heretical thoughts on human origins

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

I noticed when reading through the first chapters of genesis again, that the account of the Tower of Babel seems to be stuck in the body of the text rather randomly, like it was an old legend that someone had remembered, or was on clay tablets perhaps, and then written into the bible when it was finally written down.
There is no indication that the account is talking about before or after the flood. It says that people settled in Mesopotamia, (a plain in the land of Shinar) but that they had migrated there from the east; Persia. They spoke one language. God (or the gods?) came down (presumably from heaven?), had a look around at the city and the tower (probably a Ziggurat), and didn’t like the way the population was getting uppity, so dispersed them around the world.

So this suggests that the population at some early time in history came from Persia, then on to Mesopotamia, then out into the world.
However in the genealogical account of the descendants of Noah, it lists a number of generations;

10 These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Sons were born to them after the flood.

2 The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations.

Noah.. Japheth.. Gomer.. Ashkenaz. Four generations after the flood. each with his own language.

So where is the Tower of Babel account to fit.. if these tribes were all speaking their own languages? I’ve heard that the Tower of Babel account is after the flood (although it dosn't say that). It’s placed in the bible in chapter 11, right after the genealogy of Noah descendants, but it is probably placed there in the bible like that as it is a ‘stand-alone’ account of origins going back to east of Mesopotamia, (and it had to be put somewhere) and this convention has probably influenced what people think; that it is after the flood. But it is contrary to what was written before; that the early descendants of Noah were speaking different languages.

As it doesn’t say whether this account of Babel is before or after the flood, and it contradicts the other account in chapter 10, then this might be an independent memory, of civilisation originating in the east somewhere. It takes a while to chew over these things.
Another thing I noticed, is that Cain is the son of Adam and Eve, and he kills Abel, and then he runs off in exile, out of the land where he was living, and he was worried that he would be killed by people when he went away on his wanderings.

But who were these people, if Cain was the original son, where did these people come from? I just noticed it as I was reading. If they were his brothers, that's possible I suppose, but it struck me that these other people were already out there, as he was running off into another land, after having killed Abel... a recent event... where did these other nations come from, if they were already out there as a population?

It says a bit later that Adam and Eve had Seth, a replacement for Abel. So where is there mention of all these other sons, somewhere around the time of Cain; Seth might be the next notable person to come along, or Seth might be the next son after Cain, in which case, all these people out there near the land of Nod, would need to be Cain's sons and daughters.

Unless this is a record of the origins of one people group, going back to Adam and Eve. But there were other people groups out there as well.

 

[Aman777]

I noticed when reading through the first chapters of genesis again, that the account of the Tower of Babel seems to be stuck in the body of the text rather randomly, like it was an old legend that someone had remembered, or was on clay tablets perhaps, and then written into the bible when it was finally written down.

Dear His, All scripture is given by inspiration (God breathed) of God.

His:>>There is no indication that the account is talking about before or after the flood. It says that people settled in Mesopotamia, (a plain in the land of Shinar) but that they had migrated there from the east; Persia.

The first humans came out of the Ark. They walked out of the mountains of Ararat into northern Mesopotamia.

His:>>They spoke one language. God (or the gods?) came down (presumably from heaven?), had a look around at the city and the tower (probably a Ziggurat), and didn’t like the way the population was getting uppity, so dispersed them around the world.

It was the LORD God, who is YHWH in the Old Testament. Today, we call Him Jesus Christ. God is ONE.

His:>>So this suggests that the population at some early time in history came from Persia, then on to Mesopotamia, then out into the world.
However in the genealogical account of the descendants of Noah, it lists a number of generations;

10 These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Sons were born to them after the flood.

2 The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations.

Noah.. Japheth.. Gomer.. Ashkenaz. Four generations after the flood. each with his own language.

This was AFTER they were scattered from Babel. Meshesh is called Moscow and Tubal is the eastern capitol of Russia. I believe that Gomer is Germany.

His:>>So where is the Tower of Babel account to fit.. if these tribes were all speaking their own languages? I’ve heard that the Tower of Babel account is after the flood (although it dosn't say that). It’s placed in the bible in chapter 11, right after the genealogy of Noah descendants, but it is probably placed there in the bible like that as it is a ‘stand-alone’ account of origins going back to east of Mesopotamia, (and it had to be put somewhere) and this convention has probably influenced what people think; that it is after the flood. But it is contrary to what was written before; that the early descendants of Noah were speaking different languages.

