It has been known for over 100 years that the ages ascribed to people in early Genesis are symbolic of their character or accomplishments and are not their chronological ages. The Sumerian king list sys that one king ruled for over 28,000 years, for example.
One of the systems of symbolic numbers was based on 60. So Noah was 600 - a really outstanding champion of the Faith. And Gen. 6:3 should be translated “Let his years be 120,” that is: let him be a good and faithful keeper of the covenant.
The symbolic numbers are recognized in the Jewish Encyclopedia for 1903.
Psalm 90, ascribed to Moses, says “our years are fourscore and ten” so the actual age humans can reach was recognized by (one of) the author(s) of Genesis.
The fact is, the term that is translated “breath of life” in the KJV is not the Hebrew for spirit or soul, but the word neshamah - the term mused for God’s Spirit being given to a human. Gen. 2:7 is not a second creation story, but different story - one about the beginning of redemption. The verse reminds us that humans were created mortal (dust of the earth = mortality) but Adam is now given God’s Spirit thus redeeming him from death. This is also an old Jewish understanding of 2:7.
The NT parallel is in John 22 where Jesus breathes on his disciples and says “receive the Holy Spirit.”
I was just reading something where the author argued that “Jesus is Lord” was the basic proclamation of the Gospel. I’ve heard more times than I can count that “Jesus is Savior” comes before “Jesus is Lord”, but it seems that in the early church “Jesus is Lord” was foundational: Jesus as Savior was regarded as an outcome of giving allegiance to Jesus as Lord.
if what you say is true, how does one explain all the specific ages of individuals throughout the bible?
I have two lists for which you need to explain:
List 1
Methuselah: The oldest person in the Bible, living to be 969 years old.
Jared: Lived to be 962 years old.
Noah: Lived to be 950 years old.
Adam: Lived to be 930 years old.
Seth: Lived to be 912 years old.
Enos: Lived to be 905 years old.
Kenan: Lived to be 910 years old.
Mahalalel: Lived to be 895 years old.
Lamech: Lived to be 777 years old.
Enoch: Lived to be 365 years old, but was taken away by God instead of dying.
Abraham: Lived to be 175 years old.
Terah: Lived to be 205 years old.
Nahor: Lived to be 148 years old.
Serug: Lived to be 230 years old.
List 2
The sum of the years of the First Age.
From Adam unto Noah’s flood are years 1656.
For when Adam was 130 years old he begat Seth.
Seth being 105 years, begat Enos.
Enos, being 90 years, begat Cainan.
Cainan, being 70 years, begat Mahaleel.
Mahaleel, being 65 years, begat Jared.
Jared, at the age of 162, begat Enoch.
Enoch, being 65 years, begat Methuselah.
Methuselah, at the age of 187, begat Lamech.
Lamech, being 182 years, begat Noah.
Noah, at the coming of the flood, was 600 years old, as appeareth in the 7th chap. of Genesis.
The whole sum of the years are 1656.
From the said flood of Noah, unto Abraham’s departing from Chaldea, were 422years and ten days.
For the said flood continued one whole year and ten days.
Shem (which was Noah’s son) begat Arphaxad two years after that.
Arphaxad begat Salah when he was 35 years old.
Salah, being 30 years old, begat Eber.
Eber, at the age of 34, begat Peleg.
Peleg, being 30 years, begat Reu.
Reu, being 32 years, begat Serug.
Serug, being 30 years, begat Nahor.
Nahor, being 29 years, begat Terah.
Terah, being 130 years, begat Abram.
And Abraham departed from Chaldea when he was 70 years old.
These accounted, are 422 years and ten days.
From Abraham’s departing from Ur in Chaldea unto the departing of the children of Israel, are 430 years, gathered as followeth:
Abraham was in Charran five years, and departed in the 75th year:
Begat Isaac when 100 years old, in the 25th year of his departing.
Isaac begat Jacob, when 60 years old.
Israel was in Egypt 220 years.
Then deduct 80 years from this: for so old was Moses when he conducted the Israelites from Egypt.
So the rest of the years, that is to say, 130, are divided between Amram and Kohath.
