and God said ...RE-plenish the earth....

I've probably read this passage no less that 5,000 times; however, a friend listened to C2C last week and the guest speaker mentioned this passage of scripture. This word, REPLENISH, ONLY appears twice in the entire Holy Bible KJV. (I've removed the 'th' off the end of the words to make the passage a little more readable')

here-->Gen 1:28 And God blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.

and here-->Gen 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

Now, Basing the word 'replenish' from Gen 9:1, would only signify that the same kind of species (human) was already on the earth before, as we know from the passages before which describe the world at that time. Since this is a true statement, wouldn't Gen1:28 signify that they should have been humans (?) existing BEFORE Adam & Eve? It would only be logical. Otherwise, why would God even mention it?

For a moment, think about it. What happened to those before Adam & Eve? Another side theory is, the words 'void' & 'darkness' mean a huge war had happen. Was the race before Adam & Eve wiped out because of a war? Is God trying to give us a clue??

Personally, I'm excited about this! This might explain ALOT of what we see today. To me, it vindicates some of my opinions. Anyone else have a theory?

it's been fairly obvious to me for a while now, that if the bible story is to be taken literally at all, that Adam was definitly not the first human.

This is related to Catastorphism, and is something that I have believed in for quite awhile now. Several religions teach that the there was something here on the earth before this creation, and that the previous world was destroyed and re-created upon. The Mayan predictions being a prime example. There is nothing in the Bible that precludes this theory from possibly being correct, and besides the one you already brought up, there are several which appear to support it.

Interestingly enough, the Quran also alludes to the fact that someone was there before adam and eve. When God says he is going to put mankind on earth, the angels basically say...why, all they do is cause bloodshed and misery. Which to me, means that they had seen something like it before.

Of course, all this is only relevant if you believe in the books. I think there is a core truth in all of them.

reply to post by Komodo


Wat you're saying makes sense until you read the entire rest of the Bible!!! Did you not read about the order of how God created the earth? It took six days, it chronologically records it, after He made the Earth from NOTHING, ZILCH, NOTTA, SCRATCH, He made man on the sixth day. How could there be man before Adam if there wasn't an Earth for them to live on?

Jordan Maxwell and Z Sitchen get into this which leads to the Sumarins and the Anunaki and how the bible is really an updated version of the sumarian texts. It's also interesting how so many cylinders were stolen in Iraq

www.chicagotribune.com...

Actually in hebrew on both ocasions it says "fill" ,just as in 1:23. Maybe a translation problem? However ,for whats it worth, signs that show with what intonations the word should be read are different between (9:1 1:28) and 1:23. Cannot add more,sorry.
edit : spllng

[edit on 22-6-2008 by ZeroKnowledge]

I remember watching Jordan Maxwell last year. I think it was Sons of God.
You will enjoy it, there is more analysis Of bible pasages. One I remember was the story of kane and able. Kane was afraid of being harmed after being banished. God said he would put a mark on him so others would know not to harm him. Again, it sounds as if there are others around before the official biblical timeline of man starts.

reply to post by Komodo


This is why things like translations are often moronic, especially the KJV.

The Hebrew word there is often transliterated in English as Male or Mala and it is translated as Fill not replenish. In the Hebrew, Gen 1:28 is not the same as Gen 9:1.

Now I have my own thoughts on people that existed beyond Eden based on Genesis but there are No Implications of humans being wiped out or some cataclysmic war from the Hebrew. One could interpret the humans that were created on the Sixth day as being outside Eden and the people that Cain builds his City for, but that is a whole other topic.





[edit on 22/6/08 by MikeboydUS]

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


Hi Anonymous ATS. Yes, but, as I said in the OP, there's a theory acc. to this passage of scripture that eludes to a war here on earth by the words 'void' & 'darkness' I don't have the time to dig into them but I did a quick check on the words in Hebrew and to tell you the truth, they're interesting. I haven't checked them out in the Greek but, if I have time today I will.

So, Void and Darkness in Greek might be different from the Hebrew/English. However, even if they did, the word replenish...still remains.

reply to post by Komodo


The word replenish does not remain except in bad translations. That was the point of my post. Void and Darkness, which I asume you mean the Formless and Void translation is a bit different in the Hebrew as well. Tohu va bohu, which has a meaning close to the ancient Greek concept of Chaos and Abyss.

reply to post by MikeboydUS

Well done MikeboydUS!! I was going to get my concordance out but you beat me to it, if anyone wishes to make a point or even to study the Bible they should really get one. Much can be lost or misconstrued in translating from the original texts. What the hebrew or greek words really were can open up the true message. So if you care about the truth and denying ignorance like this website promotes,and you are interested in what the Word of god says for real, get a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance to compliment your bible studying.

reply to post by Komodo


Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was WITHOUT FORM AND VOID..." I think that it's saying there was no form to the earth and there was no earth? Hmmm...

