-
†. Gen 1:20 . . God said: Let the waters bring forth swarms of living
creatures, and birds that fly above the earth across the expanse of
the sky.
The Hebrew word for "birds" is 'owph (ofe) which just simply means covered
with wings rather than covered with feathers. It's a rather unusual word
because it includes not only creatures with feathers, but according to Lev
11:13-23, 'owph also pertains to bats and flying insects. The English word
"birds" was obviously an arbitrary translation since owph is ambiguous.
What did those early winged creatures look like? My money is on the
Pterosaurs (pterodactyls). Precisely when God phased out those early skin
winged creatures and replaced them with feather-winged creatures isn't
stated; but since no winged creatures are reported created on the sixth day,
then we have to give the birdies a share of the fifth; so I think we're talking
about a pritt-tee long fifth "day" with quite possibly some carry-over into the
sixth. What I mean is; I don't think it prudent to rule out the possibility that
those early skin-winged creatures were the ancestors of later-to-come
feather-winged creatures.
How can water be used to create both winged creatures and sea creatures?
Well, it can't be any harder than creating terra creatures from the dust of
the earth seeing as how the very same elements are dissolved in earth's
waters; and in point of biological fact, land creatures are composed of not
only dust, but also water. Dehydrate an air-breathing land creature, and it
will die.
"bring forth swarms" is derived from sharats (shaw-rats') and means: to
wriggle, i.e. (by implication) swarm or abound. Sharats, strictly speaking,
simply indicates large numbers; like in Ex 1:7 where Yhhv's people
multiplied like rabbits, and in Ex 8:3 where ka-zillions of frogs infested the
land of Egypt.
Sharats is a different word than the ones translated "bring forth" in Gen
1:12 and Gen 1:15. The word in Gen 1:12 is from dasha' (daw-shaw') which
means: to sprout. The word in Gen 1:15 is from yatsa' (yaw-tsaw') which is
a word of action and/or motion and means: to go, to cause to go, send
away, or to bring out, or proceed.
It's important to note that winged creatures were just as distinct a creation
as aqua creatures. So winged creatures didn't evolve from creatures who
once lived in the sea. Winged creatures are a separate genre of life in their
own right, and absolutely did not evolve from some other order of life.
The word for "creature" is from nephesh (neh'-fesh) which distinguishes
conscious life from non-conscious life. For example: though saguaro cacti
are alive, they aren't nephesh because saguaro cacti aren't sentient beings;
viz: they aren't self aware.
Nephesh shows up first in Gen 1:20-21 as sea creatures and winged
creatures.
Next it shows up in Gen 1:24 as terra creatures; viz: cattle, creepy crawlies,
and wild beasts.
It shows up again in Gen 2:7 as the human creature.
It shows up again in Gen 2:19-20 as the creatures to whom Adam gave
names.
It shows up again in Gen 9:8-16 as all conscious life aboard the ark,
including Noah and his family.
Some say that animals are people too. Well . . they're certainly not human,
but according to the Bible, they are very definitely just as much a nephesh
as a human being. So I guess we could consent, at least to some degree,
that critters are people too; in their own way.
†. Gen 1:21a . . God created the great sea monsters, and all the
living creatures of every kind that creep, which the waters brought
forth in swarms,
"sea monsters" is from tanniyn (tan-neen') and/or tanniym (tan-neem')
which mean: a marine or land monster. Tanniyn is sometimes translated
"dragon" as in Isa 27:1
It wasn't a tanniyn, however, that swallowed Jonah. That creature was
either a dagah (daw-gaw') a dag (dawg) or a da'g (dawg). All three words
mean a fish.
NOTE: The reason I quoted the three Hebrew words for "fish" is because to
tell the truth, translators are not always confident how best to represent a
Hebrew word with the English alphabet. In point of fact, there are ancient
Hebrew words that nobody really knows what they mean so translators are
forced to take educated guesses here and there.
