Exploring the Relationship Between Adam's Initial Immortality and the Age of the Earth

Job 33:6 said:

And the earliest uses of adam in the Bible are not talking about an individual.

Click to expand...

"And Adam said", seems like a person , capital letter.

In Genesis 2:19 we first see AdamH121 used as a proper name. [Adam]
here, [he] is connected to [the man] mentioned in Genesis 2:18 backwards.
Originally, there were no chapters or verses in the Bible, was added later.
Geneses 2 adds on more information from geneses 1, not two different Adams.

You seem hung-up on gen 1 only. Besides gen 2, many other books confirm
Adam as a real first male human, that God formed from the dirt of the earth.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God." Many places in the bible information
is recorded on a certain subject, then there is many relevant scriptures scattered
or dotted throughout the bible. This is why Isaiah 28:9-10 says this about knowledge.

"For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line,
line upon line; here a little, and there a little: also see Matthew 18:16

The man was alone "I will make him an help meet for him."

-If this man [was all humanity], [he/him] would not be alone. Humanity takes
a male and female; Adam was the first male/a man only. Explain how you can
have humanity before the first woman called Eve was even created.

[man]
an adult male human being:

[Him]
pronoun
used as the object of a verb or preposition to refer to a male person
or animal previously mentioned or easily identified. Compare with he.

[He]
: a male person or animal

AdamH121
אָדָם
'âdâm
aw-dawm'
The same as H120; Adam, the name of the first man,
also of a place in Palestine: - Adam.
Total KJV occurrences: 21

-HebrewH121 Adam, the name of the first man.

"For AdamG76 was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not
deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression...

G76
Ἀδάμ
Adam
ad-am'
Of Hebrew origin [H121]; Adam, the first man; typically (of Jesus)
man (as his representative): - Adam.
Total KJV occurrences: 9

Job 33:6 said:

Adam has a soul, or is a living soul, and so to do all of humanity whom he represents.

Click to expand...

It is one or the other, both are not simultaneously true here.
The word “soul” is translated from Hebrew, the word nephesh.
The Hebrew nephesh merely means an air breathing animal.

Animals are called nephesh in: Genesis 1:20, “moving creature”
Gen 1:21, “great whales, and every living creature” Gen 1:24,
“Living creature” (nephesh)-man became a “living soul” (creature).

So Adam the first man, became an air breathing creature.
Does Adam represent all the other creatures called nephesh too?

1 Corinthians 15:45 ties Adam, the first man with Genesis 2:7
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; ...

A Man, formed from material dust of the ground,
upon breathing air, became [a living soul/creature].

The soul is physical, composed of matter, and can die.
Satan’s lie to Mother Eve that man is immortal and cannot die.

Or Genesis 1:26 says, let us make adam in our image.

But that doesn't mean that Adam, the individual, was
made in God's image. It means that all of humanity was.

Click to expand...

But that verse means exactly what it says literally, only Adam was with God.
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

Jesus Christ inspired John to write his Gospel in a unique way that
gives more depth about Jesus Christ’s message brought from God
the Father. We find a lot of per tent info before [anything was made].

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God." God and the Word is the [us] and [our] in Gen 1:26
that later became God the Father and God the Son. Matthew 13:35

-Adam, which was the son of God

Luke 3:38 (KJV)
which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth,
which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Seths father Adam is called the son of God. The man that God
physically made that is mentioned in geneses 1. The Angeles are
called son of God being made by Gods hand. Angels a special
creation, individually made, but unable to reproduce.

The first Man Adam was a special creation, formed by God from dust.
Eve the first woman was a special creation formed by God from Adam.
The Word became a special creation Jesus created by God the Father.

God only had to make [two men], Adam the first male called the
son of God, and Jesus Christ who is also called the son of God.
Jesus looked like a normal man, and the Father looks like Christ.

Even though God is spirit, He still as an image and likeness.
God has hair on his head; he has eyes ears and a mouth to speak.
God has arms hands and fingers, and also legs and feet. Adam
was made in the image of God. God looks "like a son of man".

Genesis 5:3 (KJV)
And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son
in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

-Adam had a son in his own likeness, after his image.
God did not have to make Seth, Adam and Eve reproduced.

A rule the bible has says that kind only reproduce after its kind.
This is why evaluation falls flat according to the bible Gods word.

The first male human called Adam, made mortal from earth, yet was
made in Gods image and likeness, now passed down from father to son.

The second Adam or male human called Jesus, God sired using the Holy Spirit.

We have borne the image of the earthy[from dust of earth],
Being A decedent of Adam and Eve. We shall also bear the
image of the heavenly [as a spirit being] through Christ.