The Kohath begat Amram at the age of 67 years.
Amram, being 65 years, begat Moses, who in the 8oth year of his age, departed with the Israelites from Egypt.
So this chronology is the 430 years mentioned in the 12th chap. of Exodus and the 3d chap. to the Galatians.
From the going of the Israelites from Egypt, unto the first building of the temple, are 480 years, after this chronology and account.
Moses remained in the desert or wilderness 40 years.
Joshua and Othniel ruled 40 years.
Ehud, 80 years.
Deborah, 40 years.
Gideon, 40 years.
Abimelech, 3 years.
Tola, 23 years.
Jair, 22 years.
Then they were without a captain, until the 18th year of Jephthah.
Jephthah, 6 years.
Ibzan, 7 years.
Elon, 10 years.
Abdon, 8 years.
Sampson, 20 years.
Heli, judge and priest, 4 years.
Samuel and Saul reigned 40 years.
David was king 40 years.
Solomon, in the 4th year of his reign, began the building of the temple.
These are the 480 years mentioned in the first book of Kings, chap.vi.
From the first building of the temple, unto the captivity of Babylon, are 419 years and an half.
Solomon reigned yet 36 years.
Rehoboam, 17 years.
Abija, 3 years.
Asa, 41 years.
Jehoshaphat, 25 years.
Jehoram, 8 years.
Ahaziah, 1 year.
Athaliah, the queen, 7 years.
Joash, 40 years.
Amaziah, 29 years.
Uzziah, 52 years.
Jehoahaz, 16 years.
Ahaz, 16 years.
Hezekiah, 29 years.
Manasses, 55 years.
Amon, 2 years.
Josiah, 31 years.
Jeoaz, 3 months.
Eliakim, 11 years.
Jehoiachin, Jechonias, 3 months.
And here beginneth the captivity of Babylon.
The sum of these years are 419.
Jerusalem was re-edified and built again after the captivity of Babylon, 70 years.
The captivity continued 70 years. The children of Israel were delivered the first year of Cyrus. The temple was begun to be built in the second year of the said Cyrus, and finished in the 46th year, which was the 6th year of Darius. After that Darius had reigned 20 years, Nehemiah was restored to liberty, and went to build the city, which was finished in the 32nd year of the said Darius. All the years from the building of the temple again, are 26 years.
The whole sum of years amount to 70
From the re-edifying of the city, unto the coming of Christ, are 483 years, after this chronology.
It is mentioned in the 9th chap. of Daniel that Jerusalem should be built up again, and that from that time, unto the coming of Christ, are 69 weeks, and every week is reckoned for 7 years. So 69 weeks amount to 483 years; for, from the said year of Darius, unto the 42nd year of Augustus, in which year our Saviour Christ was born, are just and complete so many years, whereupon we reckon, that from Adam unto Christ, are 3974 years, six months, and ten days; and from the birth of Christ, unto this present year, is 1801.
Now, illustrate to me how the above is not an accurate reflection of the Biblical historical narrative up to the time of Christ?
The second list in particular presents a very comprehensive timeline all the way up to Christ…it even fits with known historical timelines from sources from outside the Bible narrative.
Also, note the affirmation in Galations Chapter 3 - which is a killer of your theology there as the apostle Paul is affirming the timeline up to the giving of the law at Sinai!
then there’s Abraham and in particular Sarah’s age when Isaac was conceived…a 90 year old women? Really?? Funny thing is, in the bible, there are a number of statements of old age that defy science and yet this one isn’t a problem for you there???
BTW, the oldest modern example i can find is a 73 year old who was impregnated artificially…so that’s not even a natural conception Erramatti Mangamma - Wikipedia
Angels/spirits were created in (inside, within) the Son of God. They were made as a small part of Him, as in Him are all things. They have free will and can rebel against God. The Holy Spirit on the other hand is the fullness of God which dwells in the Son.
Col 1:16 (BSB) For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.
19 For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him,
John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Spirit is born of Spirit and flesh is born of flesh. We have a dual body and spirit nature that is knit together forming a living soul.
Agreed its all life in the land.