"of every kind that creep" in this case regards only aquatic creatures that
creep e.g. starfish, lobsters, crayfish, newts, clams, and crabs et al. The
terra creepers are coming up in a little bit.
But what about aquatic dinosaurs? Well . . according to Discovery's web site
"Walking With Dinosaurs" paleontologists believe there were some
amphibious reptiles such as plesiosaurs and ichthyosaurs, but those
creatures didn't have the gills necessary to be truly aquatic like Nemo and
his dad Marlin.
†. Gen1:21b . . and all the winged creatures of every kind.
"kind" is from miyn (meen) and means: to portion out: to sort; viz: species.
In other words: God created a variety of winged species all at once, rather
than just one specie like He did with man.
"From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the
whole earth" (Acts 17:25-26)
Man is a one-of-a-kind specie. From just one man's genetic chemistry came
all the other variations of Man; ranging anywhere from Pygmies to Eskimos;
and has to make you wonder how that works if evolution is total bull. Well; I
don't think it's wise to relegate Darwin to the category of total bull. I mean,
just look at how well pathogens adapt and mutate in order to cope with
antibiotics. That's a natural process and the pathies don't even have to give
it any thought. I believe Darwin was on to something, but shot himself in the
foot by leaving intelligent design out of the equation. An origin of living
species theory is incomplete without an originator of life.
God built mysterious genetic reactions into living organisms that give them
the ability to make adjustments to themselves in order to survive--
adjustments that are triggered by conditions in their respective
environments. It's because of those kinds of involuntary adaptations and
mutations that I'm very curious sometimes what the original humans really
looked like.
†. Gen 1:21b-22a . . And God saw that this was good.
The Hebrew word for "good" in this instance is towb (tobe) which is horribly
ambiguous. It's meanings range from morally good, to good looking, to a job
well done, to something that's good to the taste; and to a whole lot of other
things in between; e.g. a good show, good food, as good as it gets,
satisfactory; etc, etc.
Cont.
/
†. Gen 1:20 . . God said: Let the waters bring forth swarms of living
creatures, and birds that fly above the earth across the expanse of
the sky.
The Hebrew word for "birds" is 'owph (ofe) which just simply means covered
with wings rather than covered with feathers. It's a rather unusual word
because it includes not only creatures with feathers, but according to Lev
11:13-23, 'owph also pertains to bats and flying insects. The English word
"birds" was obviously an arbitrary translation since owph is ambiguous.
What did those early winged creatures look like? My money is on the
Pterosaurs (pterodactyls). Precisely when God phased out those early skin
winged creatures and replaced them with feather-winged creatures isn't
stated; but since no winged creatures are reported created on the sixth day,
then we have to give the birdies a share of the fifth; so I think we're talking
about a pritt-tee long fifth "day" with quite possibly some carry-over into the
sixth. What I mean is; I don't think it prudent to rule out the possibility that
those early skin-winged creatures were the ancestors of later-to-come
feather-winged creatures.
How can water be used to create both winged creatures and sea creatures?
Well, it can't be any harder than creating terra creatures from the dust of
the earth seeing as how the very same elements are dissolved in earth's
waters; and in point of biological fact, land creatures are composed of not
only dust, but also water. Dehydrate an air-breathing land creature, and it
will die.
"bring forth swarms" is derived from sharats (shaw-rats') and means: to
wriggle, i.e. (by implication) swarm or abound. Sharats, strictly speaking,
simply indicates large numbers; like in Ex 1:7 where Yhhv's people
multiplied like rabbits, and in Ex 8:3 where ka-zillions of frogs infested the
land of Egypt.
Sharats is a different word than the ones translated "bring forth" in Gen
1:12 and Gen 1:15. The word in Gen 1:12 is from dasha' (daw-shaw') which
means: to sprout. The word in Gen 1:15 is from yatsa' (yaw-tsaw') which is
a word of action and/or motion and means: to go, to cause to go, send
away, or to bring out, or proceed.