-the last Adam

1 Corinthians 15:45
...the last Adam was made [a quickening spirit].
What does this mean? We can turn to Romans 8:11

"But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell
in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken
your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

When Christ returns to earth, we will be raised up in a resurrection, and
our house will be clothed with immortality if the Holy Spirit dwells in you.
We will be resurrected 1000 years before the second resurrection, as a Spirit
being that looks like God [sans His Glory], real born Sons of God as spirit beings.

Romans 8:29 (KJV)​

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to
the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Semper-Fi said:

It is one or the other, both are not simultaneously true here.
The word “soul” is translated from Hebrew, the word nephesh.
The Hebrew nephesh merely means an air breathing animal.

Animals are called nephesh in: Genesis 1:20, “moving creature”
Gen 1:21, “great whales, and every living creature” Gen 1:24,
“Living creature” (nephesh)-man became a “living soul” (creature).

So Adam the first man, became an air breathing creature.
Does Adam represent all the other creatures called nephesh too?

Click to expand...

The Hebrew terms nephesh means "soul". And Adam means humanity, not "nephesh".

Semper-Fi said:

Satan’s lie to Mother Eve that man is immortal and cannot die.



But that verse means exactly what it says literally, only Adam was with God.
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

Click to expand...

No. That's referring to humanity. No individual Adam is named here.

Semper-Fi said:

A rule the bible has says that kind only reproduce after its kind.
This is why evaluation falls flat according to the bible Gods word.

The first male human called Adam, made mortal from earth, yet was
made in Gods image and likeness, now passed down from father to son.

The second Adam or male human called Jesus, God sired using the Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

Nothing in your post suggests that dozens of Bible translations are wrong by translating adam as humanity or mankind in Genesis 1:26-28

I've repeated several times that Adams name means humanity, adam is not an individual in earlier uses of the word "adam" in Genesis, namely Genesis 1:26-28. Hence why many translations use the word "mankind" or "humanity". It's only in later uses of adam that the text refers to an individual. And that's just a fact of the text.

Genesis 1:26 ESV
[26] Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Genesis 1:26 NIV
[26] Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

Genesis 1:26 NRSV
[26] Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.”

Genesis 1:26 NET
[26] Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness, so they may rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move on the earth.”

Etc.

Even in the ESV, we can just read it. Let us make "adam/man or mankind" (Hebrew) in our image. And let "them" have dominion.

It's not talking about an individual. Later chapters do refer to Adam as an individual. But in terms of the imago dei, that's not the case.

Genesis 2:5 is another example:
Genesis 2:5 ESV
[5] When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground,

The Hebrew terms there for "man", adam, is not saying "there was no Adam [the individual] to work the ground. Rather it's saying, there were no people. Humanity or mankind, to work the ground. It's not talking about an individual.

Avaree said:

Adam upon being created by GOD and was initially in a state of innocence and perfection in the Garden of Eden. He was created to live forever, which suggests that he was in a condition of immortality while in Eden.

However, when Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, both of them were punished with mortality when GOD tells Adam that he will return to the ground from which he was taken.

As a result, if we consider Adam's state of being in Eden as immortal, it is challenging to calculate how long he lived in the garden starting from the point when he was created to the time when he fell.

From scripture, Adam's genealogies provide a timeline that leads to the conclusion of a young Earth, typically around 6,000 years old. However, if one considers the possibility that Adam lived for a very long time in a perfect, immortal state before disobedience, this could imply a much longer timeline for humanity (and an older earth) before the onset of mortality and the experiences described later after the serpent deceives Eve.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Adam lived 930 years (70 years short of entering into the seventh day (rest) but Adam was not immortal (there would have been no reason for the words “lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever”) rather he had the choice that is presented over and over in scripture … one for all, or all for one …

Avaree said:

The Bible supports this perspective, as evidenced by the fact that before Adam's expulsion from the Garden, God stationed Cherubim that guarded the way to the Tree of Life. This was done to prevent Adam from eating the fruit and living forever, which would have been detrimental because it would have allowed humanity to continue experiencing unending suffering, pain, and hardship.

Click to expand...

The way was kept, but not in that it was closed to Adam ...

Job 33:6 said:

The Hebrew terms nephesh means "soul".

Click to expand...

And yet Animals are called nephesh in: Genesis 1:20, “moving creature” Gen 1:21,
“great whales, and every living creature” Gen 1:24, “Living creature” (Hebrew nephesh).

Job 33:6 said:

And Adam means humanity, not "nephesh".

Click to expand...