Where did I say that we are just spirits? We are a soul that is spirit and body knitted together. The ‘sons of God’ are souls just like us, not angels/spirits which could be where some of the confusion is. At death the pre-incarnate spirit returns to God, the soul sleeps and the body returns to dust. In the new heavens and earth we get a new body, the spirit returns to us, resurrecting our soul.
The goal of the flood was not to destroy Satan and his angels, but a restart for Noah and his sons. The serpent was cast to the ground, meaning he was bound to the flesh which is not resurrected. He was in all flesh that was on the ark.
Please expound on that.
Angels are not Elohim (God).
To clarify, the spirit/cherub is joined with the flesh and a soul (living being) is born.
Not sure why you keep bringing up elohim… lower case? There is only one Elohim (God). Adam is a son of God, not God. We could say that Adam is a type for Jesus, the Son of God though. Adam took Eve’s sin upon himself because she was made to be with him… so its called Adam’s sin. Jesus takes all the sins of the world upon Himself.
This makes sense and shows that our spiritual body (spirit from heaven) is there the whole time.
But my comment was about the Hebrew and not any translation – the same Hebrew words used in Genesis 6:17, Genesis 7:15, Genesis 7:22 referring to all living things which breathe.
If you take נִשְׁמַ֣ת out of context (separating it from חַיִּ֑ים) then you will also find it in Proverbs 20:27 and Isaiah 30:33. And the KJV translates this as spirit in the first and as breath in the second. But is there really any justification for this KJV translation in Proverbs 20:27? I don’t see any. The meaning is frankly pretty obscure no matter the translation. Nowhere in Proverbs 20 does it speak of anything supernatural. so I see no reason why this should be
A wise king winnows the wicked,
and drives the wheel over them.
27 The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord,
searching all his innermost parts.
28 Loyalty and faithfulness preserve the king,
and his throne is upheld by righteousness.
rather than
A wise king winnows the wicked,
and drives the wheel over them.
27 The breath of man is the lamp of the Lord,
searching all his innermost parts.
28 Loyalty and faithfulness preserve the king,
and his throne is upheld by righteousness.
I can actually make more sense of the latter as a reference to a man’s words (and yes breath is frequently used to refer to words). And it makes sense to say that by a man’s words the Lord can see the innermost part of the man and know his character.
I was speaking to the use of Genesis 2:7 to refer to an insertion of our spirit (or life) into a body for the creation of Adam. Your comment does not apply to this but reads a completely different meaning into the text – one which I find far fetched and even incoherent. It is certainly a projection of theology on the passage (and a rather convoluted one at that) which I see little reason to agree with. I will stick with my much much simpler and straightforward understand of the passage as God’s inspiration bringing the mind of man to life.
Ok… I see how you connect this up in your Christian theology. This not only makes zero sense in my theology, where Genesis 2-3 is about the fall of man not his redemption, but also looks rather forced – trying to make all things revolve around Christianity (not something I have ever seen as reasonable or helpful).
It’s a dative, not a locative, following ἐν (en); in fact it is a pronoun of person, which is determinative here: in connection with persons, with the dative, ἐν when used in terms of spatial location refers to the psyche, and when this is not fitting in context the meaning passes to the instrumental, i.e. “by”, indicating that the psyche of the indicated person is the instrument of the verb in the clause.
There is nothing in the Hebrew use of the phrase, or in its parallels in other ANE use, that suggests that elohim or “sons of elohim” are anything but spirit beings.
Elohim covers God, the gods of nations, major heavenly beings, even the spirits of dead humans. In ancient Hebrew, any spiritual/heavenly being is an elohim.
We have a particular prejudice about the use of “God”, but that prejudice is not found in the Hebrew or indeed anywhere in the ANE; elohim referred to all beings whose proper residence was heaven (including the spirits of human dead, who were never meant to go to Sheol). Asherah and Molech and Baal are "elohim* as are other gods.
Besides, just BTW, “angel” is not a name for a being, it’s a name for a job; for that matter, “cherub” is really a name for a job, since the root means “to be near”; thus cherubim are those elohim assigned to be close to YHWH’s presence.