As it doesn’t say whether this account of Babel is before or after the flood, and it contradicts the other account in chapter 10, then this might be an independent memory, of civilisation originating in the east somewhere. It takes a while to chew over these things.
Another thing I noticed, is that Cain is the son of Adam and Eve, and he kills Abel, and then he runs off in exile, out of the land where he was living, and he was worried that he would be killed by people when he went away on his wanderings.

But who were these people,

They were the "sons of God" who were created and brought forth from the water on the 5th Day. Genesis 1:21 Cain married one of these natural people and Noah's sons "and also after that" married the sons of God on our Earth. This is the origin of Human Civilization on this Planet. When the sons of God marry and produce children, the children are a combination of prehistoric people and Adam's descendants. That is WHY today's humans have the DNA of a woman who lived 150k years ago...AND the human intelligence of Adam, who never walked on this planet.

His:>>if Cain was the original son, where did these people come from? I just noticed it as I was reading. If they were his brothers, that's possible I suppose, but it struck me that these other people were already out there, as he was running off into another land, after having killed Abel... a recent event... where did these other nations come from, if they were already out there as a population?

It says a bit later that Adam and Eve had Seth, a replacement for Abel. So where is there mention of all these other sons, somewhere around the time of Cain; Seth might be the next notable person to come along, or Seth might be the next son after Cain, in which case, all these people out there near the land of Nod, would need to be Cain's sons and daughters.

Not so. Cain's father Adam was made from the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day, long BEFORE the sons of God were made from the water. Seth was Adam and Eve's son born AFTER Cain killed Abel.

His:>>Unless this is a record of the origins of one people group, going back to Adam and Eve. But there were other people groups out there as well.

Good insight. The sons of God will be found where ever we find liquid water in outer Space. They are the result of God's commandment that the water bring forth the living creature that "moveth" from the water on the 5th Day. Genesis 1:21 The sons of God came forth on the first earth AND our earth, so we can expect to find them all over our cosmos.


In Love,
Aman

 

[SkyWriting]

The sons of God came forth on the first earth AND our earth, so we can expect to find them all over our cosmos.

Star Trek theology; all aliens look like us but green tinted or with pointy ears.

God sent His only Son to earth to preach and die for mankind.
There are no others. Earth is the population center of the Cosmos.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

the sons of god were/are angels. they came to earth. there's not much to go on from the bible, but i think it happened.

 

[ChetSinger]

the sons of god were/are angels. they came to earth. there's not much to go on from the bible, but i think it happened.

They were different kinds of sons. Jesus is the "only begotten" son. The word "begotten" is the Greek word "monogenes", which means unique, one-of-a-kind.

So yes, the "sons of God" appear in various places in the Bible, but they're not in the same class as Jesus. Jesus is unique: "he is the image of the invisible God" (from Paul).

I suspect you already know all of that, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

 

[Aman777]

Star Trek theology; all aliens look like us but green tinted or with pointy ears.

God sent His only Son to earth to preach and die for mankind.
There are no others. Earth is the population center of the Cosmos.

Dear Sky, I agree that Jesus is the only Son of God, but He was not one of the sons of God. The sons of God are natural people whose origin was in the water on the 5th Day. Science calls them Prehistoric people.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

They were different kinds of sons. Jesus is the "only begotten" son. The word "begotten" is the Greek word "monogenes", which means unique, one-of-a-kind.

So yes, the "sons of God" appear in various places in the Bible, but they're not in the same class as Jesus. Jesus is unique: "he is the image of the invisible God" (from Paul).

I suspect you already know all of that, but I thought I'd mention it anyway.

Dear Chet, Cain married one of the descendants of the sons of God on the first earth. Noah's grandsons married descendants of the sons of God on our earth. This fulfills the prophecy of Genesis 6:4, which tells us this happened on the first earth "and also after that" on our earth.

The sons of God moved, which agrees with Genesis 1:21 which shows that God created and brought forth from the water "every living creature that moveth", on the 5th Day. Science agrees and shows that the cells within our bodies cannot live without liquid water. The combination of the sons of God and Adam's descendants produces people with the DNA of Mitochondrial Eve, a prehistoric woman who lived 150k years ago....AND....with the higher intelligence which only Adam and God have.

IOW, It is how today's humans came to be. If you don't believe me, then explain WHY we have the DNA of a prehistoric woman AND the human intelligence which ONLY God and Adam have.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Aman777]

the sons of god were/are angels. they came to earth. there's not much to go on from the bible, but i think it happened.

Dear His, Not so. Angels don't have sex and produce children with Adam's descendants.....PLUS....the fallen Angels are held in chains, awaiting judgment.

Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Jud 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

In Love,
Aman

 

[ChetSinger]

Dear Chet, Cain married one of the descendants of the sons of God on the first earth. Noah's grandsons married descendants of the sons of God on our earth. This fulfills the prophecy of Genesis 6:4, which tells us this happened on the first earth "and also after that" on our earth.

The sons of God moved, which agrees with Genesis 1:21 which shows that God created and brought forth from the water "every living creature that moveth", on the 5th Day. Science agrees and shows that the cells within our bodies cannot live without liquid water. The combination of the sons of God and Adam's descendants produces people with the DNA of Mitochondrial Eve, a prehistoric woman who lived 150k years ago....AND....with the higher intelligence which only Adam and God have.

IOW, It is how today's humans came to be. If you don't believe me, then explain WHY we have the DNA of a prehistoric woman AND the human intelligence which ONLY God and Adam have.

In Love,
Aman

I've never heard that. What I've heard is that in Jewish culture during Jesus' time, the sons of God were considered divine beings who showed up in two major places in Jewish history.

The first is prior to the flood, where they left heaven and took human women as wives. They taught men to sin and were imprisoned in chains under the earth until judgment. This belief is referenced in Genesis 6, 2 Peter, Jude, and 1 Enoch.

The second is after the dispersion, where God divided up humankind into 70 nations and placed a son of God over each one. This belief is referenced in Deut 32:7-9 and Ugaritic religious literature.

There is perhaps a third place, in post-flood Canaan, where a figure named Anak has giant sons.

If you're promoting something new, know that this territory has already been well-mined by scholars and there's a lot written on it.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

the sons of god were angels, bene ha elohim, thats what i think anyway. they show up in the book of job, along with satan, a gathering of them somewhere, before god.

 

[granpa]

I noticed when reading through the first chapters of genesis again, that the account of the Tower of Babel seems to be stuck in the body of the text rather randomly, like it was an old legend that someone had remembered, or was on clay tablets perhaps, and then written into the bible when it was finally written down.
There is no indication that the account is talking about before or after the flood. It says that people settled in Mesopotamia, (a plain in the land of Shinar) but that they had migrated there from the east; Persia. They spoke one language. God (or the gods?) came down (presumably from heaven?), had a look around at the city and the tower (probably a Ziggurat), and didn’t like the way the population was getting uppity, so dispersed them around the world.

So this suggests that the population at some early time in history came from Persia, then on to Mesopotamia, then out into the world.
However in the genealogical account of the descendants of Noah, it lists a number of generations;

10 These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Sons were born to them after the flood.

2 The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations.

Noah.. Japheth.. Gomer.. Ashkenaz. Four generations after the flood. each with his own language.

So where is the Tower of Babel account to fit.. if these tribes were all speaking their own languages? I’ve heard that the Tower of Babel account is after the flood (although it dosn't say that). It’s placed in the bible in chapter 11, right after the genealogy of Noah descendants, but it is probably placed there in the bible like that as it is a ‘stand-alone’ account of origins going back to east of Mesopotamia, (and it had to be put somewhere) and this convention has probably influenced what people think; that it is after the flood. But it is contrary to what was written before; that the early descendants of Noah were speaking different languages.

As it doesn’t say whether this account of Babel is before or after the flood, and it contradicts the other account in chapter 10, then this might be an independent memory, of civilisation originating in the east somewhere. It takes a while to chew over these things.
Another thing I noticed, is that Cain is the son of Adam and Eve, and he kills Abel, and then he runs off in exile, out of the land where he was living, and he was worried that he would be killed by people when he went away on his wanderings.

But who were these people, if Cain was the original son, where did these people come from? I just noticed it as I was reading. If they were his brothers, that's possible I suppose, but it struck me that these other people were already out there, as he was running off into another land, after having killed Abel... a recent event... where did these other nations come from, if they were already out there as a population?

It says a bit later that Adam and Eve had Seth, a replacement for Abel. So where is there mention of all these other sons, somewhere around the time of Cain; Seth might be the next notable person to come along, or Seth might be the next son after Cain, in which case, all these people out there near the land of Nod, would need to be Cain's sons and daughters.

Unless this is a record of the origins of one people group, going back to Adam and Eve. But there were other people groups out there as well.

Points for thinking outside the box.

I've noticed this too.
I always assumed that babel was before the flood.
the line
"it was called babel for there the lord did babel the language of all the earth"
can be tranlated as
"it was called babel for there the lord did overflow the shore of all the earth"
which of course sounds like a flood to me.

But according to extra-biblical sources babel fell during teh time of abraham and sounds sorta like sodom.

After having studied it I think there were probably lots of babels.
I think its a common story.
People migrate to a region and built a city and tower then migrate further on.