I never said Adam means "nephesh".

As Adam was formed out of the ground, his name identifies his origins.

Adams name comes from the Hebrew word “adamah,”
which means “ground” or “earth” not humanty.

The Hebrew word אדמה (adamah) is the feminine form of
אדם meaning "ground" (see Genesis 2:7). The word/name אדום
(Edom) means "red". Each of these words has the common
meaning of "red". Dam is the "red" blood, adamah is the "red"
ground, edom is the color "red" and adam is the "red" man.

There is one other connection between adam and adamah as seen in Genesis 2:7
which states that "adam" was formed out of the adamah.

Job 33:6 said:

No. That's referring to humanity. No individual Adam is named here.

Click to expand...

You are not rightly dividing Gods word of Truth.

Job 33:6 said:

I've repeated several times that Adams name means humanity, adam is not an individual in earlier uses of the word "adam" in Genesis, namely Genesis 1:26-28.

Click to expand...

Repeating the same thing over and over does not make it a fact.

Nothing in your post suggests that dozens of Bible translations are wrong
by translating adam as humanity or mankind in Genesis 1:26-28

Click to expand...

In those verses they use the word man in my bible, it does not
say humanity or mankind. I posted this before.

H120
אָדָם
'âdâm
aw-dawm'
From H119; ruddy, that is, a human being (an individual or the species,
mankind, etc.): - X another, + hypocrite, + common sort, X low, man
(mean, of low degree), person.
Total KJV occurrences: 541

'âdâm could meen an individual man or the species.

Job 33:6 said:

The Bible also speaks of God giving animals for mankind to have dominion over. And there is no reason to exclude consumption from that.

Click to expand...

On the contrary again. Many reasons given to exclude consuming of animals.
And no reason to say they where allowed to eat animals, just your reasoning.

Genesis 1:29 states, “Then God said, ‘I give you every seed-bearing plant
on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it.
They will be yours for food.’”

After they sinned

17And unto Adam he said, because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of
thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying,
Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt
thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat
the herb of the field; 19in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread,
till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust
thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Before the flood did people eat meat?
Sure but was not condoned by God.

After the flood

Genesis 9:3 God states, “Everything that lives and moves about will be food
for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.”

This marked a significant shift in human diet after the flood.
This is the same time frame that life expectance went down sharply.

[Now] Noah and his family were now allowed to eat meat, but there
was one restriction: God commanded, “But you must not eat meat
that has its lifeblood still in it” (Genesis 9:4).

This meant that meat had to be properly prepared, with the blood
drained, a principle carried over into later biblical laws. Lev. 17:11

You can say the First Passover was God killing an animal to cover
them up with skins to cover their nakedness, a type of sin. Rev 13:8
-

Do you have any bible verses that backup your claim?

Having dominion over Gods creation is not about eating any animal.
I can ride a horse, use whale oil or a million other uses and they would
not be eating any animal. I could drink milk or eat honey etc...

This concept emphasizes that humans are granted authority over creation,
which should be understood as a call to stewardship rather than exploitation.
In essence, having dominion means to responsibly manage and care for the
earth and its creatures.

The Sciences can study Gods animal creations without having to eat them.

Semper-Fi said:

And yet Animals are called nephesh in: Genesis 1:20, “moving creature” Gen 1:21,
“great whales, and every living creature” Gen 1:24, “Living creature” (Hebrew nephesh).


I never said Adam means "nephesh".

As Adam was formed out of the ground, his name identifies his origins.

Adams name comes from the Hebrew word “adamah,”
which means “ground” or “earth” not humanty.

The Hebrew word אדמה (adamah) is the feminine form of
אדם meaning "ground" (see Genesis 2:7). The word/name אדום
(Edom) means "red". Each of these words has the common
meaning of "red". Dam is the "red" blood, adamah is the "red"
ground, edom is the color "red" and adam is the "red" man.

There is one other connection between adam and adamah as seen in Genesis 2:7
which states that "adam" was formed out of the adamah.

You are not rightly dividing Gods word of Truth.

Repeating the same thing over and over does not make it a fact.



In those verses they use the word man in my bible, it does not
say humanity or mankind. I posted this before.

H120
אָדָם
'âdâm
aw-dawm'
From H119; ruddy, that is, a human being (an individual or the species,
mankind, etc.): - X another, + hypocrite, + common sort, X low, man
(mean, of low degree), person.
Total KJV occurrences: 541

'âdâm could meen an individual man or the species.

Click to expand...

Wow, KJV only and all other Bible translations are wrong? That's real honest.

And there is a difference between adam, that is humanity or mankind, and adamah, for ground.