No – a cherub qualifies as an elohim, and elohim do not get enfleshed; the only elohim that ever incarnated was the Word.
Because elohim does not mean “God” except when used with a singular verb, and not always then.
False. Baal is an elohim, Molech is an elohim; Laban had household elohim; YHWH-Elohim is greater than all elohim; the spirit of Samuel raised by the witch was an elohim; etc.
I believe each of the patriarchs can represent a condensed list of 160 generations that show they can be historical individuals (see OP), but your comment is a good lead in to something else I really would like to show in this discussion thread.
What the patriarchs symbolize (or personify if I may) is our common descent with all life which is described by their character in story, in the meaning of their names, their location, where they are going and what they are doing/accomplishing.
To go along with this we need a timescale: In reading through the genealogies (generations of Adam), when we view the long life spans and when they beget children as representing a new kind… (meaning of Adam is mankind (120. אָדָם adam) …a kind or species of man descended from an original mankind (root meaning “to be red” or “ruddy”) made of the earth, of dust - the smallest spec that Moses could think of)… instead of an individual person, we will see that the chronology lines up almost perfectly with what we know from science today.
And one more note on kinds before we jump to the timeline is that it can mean not just a species, but a whole family. A family or superfamily is a scientific taxonomy for organizing a class of organisms. When Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Jacob or Esau move to different locations, its not just them. Its a whole camp, a whole group of people in their household including family, and workers managing livestock.
The timeline matches up what we have learned from science just in the last 200 years or so with what has been in the Bible for over 2,000 years. The creation days and genealogical record are an accurate and highly condensed timescale which can be unraveled based on 2 Peter 3:8 of which I defend the math and grammar discussed with @St.Roymond and others in this thread:
2 Pet 3:8 (NKJV) But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
Do not forget this!*… be not ignorant (KJV)… don’t overlook (ESV)… don’t let it escape your notice (BSB)… this one fact!* (NASB)…
* Emphasis mine
(BLB) Do not let this one thing be hidden from you:
One day with the Lord = 1,000 (literal) years …So then… One year with the Lord = (365 x 1,000) = 365 thousand years
and 1,000 years (with the Lord) = One (Creation) Day = (365,000 x 1,000) = 365 million years
The creation days need to be adjusted based on the number of days (a variable) in a year as we go back through time and find that the beginning of Day 1 lines up with 4.5 bya (billion years ago). Full discussion on the creation days in the other thread.
So, here we will look at the generations of the heavens and the earth (in the Garden of Eden), the generations of Adam, the generations of Shem, and then fill in gaps with the generations of Cain, of Japheth, and of Ham. There is much detail but to see it we need to be grounded in Christ… Yes, that’s right, Jesus is our ground zero, our starting point, born in 4 BC (or 1 AD) and we can work backwards from that zero point to find how all created things fall before and after Him, the Alpha and Omega. He is the Image of God that mankind is made into at the conclusion of the 6th day of creation.
A very clear type for Christ in Genesis is Isaac, the son of Abraham, who is a type for God the Father. Abraham was willingly going to sacrifice his son Isaac, but because God saw his faith, a lamb was provided in Isaac’s place. Jesus, the Lamb of God was the perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world, provided in place of everyone who is found in Him.
Isaac is also a type for Christ in that he followed the footsteps of Abraham, doing what his father did. Both married their sister, both told Abimelech that their wife was their sister and were blessed. We (the church) are the bride of Christ and yet are also called His brothers and sisters.
Both Jesus and Isaac had miraculous births. Sarah was in her old age and Mary was yet a virgin. The meaning of the name Isaac is “to laugh” or “to rejoice”. Rejoice! for unto us a Son is born. One year after Abram is given a new name ‘Abraham’, Isaac is born when Abraham is 100 years old.
Gen 21:5 Now Abraham was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him.
If we are to say that Abraham is a different ‘kind’ from Abram, then for Abraham to be given his new name only one year before Isaac is born, then Abraham and Isaac bust be the same kind, the same likeness, for one year is too young to have children, to beget a new kind. So, Isaac is really more like a spiritual rebirth of Abraham.