It's important to note that winged creatures were just as distinct a creation
as aqua creatures. So winged creatures didn't evolve from creatures who
once lived in the sea. Winged creatures are a separate genre of life in their
own right, and absolutely did not evolve from some other order of life.
The word for "creature" is from nephesh (neh'-fesh) which distinguishes
conscious life from non-conscious life. For example: though saguaro cacti
are alive, they aren't nephesh because saguaro cacti aren't sentient beings;
viz: they aren't self aware.
Nephesh shows up first in Gen 1:20-21 as sea creatures and winged
creatures.
Next it shows up in Gen 1:24 as terra creatures; viz: cattle, creepy crawlies,
and wild beasts.
It shows up again in Gen 2:7 as the human creature.
It shows up again in Gen 2:19-20 as the creatures to whom Adam gave
names.
It shows up again in Gen 9:8-16 as all conscious life aboard the ark,
including Noah and his family.
Some say that animals are people too. Well . . they're certainly not human,
but according to the Bible, they are very definitely just as much a nephesh
as a human being. So I guess we could consent, at least to some degree,
that critters are people too; in their own way.
†. Gen 1:21a . . God created the great sea monsters, and all the
living creatures of every kind that creep, which the waters brought
forth in swarms,
"sea monsters" is from tanniyn (tan-neen') and/or tanniym (tan-neem')
which mean: a marine or land monster. Tanniyn is sometimes translated
"dragon" as in Isa 27:1
It wasn't a tanniyn, however, that swallowed Jonah. That creature was
either a dagah (daw-gaw') a dag (dawg) or a da'g (dawg). All three words
mean a fish.
NOTE: The reason I quoted the three Hebrew words for "fish" is because to
tell the truth, translators are not always confident how best to represent a
Hebrew word with the English alphabet. In point of fact, there are ancient
Hebrew words that nobody really knows what they mean so translators are
forced to take educated guesses here and there.
"of every kind that creep" in this case regards only aquatic creatures that
creep e.g. starfish, lobsters, crayfish, newts, clams, and crabs et al. The
terra creepers are coming up in a little bit.
But what about aquatic dinosaurs? Well . . according to Discovery's web site
"Walking With Dinosaurs" paleontologists believe there were some
amphibious reptiles such as plesiosaurs and ichthyosaurs, but those
creatures didn't have the gills necessary to be truly aquatic like Nemo and
his dad Marlin.
†. Gen1:21b . . and all the winged creatures of every kind.
"kind" is from miyn (meen) and means: to portion out: to sort; viz: species.
In other words: God created a variety of winged species all at once, rather
than just one specie like He did with man.
"From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the
whole earth" (Acts 17:25-26)
Man is a one-of-a-kind specie. From just one man's genetic chemistry came
all the other variations of Man; ranging anywhere from Pygmies to Eskimos;
and has to make you wonder how that works if evolution is total bull. Well; I
don't think it's wise to relegate Darwin to the category of total bull. I mean,
just look at how well pathogens adapt and mutate in order to cope with
antibiotics. That's a natural process and the pathies don't even have to give
it any thought. I believe Darwin was on to something, but shot himself in the
foot by leaving intelligent design out of the equation. An origin of living
species theory is incomplete without an originator of life.
God built mysterious genetic reactions into living organisms that give them
the ability to make adjustments to themselves in order to survive--
adjustments that are triggered by conditions in their respective
environments. It's because of those kinds of involuntary adaptations and
mutations that I'm very curious sometimes what the original humans really
looked like.
†. Gen 1:21b-22a . . And God saw that this was good.
The Hebrew word for "good" in this instance is towb (tobe) which is horribly
ambiguous. It's meanings range from morally good, to good looking, to a job
well done, to something that's good to the taste; and to a whole lot of other
things in between; e.g. a good show, good food, as good as it gets,
satisfactory; etc, etc.
Cont.
/