Outline of the Bible/Biblical geography - Religion-wiki

Outline of the Bible/Flood chronology - Religion-wiki

 

[lesliedellow]

There is nothing heretical about thinking the first eleven chapters of Genesis are not history. Few people outside of America think they are. They were, however, put there for a reason, and it is still incumbent upon Christians to read them with an ear open for what the chapters are saying about God, his nature, his will etc.

 

[Aman777]

les:>>There is nothing heretical about thinking the first eleven chapters of Genesis are not history.

Dear les, The first chapter of Genesis is the entire history of the 6 days of creation including events which have not yet taken place. All of the rest of the Bible refers back to the events of first chapter of Genesis unless Scripture is speaking of heaven. Genesis 2:1-3 tell us of the 7th Day, when Christians are in heaven.

In Love,
Aman

 

[lesliedellow]

les:>>There is nothing heretical about thinking the first eleven chapters of Genesis are not history.

Dear les, The first chapter of Genesis is the entire history of the 6 days of creation including events which have not yet taken place. All of the rest of the Bible refers back to the events of first chapter of Genesis unless Scripture is speaking of heaven. Genesis 2:1-3 tell us of the 7th Day, when Christians are in heaven.

In Love,
Aman

Unfortunately, the creation lasted for something like 13.7 billion years (and there is no reason to think God has finished with it even now).

 

[Aman777]

Unfortunately, the creation lasted for something like 13.7 billion years (and there is no reason to think God has finished with it even now).

Dear les, I agree that our Cosmos is some 13.7 Billion years old, but Genesis 2:4 shows that the Big Bang was on the 3rd Day. This means that the Creation is some 25 Billion years old, in man's time, and the BB wsa 3 Days ago, in God's time.

In Love,
Aman

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

There is nothing heretical about thinking the first eleven chapters of Genesis are not history. Few people outside of America think they are. They were, however, put there for a reason, and it is still incumbent upon Christians to read them with an ear open for what the chapters are saying about God, his nature, his will etc.

it takes a while to get used to dumping the genesis account, as unreliable, as it's supposed to be the word of god, although a lot of people have dumped it long ago. you'd have to dump it if you were to accept the evolutionary theory.
i tend to reject the whole thing job lot, if it is proved to be untrue. i don't have much tolerance for reading in interpretations that tend to create excuses, much like hugh ross seems to do, although he really believes his theories, i dont.
i no longer accept the creation account in genesis. i read it for what it is. the second creation account of the fall, has some symbolic/teaching value, in my opinion.
hugh ross gets a lot of stick in america for his old earth opinions. i suppose more liberal minded christians would be totally out for a lot of churches in america.
i think there is a lot of value to young earth creationists maintaining their theories, although i think they have got some of it wrong. but i suppose it's a faith thing, rather than based on the evidence, totally.

 

[lesliedellow]

Dear les, I agree that our Cosmos is some 13.7 Billion years old, but Genesis 2:4 shows that the Big Bang was on the 3rd Day. This means that the Creation is some 25 Billion years old, in man's time, and the BB wsa 3 Days ago, in God's time.

The big bang was the moment of creation, and that was 13.7 billion years ago. We finally turned up about 200,000 years ago.

 

[lesliedellow]

i tent to reject the whole thing job lot, if it is proved to be untrue. i don't have much tolerance for reading in interpretations that tend to create excuses, much like hugh ross seems to do, although he really believes his theories, i dont.

It is untrue as science. It most certainly is not untrue as theology. God is the creator of all things, as Genesis 1 spells out in some detail. Its especial concern is to attribute to God things like the sun, moon and agriculture which, in surrounding cultures, were regarded either as gods in themselves or as the responsibility of some god.

You need to think yourself back into the mindset of the original author, which certainly would not have been the mindset of a present day scientist. The questions he asked, and tried to answer, were about God and man.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

The big bang was the moment of creation, and that was 13.7 billion years ago. We finally turned up about 200,000 years ago.

30,000 years ago. in my estimate. i'm still not sold on an old universe, or an old earth.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

It is untrue as science. It most certainly is not untrue as theology. God is the creator of all things, as Genesis 1 spells out in some detail. Its especial concern is to attribute to God things like the sun, moon and agriculture which, in surrounding cultures were regarded either as gods or the responsibility of a god.

yeah, it's ok for them, back in those days, so that they could understand it, but it's still based on the sumerian cosmology, in my opinion, and it is not the truth about creation, the earth or the universe.
if god was involved, he would have described the creation as it truly is, even if they wouldn't understand it.