Gen 17:1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram… 5 No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you a father of many nations.
Abraham means “father of many (or a multitude) of nations”. How many nations of the earth would you say came from Abraham? Is that many?.. a multitude of nations? Yes, thats right, of the many nations of the earth today, Abraham is the father of all of them, as he is a type representing the entire human race. Anatomically modern humans are one year (with the Lord) before Christ (1 x 365 x 1000) = approx. 365 thousand years ago.
Gen 16:16 Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore Ishmael to Abram.
Ishmael means “wild donkey of a man” for his hands were on everyone and everything.
Gen 16:12 He shall be a wild man; His hand shall be against every man, And every man’s hand against him.
Ishmael used his hands and so is shown to represent the advanced use of hands with tool making found with bipedalism. Australopithecus is a good representation of Ishmael, born 13 years before Abram is given a new name. 365,000 + (13 x 365 x 1000) = approx. 5.1 million years ago (mya).
Gen 16:16 Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore Ishmael to Abram.
Abram means “exhalted father”. One thing that distinguishes primates (and simians in particular) from other species is that they have an advanced social structure, often headed by a dominate male elder. Scientific estimates for our common decent with new world monkeys is 42 mya and with old world monkeys is 27 mya. Abram is a type representing simians. 5.1 mya + (86 x 365 x 1000) = approx. 36.5 mya
Gen 11:26 Now Terah lived seventy years, and begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran.
Terah means “breather” or “wanderer”. He set out with Abram on the journey to Canaan (means “subdued”) but stopped in Harran (means “elevated”) and ended up dying there. Tarsiers used to be globally widespread “wanderers” but are now only found “elevated” in the liana in southeast Asia.
Interestingly if you try to touch tarsiers, take them into captivity i.e. “subdue” them, they will commit suicide. Scientific estimates for our common decent with tarsiers is 68 mya. Terah is a type representing tarsiers. 36.5 + (70 x 365 x 1000) = approx. 62.1 mya
Gen 11:24 Nahor lived twenty-nine years, and begot Terah.
Nahor may mean to “to snort” or “to breathe hard” and also may mean “scorched” or “charred”. It sounds like Nahor was living during some difficult times, and indeed our common decent with lemurs lines up closely with the most famous extinction event of all time, the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event of the dinosaurs about 66 mya. Also the island of Madagascar where lemurs are found stranded or “left behind” by Terah and Abram is an arid place. Scientific estimates for our common decent with lemurs is 75 mya. Nahor is a type representing lemurs. 62.1 + (29 x 365 x 1000) = approx. 72.6 mya
Gen 11:22 Serug lived thirty years, and begot Nahor.
Serug means “branch”, “layer or twining”… you know I think I’ll pause here and let y’all have a chance to look that one up and the next few after it. I’ve set you on the path and there is something to be said for seeing things for yourself instead of having it shown to you.
And that person of the Son of God is bigger than the entire universe. The known universe is like one charged neuron in the mind of God. So its locative… All things are made “in” 1722 en (a preposition) – properly, in (inside, within). Thayer’s says “in the interior of some whole; within the limits of some space”.
These are all false elohim. There is only one God Elohim and angels or spirits are not gods or sons of God:
Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did He ever say: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again: “I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son”?
We are sons of God only by being made in the Son of God… like a single cell in the whole body.
The Hebrew word doesn’t have any such parameters; it cannot be used as a scientific term at all. It is a great deal like the idea involved with “one of these things is not like the others”, indicating resemblance.
I listened to a guy once who was calculating population growth starting with Abraham who tripped over this: he ignored all the hundreds of people in Abraham’s camp! “Sons of Abraham” was not a term that was restricted to blood descent, it included all in his camp whether technically (by our terms) family or not.
Essentially anyone who had Abraham as their “lord” was a “son of Abraham”.
You missed the entire point – it isn’t locative, you just want it to be.
In fact your whole scheme is built on missing the point of the Hebrew and Greek text, redefining words and twisting concepts to force them to fit your fanciful bastardization of theology and science.
Sorry, but you are not greater than the scriptures! The Hebrew uses elohim for all of these, and therefore they are all elohim.
