Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘2nd Chapter of Genesis’ Category

I don’t think we know for certain how YHWH, from the Hebrew Old Testament, should be pronounced. If you research the word “Lord,” in a Bible Concordance such as Strong’s, the original word was almost always the name YHWH. In defence of the translators, when YHWH is used it is speaking of the Lord, even though YHWH doesn’t actually mean Lord.

Elohim (God), and Adonai (Lord), are more of a description of what he is, whereas YHWH is his name. The name YHWH is said to mean Ever-Existent, or Ever-Being. “You shall not take the name of YHWH your Elohim in vain,” is one of the Ten Commandments. Out of fear or reverence, the ancient Hebrew people substituted the name “Adonai,” rather than pronounce “YHWH” as written.

That methodology was already established by the time the Septuagint was translated. It was adopted by some of the early Christians, who were themselves Jewish, and later became the standard used in Bible translations. This has made it easier to overlook some mysterious things about the name YHWH. It has come to be thought of as “the unutterable name,” though the commandment was not against saying the name YHWH, but against taking it in vain.

I’m sure that many people will already know what I’m going to say, but I’ve never heard it. Perhaps some have considered it unimportant, and others have avoided it for fear of controversy. For some reason, the secret has been well-kept from the most of us.

Many people are aware that the symbols of the Hebrew alphabet represent numerals as well as letters, and that they also have individual meanings. For example the Hebrew letter “aleph,” usually represented by the letter “A,” is also a word that means “ox.” “Beth,” (B) means house, and so on. There’s general agreement on the meanings attached to the letters, and whenever there are multiple meanings, they are usually related in some way.

In a few places, the CJB (Complete Jewish Bible), spells out Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh rather than using the English letters YHWH (it substitutes Adonai in most places). When I saw it written that way, the meanings of the letters came to my mind.

“Y” (Yud, Yad, or various spellings), is translated as “hand,” or “hands.” (Ref. Psalm 119-Yod)

I have a “Langenscheidt Pocket Hebrew Dictionary,” that says “H” (He, or Heh), means air-hole. Other sources say that it means “look,” or “window.” Those meanings are connected because the earliest windows were simple holes that you could look through, and that would allow a flow of air. The Hebrew symbol for H is shaped like “Cheyth,” another Hebrew letter, except the H has a hole or opening in one corner. The Early Paleo-Hebrew symbol for H is the figure of a man with hands raised as if to say, “stop,” or “look.” No doubt our word “Hey,” that we call out to draw attention, comes from the Hebrew symbol “heh.”

The Hebrew V (vav or waw) means “nail,” “hook,” or the plural of these words. Vav is translated as “hooks,” in passages of Exodus which deal with the curtains of the Tabernacle. That includes the vail (veil) of the inner sanctuary (Ex. 26:31-33). I haven’t seen this word elsewhere in the Script, except in the alphabetical layout of Psalm 119.

Many times I’ve wished the truth could be told without someone being offended, but that’s impossible in our world. My next sentence will seem like blasphemy to some people, but it is true, and it’s nothing to fear. The meaning of the letters Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh is something like, Hands-Holes-Nails-Holes, or Hands-Look-Nail-Holes.

You can order the words somewhat differently, but the prophetic message conveyed by the letters YHWH is very clear. “YHWH” is testimony for Jesus, and his crucifixion. I want to go back and read many passages of the Script with this thought in mind. It lends greater meaning to many New Testament writings, and I’m certain that will be the case with the Old Testament also.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke, recorded that when Jesus died there was an earthquake, and the veil of the Temple (which replaced the Tabernacle) was ripped from the top to the bottom (remember the word vav, for the hooks or nails, that this curtain was hanged upon).

Hebrews 10:16-20, is another passage made more meaningful by this understanding. Verse 20 speaks of “a new and living way which he has prepared for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh.” The inner sanctuary of YHWH, his very heart, is open to anyone who will enter through this torn veil. The Script tells us to “enter into the holiest.” Whoever you are, you can enter the sanctuary, but go softly, and be humbled for this is a hallowed place. The blood of the Son of God is sprinkled here.

Read Full Post »

Whether you’re reluctant to think of it as time-travel or not, Elohim has been to the end, and back. He knows the moves we are going to make, and those he must make in return. When he tries to persuade us to take another path, it’s because he knows what lies ahead.

Some things can be said to be scripted because they were recorded before they actually happened. This is one of the most important evidences for the Script. Things have happened, and continue to happen, that were predicted thousands of years ago. I think these things are evidence that Elohim can move outside of what we call time.

You find disagreement about the particulars, but many scientists believe that some form of time-travel is theoretically possible. Physicists have recently recorded velocity measurements of neutrinos moving faster than light. Currently, there’s debate about the accuracy of the experiments, and what they might mean concerning time travel. Results of further experiments are expected before the end of 2011.

We don’t know what scientific process Elohim has used to accomplish certain things, but time-travel would seem to explain some of the more strange occurrences in the Script. I believe the days of creation in Genesis were the same basic length as today, but some strange things are evident about day six.

There have been times when I’ve wished a day would never end. It can be that way with Elohim. I don’t think anything short of something of that nature can explain everything that happened on Creation day six. Land animals were created (Genesis 1:24,25), and then the first man Adam (1:26,27 and 2:7). He was placed in a garden in Eden (2:8). The trees in the Garden of Eden may have been created mature, or made to grow very quickly in a time frame all to themselves (2:9).

Then the animals were paraded by Adam, as he named them (2:19,20). The ‘Today’s New International Version’ of the Script probably offers the correct meaning of 2:19, “Now the Lord God had formed…all the animals…” The animals that had been created earlier were now brought to Adam.

At some point, Adam may have noticed there were males and females of each animal kind, and wondered about a female like himself. Elohim then removed a rib from Adam, and from it created, not simply a clone, but a woman equal to the man (2:21-23). She was then brought to Adam, who gave her the name Ishshah, meaning woman. This was all on the sixth day.

One of the keys to understanding Elohim, and the Script, is to think outside this box called time, that we are trapped in. In the Script, Elohim sometimes speaks of the past, and the future, as if it is all the present. Luke 20:38 says, “He is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for all live unto him.”

Because of that fact, once we are created, we exist in eternity, though we don’t yet see the outcome of it. Those who will come to the light, will live in a wonderful day that will never end. There’s evidence in the Script, and in current scientific study, that such a thing is indeed possible.

Read Full Post »

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 »