Even your reference to strongs concordance plainly says it "or the species, mankind etc.".

Not hard to understand. Not sure why you're denying your own source. You're contradicting yourself.

Word Origin
from an unused word
Definition
man, mankind
NASB Translation
any man (2), anyone (4), anyone's (1), being* (1), common sort* (1), human (19), infantry (1), low degree* (1), low* (1), man (363), man's (20), man* (1), mankind (9), men (104), men of low degree* (1), men's (3), men* (4), mortal (1), one (3), people (1), person (5), person* (1), persons (3), population (1), someone (1).

And yes, animals are called nephesh. The same word translated as "soul". Im sure you can use a strong's concordance to verify that too. I'm still not sure what your concern is about this fact of the Bible. Animals were formed out of the ground in Genesis 2 as well. So I'm not sure what you're concerned about here. But it is a fact that adam in Genesis 1:26-28 means "mankind" or plainly "man" as in, a population. That's why no translation, not even the KJV says "God created Adam". They all say "God created man". Or humans, mankind, humankind etc.

So, you're welcome to contradict yourself with more sources that confirm what I am saying. But unless you can clarify what your concern is, it's case closed. All you've done here is affirm what I've been saying.

Semper-Fi said:

On the contrary again. Many reasons given to exclude consuming of animals.
And no reason to say they where allowed to eat animals, just your reasoning.

Genesis 1:29 states, “Then God said, ‘I give you every seed-bearing plant
on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it.
They will be yours for food.’”

Click to expand...

And in verse 28, God gave mankind dominion over the animals. This verse doesn't contradict verse 28.

Semper-Fi said:

After they sinned

17And unto Adam he said, because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of
thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying,
Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt
thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat
the herb of the field; 19in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread,
till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust
thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Click to expand...

This is fine. But this doesn't exclude consumption of meat. The ground is cursed, and people are going to have to work for their food. Obviously Adam didn't just live off of bread after the fall. This doesn't even make any sense because even YECs recognize that animal death occurred after the fall. So it sounds strange that God would command Adam to live off of bread while everyone else was eating meat anyway.

Semper-Fi said:

Before the flood did people eat meat?
Sure but was not condoned by God.

Click to expand...

Ok. So that negates your prior post-fall references.

Thanks.

Semper-Fi said:

After the flood

Genesis 9:3 God states, “Everything that lives and moves about will be food
for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.”

This marked a significant shift in human diet after the flood.
This is the same time frame that life expectance went down sharply.

Click to expand...

Nope. You're missing a verse again.

"Genesis 9:4 NIV
[4] “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it."

All dietary rulings in the old testament begin with that which was already being consumed (which you've already acknowledged) followed by the prohibitive ruling.

Example:
Deuteronomy 14:3-4, 7, 9-12 NIV
[3] Do not eat any detestable thing.

[4] These are the animals you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat,
[7] However, of those that chew the cud or that have a divided hoof you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the hyrax. Although they chew the cud, they do not have a divided hoof; they are ceremonially unclean for you.

[9] Of all the creatures living in the water, you may eat any that has fins and scales. [10] But anything that does not have fins and scales you may not eat; for you it is unclean.

[11] You may eat any clean bird. [12] But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture,

These verses are not saying that the Isrealites never ate sheep or goat or fish or birds. Or that God is just now giving the Isrealites permission to eat their sheep for the first time. It's acknowledging that these are already aspects of their diet. Then the prohibition follows.

Its the same structure as Genesis 9:3-4. Indeed, people in Genesis, much like the Isrealites in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, were already consuming meat identified in the first verse. The second verse introduces the prohibition as a sub category of what was already being consumed.

Semper-Fi said:

[Now] Noah and his family were now allowed to eat meat, but there
was one restriction: God commanded, “But you must not eat meat
that has its lifeblood still in it” (Genesis 9:4).

Click to expand...

Nope. See above.

Additionally, in Genesis 1, God commanded mankind to subdue and rule over all the animals. But you can do a word study with strongs concordance on these terms. They typically hold war-time and armed struggle connotations. Like subduing a lion for example (and I'm not talking about Narnia lions, I'm talking about meat eating lions that might endanger your sheep). Subdue and rule. That's the real message God was giving Adam and Eve.

Got didn't tell Adam and Eve to subdue wild fish and birds so that they could start an aquarium and a petting zoo. This is ancient near east conquest language. It's not clear to me what Adam would even do with a wild salmon other than eat it anyway.

In contrast, God also instructed the Isrealites to subdue and rule over the land of Canaan. And we all know how that went.