You’re basically putting a tradition of man above the inspired Word, forcing a Hebrew term to mean what you want it to rather than learning from the scripture.
Does not say what you want it to: you can’t take just one piece of a statement, you have to take the whole thing. The key is “Today I have begotten you” – that is the part that distinguishes The Son from all other sons.
Which has nothing to do with the meaning of elohim. You don’t get to change the text to fit your theology, you’re supposed to change your theology to fit the text.
Good point here and I’ll clarify that its not my intent to tie a ‘kind’ down to any scientific parameters. Its a resemblance as you say and not unlike how things are classified with taxonym. We might say that these look similar in a lot of ways, but here is a key difference… Noah may differ from Japheth the same as a salamander differs from a lizard. Kinds are God’s taxonomy and He does just enough of it to paint the full picture for us… So we can look at the names and their meanings, look at the provided timescale and compare it all with scientific classifications and dating methods. It all lines up as He is the author of it all… of scripture and creation.
What an oversight indeed😂
This is true and Jesus says the same thing to the scribes and pharisees that may be biologically sons of Abraham, but really are not because they don’t do his works.
Perhaps I have, and so what point do you want to make? That Jesus is not all in all? He is all in all but some have gone astray… He will not stop searching for the lost until they all have been redeemed to Him.
Oh, you need to engage and show me where I’m wrong before you can say that. Are the meanings of the Hebrew names wrong? Are the associations with different species wrong? Is my math wrong? You could say specific cases may be a coincidence but it all fits together when looking at the whole picture.
1 Cor 8:4 So about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many so-called gods and lords), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.
No, “to which of the angels did He ever say”? In all of scripture where did He say that? The Son of God is begotten and all other sons are begotten through the Son.
“Kinds” are not taxonomy, period. “After their kind” means “be like their parents”.
Jesus is not a space or location that one can be “in”.
Invoking Greek doesn’t change the meaning of the Hebrew.
Paul is expounding not on whether there are other elohim – he knew there were – but whether those elohim deserve the title “theos”. He is pursuing a point begun in the polemic of the first Genesis Creation account where the writer shows all the elohim of Egypt to be created entities brought into existence by YHWH-Elohim for His purposes. This is clear from the statement “for us there is but one God”; this ties the concept of “sons of Elohim” in when he continues “the Father, from whom all things came”: these others are elohim, but they are not YHWH-Elohim and thus do not deserve the title “theos” because they are derivative. This ties in with Genesis 6 where the beginning refers to the elohim as "sons of elohim who rebelled against YHWH-Elohim as well as to Pslm 82 when YHWH-Elohim stands in the midst of the assembly of elohim and condemns them to the doom of which Peter writes when he mentions them as chained in gloomy darkness. It also fits with Yahweh as “God of gods” in Deuteronomy and elsewhere.
The ‘trick’ here is to not force today’s Christian definition of the English word “God” back into the Hebrew or even the Greek but rather to pay attention to those languages and their concepts.
Right – He never said to any angels that He had begotten them.
Usage: The Hebrew word “מִין” (min) is used to denote a category or classification, often referring to different kinds or species within creation. It is primarily used in the context of God’s creative order, emphasizing the diversity and distinctiveness of various forms of life.
Cultural and Historical Background: In the ancient Near Eastern context, categorization of living things was significant for understanding the natural world and humanity’s place within it. The concept of “kinds” reflects an early understanding of biodiversity and the orderliness of God’s creation. This classification underscores the belief in a purposeful and intelligent design by the Creator.
Kinds are taxonomy:
AI Overview
Taxonomy is the scientific study of classifying, describing, and naming organisms, including plants, animals, and microorganisms. It’s a methodology that uses a hierarchical system to organize elements.
Seth is like his father Adam but not exactly. There are differences. Children resemble both parents, but also may in some ways resemble neither. Where did the red hair come from? It could be a recessive gene. Some other difference could be a mutation for good or bad.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.
Back in verse 1 it says that Adam was made in God’s likeness but notably doesn’t also say God’s image. ‘Likeness’ speaks more to a physical resemblances where as ‘image’ is more of a spiritual resemblance.
