> General Discussions
Another Possible Example of Where Proper Translation Meets Science
Heidi:
My attempt at being ready to give an answer for why I believe and have the faith I now live by.
We cannot dispute science and DNA analysis. The following is from ScienceMag.org:
In the new study, researchers gathered blood samples from 200 living people in groups whose DNA is poorly known, including foragers and hunter-gatherers in Namibia and South Africa who speak Khoisan languages with click consonants. The authors analyzed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), a type of DNA inherited only from mothers, and compared it to mtDNA in databases from more than 1000 other Africans, mostly from southern Africa. Then the researchers sorted how all the samples were related to each other on a family tree.
Confirming earlier studies, the data reveal that one mtDNA lineage in the Khoisan speakers—L0—is the oldest known mtDNA lineage in living people. The work also tightens the date of origin of L0 to about 200,000 years ago (with a range of error of 165,000 to 240,000; previous studies had a range of error from 150,000 to 250,000), the team reports today in Nature. Because today this lineage is found only in people in southern Africa, people carrying the L0 lineage lived in southern Africa and formed the ancestral population for all living humans, says lead author Vanessa Hayes, a genomicist at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research and the University of Sydney in Australia./i]
This was not the only point of reference that I studied either since there are many other reputable sources. My reply will be too long if I have to quote all of them, but research for yourself. DNA does not lie.
How do we explain this in the current discussion? I would be interested in your replies.
To me it is clear that there were other humans before Adam was breathed life into, receiving Gods spirit specifically to show us where Christ decided to introduce himself to us and the start of his human genealogy.
For all intent, that was our Genesis (approx 6000 years ago) those who believe that Christ had to empty himself of his glory on order to take on the likeness of his human form. The first of his firstsfruits to whom he is now revealing this in the last days.
We are all made out of what God created and this creation event had a beginning. For us, Gods sons and daughters it is Genesis. Eventually it will be ALL. Christ was Gods created original and we are being shown, taught and teached these truths so that if we continue in the faith of Christ we will be saved and adopted into his kingdom.
Heidi
Musterseed:
Hi Octoberose
I was reading about this today in ( More of Rays teaching transcripts on the forum)
An email about the creation account in Genesis. I will quote some of what Ray had to say about it ok.
Chapter two does not recount the creation of humanity, but rather the creation of Adam and Eve.
In Gen.1:6 God made ( Heb. asah) male and female. In Gen. 2:6 God formed ( Heb. yatsar) Adam.
Two different Hebrew words , two different formations. Notice that it doesn’t say in chapter 2 vs. 3
that there was no man on earth at this time but rather that there was no man to till the ground.
There were men but they were hunters/ gatherers, not farmers. God is now going to make a more
advanced human to cultivate the land. The phrase dress it and keep it is tend and cultivate.God is
teaching Adam to be a farmer.
There is more so you can read it. Hope it helps.
John 15:1
I am the true vine and my Father is the farmer.
God is our spiritual farmer.😀
Musterseed:
Also I was just wondering about something you said about being a mother Octoberose.
Eve is the mother of all living, could this mean why God made females. Only females of any kind ie
plants. animals , fish, women. Just a thought.
can conceive and give birth, 🤔
In Christ
Pamela’💕
Wanda:
Nshan-
While your frustration got the better of you, my patience for it got the better of me, and for that I am regretful. I haven't posted a reply to you on the subject of other people, as it's not something I'm settled on, for some of the same reasons you've presented and more. What I did reply to was what you said regarding Gen 3: 20 which you've ignored or were to frustrated to acknowledge. So I'm posting it again.
--- Quote ---To me at least it doesn't take a lot to understand that Eve is the mother of all living BECAUSE she made living beings aka babies with Adam.
--- End quote ---
There is a problem with a literal enterpretation of Gen. 3:20 because Eve can only be Adam's mother symbolically. Unless you have witness to the contrary.
--- Quote ---I believe you think the above verse Gen 3:20 doesn't say that because you don't even have multiple witnesses, so perhaps you don't even fully understand it or the implications of what you're saying (casting people off from the family of God).
--- End quote ---
Are these not witnesses?
God promised that through the Seed (i.e., descendant) of a woman (Eve) would come one who would crush the head of Satan. This is the first promise of a Savior to come into the world to save ALL MANKIND. Genesis 3:14–15
And this from Heidi.
witness is Roman's 1:2 "2 the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David" other translations say " to his human nature" was a descendant of David.
Matt. 1:21
21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”
Could you please tell those of us who are in agreement with this understanding of Gen. 3:20, what we don't fully understand and what the implications are, otherwise I'm left scratching my head?
Perhaps it is both literal and symbolic if we read it as, she will become or she became the mother of all living, as Octoberose explained about being a mother, but not the mother of her husbandI. Although I'm struggling to see anything but the symbolism.
Wanda:
On the subject of other people Ray himself said he wasn't taking a big stand on it. In fact he never wrote extensively on the subject as he did other subjects. Maybe if he had studied it a bit more he would have seen it differently. We will never know.
Ray said
Now I talked a little, not during the conference so much, but in some of the bull sessions in the evening we had. Where it was said, ‘were Adam and Eve the first humans?’ Well, I said, not necessarily and I gave numerous reasons for that. I thought of another one here just yesterday, so I’ll throw this out just for fun and just to think about. I’m not making some big stand on this.
https://bible-truths.com/forums/index.php/topic,9130.0.html
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version