Examples:

Zechariah 9:15 KJV
[15] The LORD of hosts shall defend them; and they shall devour, and subdue with sling stones; and they shall drink, and make a noise as through wine; and they shall be filled like bowls, and as the corners of the altar.


Joshua 17:17-18 NIV
[17] But Joshua said to the tribes of Joseph—to Ephraim and Manasseh—“You are numerous and very powerful. You will have not only one allotment [18] but the forested hill country as well. Clear it, and its farthest limits will be yours; though the Canaanites have chariots fitted with iron and though they are strong, you can drive them out.”

Joshua 18:1 KJV
[1] And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the tabernacle of the congregation there. And the land was subdued before them.

2 Samuel 8:11-14 NIV
[11] King David dedicated these articles to the Lord, as he had done with the silver and gold from all the nations he had subdued: [12] Edom and Moab, the Ammonites and the Philistines, and Amalek. He also dedicated the plunder taken from Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah. [13] And David became famous after he returned from striking down eighteen thousand Edomites in the Valley of Salt. [14] He put garrisons throughout Edom, and all the Edomites became subject to David. The Lord gave David victory wherever he went.

When God commands people to subdue in the old testament, he's not talking about starting a petting zoo. The world beyond Eden was a dangerous place. So much so that Cain feared for his life when he was being exiled (notice that no other sons or daughters were yet mentioned, so who did he fear?).

And that's the true story of Genesis that you won't hear on Sunday school, censored for kids.

Job 33:6 said:

And in verse 28, God gave mankind dominion over the animals. This verse doesn't contradict verse 28.

Click to expand...

Clearly verse 29 says was given seed-bearing plants for food. Not one verse says they are
given animals for food, on the contrary. God said He gave them seed-bearing plants [for food].

Genesis 9:3 God states, “Everything that lives and moves about will be food
for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.”

Clearly Genesis 9:3 gives Noah [now permission] to eat animals.

Semper-Fi said:
After they sinned
Genesis 3:17-18 And unto Adam he said....

This is fine. But this doesn't exclude consumption of meat.

Click to expand...

This doesn't include consumption of meat like your claim. Genesis 9:3
shows consumption of meat was condoned after the flood, not before.

The ground is cursed, and people are going to have to work for their food.

Click to expand...

Glad you agree for once. They would have to work for there [food],
tilling and [watering] the ground. I love gardening, and know the
struggles of growing a food crop.

Why curse the ground to make it hard to get food, yet they where
freely able to kill all animals for food? Not make any sense.

Obviously Adam didn't just live off of bread after the fall.

Click to expand...

God gave them the herb of the field, every seed-bearing plant.
Milk and honey sounds good, are chicken/bird eggs ok?

This doesn't even make any sense because even YECs
recognize that animal death occurred after the fall.

Click to expand...

What does a young earth or an animal death before or after
the fall have to do with consumption by people after the fall.

So it sounds strange that God would command Adam to live
off of bread while everyone else was eating meat anyway.

Click to expand...

So Adam is a real person now with a capital A? As I said before
If Adam or others ate animals, it was not Gods clear commands.

Ok. So that negates your prior post-fall references.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

How so? It does not negate my prior post. I asked and
answered my own question what is so hard about that.

Semper-Fi said:
"Before the flood did people eat meat?
Sure but was not condoned by God."

The bible does not condone eating meat until after the flood.
If Adam or his son or anyone before the flood ate meat it does not
mean it was condoned by God, it was against His clear oracles.

Nope. You're missing a verse again.

"Genesis 9:4 NIV
[4] “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it."

Click to expand...

No, I posted it, you just passed over it, you posted it yourself
and just dismissed it and said "Nope. See above. "

Semper-Fi said:
"[Now] Noah and his family were now allowed to eat meat, but there
was one restriction: God commanded, “But you must not eat meat
that has its lifeblood still in it” (Genesis 9:4).

This meant that meat had to be properly prepared, with the blood
drained, a principle carried over into later biblical laws. Lev. 17:11

You can say the First Passover was God killing an animal to cover
them up with skins to cover their nakedness, a type of sin. Rev 13:8"

All dietary rulings in the old testament begin with that which was
already being consumed (which you've already acknowledged)
followed by the prohibitive ruling.

Click to expand...

First the bible does not say they ate meat before the flood.
Second I said "if they did, they were breaking Gods Oracle's.
Third Deuteronomy was given to Gods chosen nation.

The prohibitive ruling about eating blood from animals God
gave after the flood to Noah and family, not before.
God gave this prohibitive ruling right after He said to "Noah"
Just as I gave you the green plants, I [now] give you everything.”