Meaning: a phantom, illusion, resemblance, a representative figure, an idol
Word Origin: From an unused root meaning to shade
Shade like your shadow on the ground or your image in the mirror. You lift your hand and your image lifts their hand. You jump up and down and your image jumps up and down. Your image does what you do.
Seth was not made in God’s image (not yet at least), but was in Adam’s image. This was before man was made ‘in’ God’s image on the 6th day through Christ who is the Image of God. Jesus does what He sees His Father doing, and us being made in His image is a process.
Better said: Jesus is not in a specific space or location that one must go to to be in Him.
Mat 24:23 At that time, if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There He is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders that would deceive even the elect, if that were possible. 25See, I have told you in advance.26 So if they tell you, ‘There He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
As the lightning comes from the east and flashes as far as the west means everywhere at once.
He is already in us. We are the tent and He is the tentmaker and He dwells within us. And when we gather in His name He is in the midst.
Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
The elohim of Egypt is the pharaoh, a human who is believed to be an incarnation of a false god. I agree that God put the pharaoh in his place for His purpose.
God put all the rulers of the nations in their place. I think part of the problem with the word elohim is that it has a broad definition and can mean a judge or magistrate.
These ‘sons of elohim’ are then again human rulers (not angelic beings or gods) that were corrupt and needed to be removed for Noah and his sons to get a leg up.
Psalm 82 makes it clear that these elohim or sons of Elohim are mortal men.
6 I have said, ‘You are gods;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But like mortals you will die,
and like rulers you will fall.”
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are Your inheritance.
Their rule comes to an end (chained in gloomy darkness) as the King of king and Lord of lords establishes His Kingdom.
Strong is somewhat misleading or sloppy here, or at least you cannot take a lexical entry and hop to a scientific definition and then teleport that back into the original Hebrew. The hazard of doing this is demonstrated where the Bible lists bats in with birds, which is a clear error if you do not recognize that the ancient near east practiced a foreign way of viewing nature. Species is a modern biological concept related to the hierarchy of descent or traits, unknown to the ANE. Most YEC no longer regards kinds as species, but have stretched the meaning into genera or families; that misses the point as well. Kinds is just a reference to named animals, and a horse can be named a horse without any taxonomic inferences. That is all. This simple word gets so overworked in the interest of reading into scripture some agenda that is just not there, all of which is eisegesis.
There is no pharaoh in Genesis 1. The elohim of Egypt were the sun, the moon, the sky, the earth, the stars, etc.
Humanists want us to think that, but there is not a single instance in ancient Hebrew where it makes any sense to render elohim as “judge” or “magistrate”. That idea was made up in the late fourth century.
It makes absolutely no sense to make it mean “mortal men” there – saying they will “die like men” is idiotic if they are men because that is a forgone conclusion.
Those chained in gloomy darkness are the Watchers, heavenly beings who transgressed their estate.
The idea that the Genesis narrative in part reflects a transition from foraging to farming reminds me of Daniel Quinn’s novel Ishmael in which he, through one of the characters, essentially argues that Cain killing Abel reflected early conflict between farmers and hunter-gatherers. Although I think there are some issues with historical accuracy in this view and I think Quinn kind of misses the actual point of the story (i.e., to show humanity sliding on a downward spiral towards violence), I think there is something to that idea and it would be consistent with Adam being called simply “son of God” because of not having a recorded genealogy as a nomadic hunter-gatherer or pastoralist.
That is an interesting idea because there have been repeated conflicts between farmers and hunter-gatherers or herders since the start of widespread farming. Small cultivations and hunter-gathering/herding might fit together to the same general area - you just need to put a fence around the cultivations as has been done here still a century ago to allow cattle to utilize the areas outside the cultivations. Monopolisation of wider areas to farming inevitably leads to conflicts with the groups that want to utilize the same area to herding/hunter-gathering. Farming would probably also increase population growth, leading to more intense competition for space.
Although this hypothesis is interesting, the text itself does not give much support to it. Why would God like hunter-gatherers and herders more than farmers?