons (the Greek word for image), or representations. The sad thing is that our representations aren’t often very true to life.

A similar word to tselem, “tsela,” is the word for a rib (side) used in Genesis 2:22. Elohim took the rib of the male human being, and created a female counter-part of the man. She was like him, yet very different, just as it should be.

Together, the man and the woman were called “Adam,” which means man, or mankind. Genesis 1:27, “So Elohim created Adam in his own image, in the image of Elohim he created him; male and female he created them.” I’ve said before that if a woman can be created from the rib of a man, medical science shouldn’t need to sacrifice embryos to obtain stem cells. I believe humanity was intended to be a part of Elohim as woman is part of man. The Hebrew words reflect that intent.

Love is the reason for the methods Elohim used, and a subordinate role is not implied. Male and female were created equal, (Galatians 3:28) yet with different roles in mind. Every male except Adam, has been born of a female. That doesn’t exalt the female above the male, because Eve, in turn, was made from Adam’s rib.

Another similar word, “tsala,” means “to limp,” or “to be one-sided.” Without woman, man would limp along and be extinct in one generation. Elohim blessed Adam and Eve, as he had blessed the animals, saying to them, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth…”

Nothing that Elohim created was intended to become a curse. Human beings were never intended to become “shades” of Hades.

Read Full Post »

Sometimes words are defined and redefined to the point of meaninglessness. “Species,” is one such word. It wouldn’t matter much except that it’s used to deceive people into thinking new “species” are evolving. Much of the argument over evolution is really about semantics. All scientists are actually seeing is variety within the “kinds” of things that were created.

The mechanisms created by Elohim, to produce individuality within each species, are sometimes given credit for all life. The actual mechanism used by Elohim to generate life is not yet known. By “mechanism,” I mean that he probably established pre-conditions for the generation of life. If science discovers how he created life, many will claim they’ve discovered the secret of evolution.

There are possibly different methods that could have been used in creation, but life was no accident. The Script records that Elohim called specifically for certain types of life. The careful way in which the opening chapters of the Script are written is evidence that the arguments against it were anticipated. That’s one of the reasons I’m calling it the Script. It isn’t just a collection of writings. It is an ancient writing that foretells the major moves that mankind is going to make, from the beginning to the end.

Living things weren’t intended to reproduce carbon-copies of themselves. The Hebrew word “miyn,” (see note below) is usually translated “kinds.” The words “species,” and “kinds,” can mean pretty much the same thing. The Script gives a short scientific definition of “kinds,” by the references it makes to reproduction (Genesis 1:11,21,24-25). If animals can reproduce, they are from the same kind, or species. Sterile hybrids wouldn’t be excluded from their particular kind.

The fact that a lion and a tiger can produce a “liger” shows that both came from the same “kind.” To me, a liger looks very much like the saber-toothed tigers have been depicted, only without the great fangs. Ligers are strange-looking creatures, especially when grown. A cat and a dog cannot reproduce because they are different “kinds” of creatures. The different kinds cannot cross unless science interferes with their very nature.

Sometimes when I’m writing about the Script, I will mention something that appears to me to be strange, though I may not know what it means. The Script reads as though fish and birds were created out of water, while other types of animals were made out of earth (Genesis 1:20 & 1:24). That seems significant to me, though too much is often “read into” the Script.

Here is another strange thing about the Script. Elohim is said to have spoken to the animals that he created, “blessing” them, telling them to reproduce (Genesis 1:22). So, he talks to the animals. I like that. The last book of the Script has animals speaking to him (Revelation 5:13). I don’t think that is just fanciful writing, but a fascinating fact.

Atheistic science laughs at the Script because of this sort of thing. They seem blind to the research that proves them wrong. Scientists have learned to communicate with honey bees. By using a robotic “bee,” they can tell honey bees which direction to go to find food. These scientists are talking to insects, and the bees can understand the robotic bee just as they do other bees.

Another strange thing recorded in the Script is that all creatures were originally designed to eat only plants (Genesis 1:29,30). Something has gone terribly wrong, and creation has grown wild. The Earth is no longer the garden that it was intended to be.

Note: The Hebrew word “miyn,” may be the origin of several English words, though they may come to us through other languages. The prefix “mini,” could have come about because baby animals are mini-versions of the parents. “Many,” is probably another related word. A similar word “mene,” means numbered (Daniel 5:25,26). “Mean,” (middle) and “mine” are likely other words derived from “miyn.”

Read Full Post »