Do you keep diatery laws in Deuteronomy?

Additionally, in Genesis 1, God commanded mankind to subdue and
rule over all the animals. But you can do a word study with strongs
concordance on these terms. They typically hold war-time and armed
struggle connotations. Like subduing a lion for example (and I'm not
talking about Narnia lions, I'm talking about meat eating lions that
might endanger your sheep). Subdue and rule.

Click to expand...

After all that info you just give, not one word about eating animals.

You can subdue an enemy by eating them I guess, most just get killed
or tortured and locked up, or turned into slave labor. You can eat a lion
if you want to subdue it, or just kill it to protect flocks. I have subdued
or killed racoons, possum that was in my domain, but never ate one.

Yes "Subdue and rule", but does not mean subdue, kill and eat.
I did do a word study with strongs concordance on these terms, did you?.

dominionH7287
רָדָה
râdâh
raw-daw'
A primitive root; to tread down, that is, subjugate; specifically to
crumble off: - (come to, make to) have dominion, prevail against,
reign, (bear, make to) rule, (-r, over), take. Total KJV occurrences: 27

subdueH3533
כָּבַשׁ
kâbash
kaw-bash'
A primitive root; to tread down; hence negatively to disregard; positively
to conquer, subjugate, violate: - bring into bondage, force, keep under,
subdue, bring into subjection.

dominion-subdue
Show me where these two terms anywhere means eating an animal.

This is ancient near east conquest language....
In contrast, God also instructed the Isrealites to subdue and
rule over the land of Canaan. And we all know how that went.

Click to expand...

You give Strong's Hebrew: 3533, where does it say they eat animals?

Was the land subdued by eating it? How did they subdue the people,
by eating them? Did king David eat silver or gold he subdued? Clearly
dominion and subdue here does not mean killing and eating animals.

The world beyond Eden was a dangerous place.

Click to expand...

They should've thought about that before they reasoned around Gods word/
oracles/utterances. Alot of dangerous animals waiting to kill or eat them.

When God commands people to subdue in the old testament,
he's not talking about starting a petting zoo.

Click to expand...

Correct, He is talking about driving them out, killing them, or putting them
in subjection under them as a vessel state, nothing about eating them though.

Subdue and rule, not sudue by killing and eating.

This is ancient near east conquest language.

Click to expand...

Thats a new one, reminds me of Nimrod. He protected the people from wild
animals, and made city's for them, just to control and rule over them.

Then Exodus 23:28-32 God was going to send hornets ahead of them to drive
the Hivites, Canaanites and Hittites out of their way. But they disobeyed God.
I will not drive them out from before thee in one year; lest the land become
desolate, and the beast of the field multiply against thee.

Semper-Fi said:

Clearly verse 29 says was given seed-bearing plants for food. Not one verse says they are
given animals for food, on the contrary. God said He gave them seed-bearing plants [for food].

Click to expand...

And this doesn't contradict verse 28 that they were given dominion over animals as well.

You then proceeded to ignore the entire dietary law syntax outlined in my prior post.

If you are going to ignore me, then I'll just ignore you.

The rest of your post is just a strawman. I never said that God commanded the Isrealites to eat the land of Canaan. What I'm saying is that to subdue and to have dominion and rulership includes, but is not limited to, consumption of its resources. Namely, wild fish and birds.

You don't wage war with wild fish. When you subdue and rule over wild fish, you have the freedom to eat them. That's what you do with fish. Subduing wild fish is not about riding them or trapping them inside a fish tank for pets. Subduing is complete subjugation.

Job 33:6 said:

And this doesn't contradict verse 28 that they were given dominion over animals as well.

You then proceeded to ignore the entire dietary law syntax outlined in my prior post.

If you are going to ignore me, then I'll just ignore you.

Click to expand...

On the contrary I addressed you posts, you are ignoring Gods Oracles not me.

dominion-subdue
Show me where these two terms anywhere means eating an animal.

Job 33:6 said:

Wow, KJV only and all other Bible translations are wrong? That's real honest.

Click to expand...

Assuming and putting words in my mouth, thats original.

And there is a difference between adam, that is
humanity or mankind, and adamah, for ground.

Click to expand...

Yes I know I mentioned before about this. [The root] of the word Adam
is from being made from, dirt, red, earth.] Makes sense, then Adam
calls His Wife wo-man, because She came from Adams rib bone.

[And] "The Hebrew lexicon defines Adam as the first human
created directly by God, the progenitor of all mankind".