Edgar Cayce seems to agree with you that there were people on earth before Adam & Eve and he claimed many of them were part animal and some even part plant.

He also said there were 5 races (black, brown, red, yellow and white) started here simultaneously. So in effect, 5 different Adam's (& Eve's) at one time.

In the KJV Genesis 1:2 says "The earth was void and without form...." but the word "was" is the same word that throughout the rest of the O.T. is translated "became". The earth BECAME void and without form.
See G.H. Pember's "Earth's Earliest Ages" for a detailed explanation.

reply to post by Komodo


you also have to remember that genesis was written way later than that of adam, so its of someone else perspective

although the possibilities of humans before is very possible as the bible makes no reference to or not

then there is the point that the term 'Replenish'
is in no way connected to or have a mixed meaning with 're-populate'

and that meaning is what the OP is trying to make...
a way left field interpetation of the word translated as replenish.


to my thinking the idea of 'replenishing' the Earth would have a lot more to do with being eco-conscious and some form of re-cycling ...
than being meant as re-populating the planet.

because early man was assigned the task of 'Tending the Garden'
and being a 'good steward' in equal portion with the task of subduing nature & the animals and the bounty that the Earth provides.
So. iow, the phrase to replenish the Earth meant to 'Give back that which one takes from the Earth' = replenish......... as opposed to repopulate.


thanks,

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Komodo

 

Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was WITHOUT FORM AND VOID..." I think that it's saying there was no form to the earth and there was no earth? Hmmm...

In the new international version you will see a note in the footer next to "and the earth was" which says: Or possably became.
Im not too sure about other translations but this is in the NIV link.

The following relates to this link here.

This lends itself to the idea that possibly there was a form to the earth before God wiped it clean and started again. If you follow through the rest of the passage you see that there is no more creation of land after Gen 1:1, God only collects water which obviously forms the ice on the poles.

From then on we see God saying let the land produce vegitation - the way its written would suggest to me that there was nothing new created this this passage..... until we get to vs 14.

In vs14 God creates the sun and the moon, he also creates the solar system as well. It also suggests that he made the stars here which would mean that the rest of the cosmos were created in this time.
This seems to reinforce the idea that in the beginning there was ONLY heaven and earth which suggests that earth would be an important place for God. But why?
If earth was the only planet before Gen 1:1 then was it made as a home for the angels? This would further support Stan Deyo's theory (this can be found in dertail in his book "the cosmic conspiricy") on pre Gen 1:1 times (its a little to detailed to go into here but Stan suggests that earth is serving as the trial for Saten after he rebeled, also suggests that the dinosors were during this time).

It gets a little intesting when we get to vs21-25. God creates the animals and the birds first then he makes the land animals. Could he have used evolution during this time to create the animals? Rather then just making them appear, making the animals evolve into their present day state would make more sence and would prove to more of a solid theory.
Theres more on here I would love to discuss, but I dont have the time.

Then finaly in vs26 man is created in Gods image. I guess conflicting with what one of the anonymous posters posted before God did not just come up with the image of Man on the spot when he made the earth, but rather he took the image of himself and modeled man after himself. Relating to what geek101 said in his/her earlier post: Could these angels be refering to God creating those in his image after the stuff that went down with Saten before Gen 1:1? More specificaly challenging Gods idea of making things with free will.

I hope Ive been able to bring up a few questions and provide some insite into the first chapter of Genesis. Ive probably missed some stuff so please correct me if Ive missed something or said something that was wrong. Also Ive been a little vague so sorry if I have caused a little confusion.

-fm

[edit on 24-6-2008 by funky monk]

Originally posted by defcon5
This is related to Catastorphism, and is something that I have believed in for quite awhile now. Several religions teach that the there was something here on the earth before this creation, and that the previous world was destroyed and re-created upon. The Mayan predictions being a prime example. There is nothing in the Bible that precludes this theory from possibly being correct, and besides the one you already brought up, there are several which appear to support it.

In fact, the Talmud, and many Kabbalistic texts, purport this theory to be true, too. Our most recent seven days of creation (to speak Biblically here) was exactly that: only the most recent. In fact, in the Talmud, it was posited that before Adam existed a pre-human species of walking, semi-intelligent apes. Then came humans. Then God breathed a soul into Adam and humanity as we know it was created.

Of course, if you don't accept Jewish tradition, then this doesn't hold any water for you, but it's interesting nonetheless.

Oh and just too clarify, but in the Jewish tradition, God created all these things, so be careful before making analogies with Darwinism. Although, Judaism doesn't have exactly the same issues with evolutionary theory as Christianity precisely because it has the Talmud as well as the Torah - both of which are equally true to a Jew.