Here The Hebrew lexicon define Adam as the first hu-man.
"The man Adam represents humanity Because [he is the first male man]
and he is the father/or start of all the human race that followed after".

It seems you reject the genealogy back to Adam the person. Adam is
called the son of God who was the father of Seth who is in Adams
image through Eves childbirth, according to the bible.
Genesis 2:19 AdamH121 " the name of the first man"

So how do you make mankind or humanty?
One male and one female right.

Even your reference to strongs concordance plainly says it "or the species, mankind etc.".

Click to expand...

You claimed Adam meant humanity, I showed H120 can have two meanings.
My post was Back in post #80, did you not see the word highlited in red?
Adam H120 "a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.):"

I also said "Names/words can have several meanings, you should know this."
Your NASB Translation list 25 or so different meanings, backing my claim.

Not hard to understand. Not sure why you're denying your own source.
You're contradicting yourself.

Click to expand...

I am not denying anything nor contradicting myself, [you] missed my post.
I will say it again 'âdâmH120 could mean an individual man or the species.

What about H121 Adam, the name of the first man? or G76

H121
אָדָם
'âdâm
aw-dawm'
The same as H120; Adam, the name of the first man,
also of a place in Palestine: - Adam. Total KJV occurrences: 21

G76
Ἀδάμ
Adam
ad-am'
Of Hebrew origin [H121]; Adam, the first man; typically (of Jesus)
man (as his representative): - Adam. Total KJV occurrences: 9

So why is these not talking about the first man? Does God make
Man/humanity in gen 1, then makes another man called Adam in gen 2?

And yes, animals are called nephesh. The same word translated as "soul".
Im sure you can use a strong's concordance to verify that too.

Click to expand...

I did use a concordance and posted the verses. Animals are not called
nephesh or soul, the word nephesh is translated as “moving creature”,
“great whales and every living creature” “Living creature” (Hebrew nephesh).

I'm still not sure what your concern is about this fact of the Bible.

Click to expand...

You said in post #79
something about "both topics may be simultaneously true".
1"Adam has a soul, or is a living soul,"
2"and so to do all of humanity whom he represents."

1 I claimed both could not be simultaneously true, which is correct.
2 Then I showed the word nepesh means any air breathing animal, not just
humans, and asked if Adam represents animals too? Not a hard question.

Genesis 1:27 is God making a whole population of people? And then
in Genesis 2:7 God forms another man, that He put in the garden?

In gen 2:20-23 AdamH121 [not H120] calls his new help-ment woman,
Are you claiming there are other humans alive before Cains mother Eve?
Gen 3:20 Adam called his wife Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

How can you have a population before Eve, the mother of all living humans?

Semper-Fi said:

How can you have a population before Eve, the mother of all living humans?

Click to expand...

Its easy. God made humanity progressively from 200 million years of evolution, and then about 12,000 years ago came the first spiritually awake humans adam and eve..

Who messed up almost immediatly and cain goes out and finds a wife from the children of men, i.e. spiritually dead humanoids. But still biologically almost the same dna.

And we end up at noah, the last of the spiritual generation of man that God miraculously preserves (and yes there could be many Noah's that all acted prophetically to save their people from the rising flood waters of the last ice age)

You them get remnants of spiritually dead men who survived. Given the huge amount of neanderthal bones found in Israel it really makes me wonder if the giants of old.. are neanderthals and densovans.

What really surprised me with Job33:6, is he links to michael heiser. A man who takes genesis 6 litterally.

Semper-Fi said:

Assuming and putting words in my mouth, thats original.



Yes I know I mentioned before about this. [The root] of the word Adam
is from being made from, dirt, red, earth.] Makes sense, then Adam
calls His Wife wo-man, because She came from Adams rib bone.

[And] "The Hebrew lexicon defines Adam as the first human
created directly by God, the progenitor of all mankind".

Click to expand...

Strong wasn't an ancient Israelite. This is a false argument.

Semper-Fi said:

It seems you reject the genealogy back to Adam the person. Adam is
called the son of God who was the father of Seth who is in Adams
image through Eves childbirth, according to the bible.
Genesis 2:19 AdamH121 " the name of the first man"

Click to expand...

I view Adam as the first man to be chosen by God. Not biologically the first man.

Semper-Fi said:

So how do you make mankind or humanty?
One male and one female right.

Click to expand...

Just as with the fish, birds, and other animals of Genesis, God need not begin with just 1 man and 1 woman.

Semper-Fi said:

You claimed Adam meant humanity, I showed H120 can have two meanings.
My post was Back in post #80, did you not see the word highlited in red?
Adam H120 "a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.):"

Click to expand...

Yup. And in Genesis 1, it's not talking about 1 man. Its talking about humanity as a whole.

Semper-Fi said:

I am not denying anything nor contradicting myself, [you] missed my post.
I will say it again 'âdâmH120 could mean an individual man or the species.

What about H121 Adam, the name of the first man? or G76

H121
אָדָם
'âdâm
aw-dawm'
The same as H120; Adam, the name of the first man,
also of a place in Palestine: - Adam. Total KJV occurrences: 21

G76
Ἀδάμ
Adam
ad-am'
Of Hebrew origin [H121]; Adam, the first man; typically (of Jesus)
man (as his representative): - Adam. Total KJV occurrences: 9

So why is these not talking about the first man? Does God make
Man/humanity in gen 1, then makes another man called Adam in gen 2?

Click to expand...

Correct. The humanity created in Genesis 1, in chapter 1, is not equivalent to the creation story of Adam, the individual. These are different stories.

Semper-Fi said:

I did use a concordance and posted the verses. Animals are not called
nephesh or soul, the word nephesh is translated as “moving creature”,
“great whales and every living creature” “Living creature” (Hebrew nephesh).

Click to expand...

Yes they are. Animals in Genesis 1 certainly are. So I'm still not sure what you're trying to argue here. You'll have to clarify.

Semper-Fi said:

You said in post #79
something about "both topics may be simultaneously true".
1"Adam has a soul, or is a living soul,"
2"and so to do all of humanity whom he represents."

Click to expand...

Semper-Fi said:

1 I claimed both could not be simultaneously true, which is correct.
2 Then I showed the word nepesh means any air breathing animal, not just
humans, and asked if Adam represents animals too? Not a hard question.

Click to expand...

I don't see the connection here. Adam doesn't mean "animals". So why would he represent animals?

Semper-Fi said:

Genesis 1:27 is God making a whole population of people? And then
in Genesis 2:7 God forms another man, that He put in the garden?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Semper-Fi said:

In gen 2:20-23 AdamH121 [not H120] calls his new help-ment woman,
Are you claiming there are other humans alive before Cains mother Eve?
Gen 3:20 Adam called his wife Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Click to expand...

Yes. And Eve of course is not actually the mother of all living. Unless you think she is the mother of Adam too. These are titles. They aren't about biology. Adams sons are identified as the fathers of all those who play the flute and live in tents etc. it isn't about biology.

johansen said:

Its easy. God made humanity progressively from 200 million years of evolution, and then about 12,000 years ago came the first spiritually awake humans adam and eve..

Who messed up almost immediatly and cain goes out and finds a wife from the children of men, i.e. spiritually dead humanoids. But still biologically almost the same dna.

And we end up at noah, the last of the spiritual generation of man that God miraculously preserves (and yes there could be many Noah's that all acted prophetically to save their people from the rising flood waters of the last ice age)

You them get remnants of spiritually dead men who survived. Given the huge amount of neanderthal bones found in Israel it really makes me wonder if the giants of old.. are neanderthals and densovans.

What really surprised me with Job33:6, is he links to michael heiser. A man who takes genesis 6 litterally.

Click to expand...

Michael Heiser understands that Genesis describes an ancient Israelite cosmology, not modern science. He takes the Bible literally, but he also doesn't confuse it with modern science and biology.

Job 33:6 said:

Unless you think she is the mother of Adam too

Click to expand...

Its turtles all the way down lol.

Job 33:6 said:

They aren't about biology. Adams sons are identified as the fathers of all those who play the flute and live in tents etc. it isn't about biology.

Click to expand...

So you reject the clear genealogy of Adam and his decedents,
that explains it and all I need to know, you just reject Gods word.
You just try and reason around Gods clear teaching in the bible.

Semper-Fi said:

So you reject the clear genealogy of Adam and his decedents,
that explains it and all I need to know, you just reject Gods word.
You just try and reason around Gods clear teaching in the bible.

Click to expand...

Geneologies in the ancient world are not like geneologies of 21st century DNA tests. Even in the Bible, you have geneologies that are leaving people out. Some contradict one another. Mathew organizes his geneologies, omitting certain people, so that they match in number 14s as well.

In the ancient world, geneologies, including figures of the Sumerian and Assyrian kings lists, include legendary heroes that were theologically important, but not necessarily biologically ancestral.

And acknowledging that the Bible isn't a science textbook is not rejection of the Bible. It's acceptance of the Bible.

Turning it into a biology textbook is the real denial of scripture.

For the literalists, behold, the Bible as it truly is:


Those who try to turn it into modern science, are the true denialists of God's Word.