Questions of Reliability and/or Authorship

No place in Genesis 2:4 does it mention anything other than the heavens and the earth. I don't care how you twist it, or pervert it. None of those are mentioned in any verse from Genesis 2:4 through Genesis 4:26. Shucks, I thought they were a part of the heavens. Silly me, I thought it was because they were two different stories altogether.The man and woman created at the same time in Genesis 1:27 was never anywhere near the garden of Eden neither did they have a son named Cain or Abel. I know you do not believe these are factual accounts.But I do believe they are the actual factual accounts that God wanted us to have to answer my questions if nobody else's.I know to you that is foolishness. You ask how do you know that?God told me through Paul in: The Bible is not a storybook as most people think it is. It is the Word of God and to be able to understand what He is saying you have to know God.A natural man is one who has been born into this world. To be a spiritual man you have to be born of the Spirit of God. How about we start with what seems to be the Bible around here. Here you will find: HereHereThis is the first 3 hits when I googled Hebrew tense. Here we find this concerning the Septuagint.I present this in response to your quoting a quote from bertot. I gather that you do not believe in God, and that the Bible is not the Word of God but a bunch of books by man that is full of errors and is not to be believed or trusted. Correct me if I am wrong.Now if this is what you believe and there is no God. Why are you wasting time trying to prove God does not exist by trying to demolish His Word.The devil has been trying to do that since he deceived the woman in the garden of Eden. Billions of years ago. He has got a lot of perversions out there but God's Word is still here.But on the other hand if there is something driving you or putting a desire into your mind to study these things maybe you should search for that entity and see if it would be your answer.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

quote:

---

I did not interpet anything.

​

I took the scriptures as they are written.

---

You cannot possibly know how the scriptures were written. You do not know the context. How many times do people complain about things being taken out of context? There always is interpretation involved - even when someone is telling you something to your face and you know the immediate context. So now we are talking about something that was written in a different time and place and language and you do not even know the context and you maintain there is no interpretation. Please. That is just nonsense.

Hi deerbreh, welcome to this part of the world. My statement: I took the scriptures as they (are) written.
Your words:........know how the scriptures (were) written.Do you notice any difference?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

ICANT: you quoted the following: This is what I wrote to you in post 70:

quote:

---

Gen. 1:1 is written in the Hebrew past tense {Heb. perfect tense}, which denotes “a completed act.” Therefore, Gen. 1:1 is essentially describing that which has already been done, accomplished, finished. For this reason Gen. 1:1 is an introductory verse to that which will follow up to and including Gen. 2:1 where it is clearly stated that God has finished creating the heavens and the earth and all the host of them. Gen. 1:2 is the beginning of the creative process: “So the earth was formless and empty; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. Then the spirit of God was hovering upon the face of the waters.”
Gen. 2:1 describes in the Hebrew future tense {Heb. imperfect tense}, which denotes “an incomplete act,” God hovering upon the face of the waters; an act that is in process”the beginning of the beginning.
You are in fact “interpreting” the Gen. 1:1 thru 2:3 creation text when you claim that an act of creation was ongoing in between the perfect tense of Gen. 1:1, and the imperfect tense of Gen. 1:2. That is an “interpretation” and a “grammatically poor interpretation” at that.

---

If you would learn to simply read what I post we could probably move our discussion along a little. You are wrong. And it is individuals like you that are distorting the words that comprise the Hebrew Tanakh, as well as the Alexandrian Greek Septuagint.You, not I, are trying to take the “completed act” described in Gen. 1:1 and turn it into an “uncompleted act” so that you can apply you mystically imaginative interpretation of Gen. 2:4 thru 4:26 between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:2.Wow! I wonder why God didn’t think of doing that?Get off your “Holy Spirit inspired” nonsense: Apparently you think you are “a spiritual man” because you think you have been “born of the Spirit of God” and that is what you think gives you the right to disregard the Biblical Hebrew Text and try rearranging the Scriptures to fit you own personal distorted interpretation. Paul the Roman Pharisee has certainly taught you well.Answer me this: Is Gen. 1:1 composed in the “Hebrew Perfect, Completed Act” sense? And, if you admit that it is, and you believe Gen. 1:1 to be the “Word of God” would that not mean that God intended Gen. 1:1 to be composed in that “Completed Act” fashion?Regards,
Ger

Genesis 1:1 was not finished until Genesis 2:3.God is still resting from His creative work and will until the heavens melt with fervent heat and He create's a New Heaven and a New Earth.Since Genesis 2:4 claims to be the generations of Genesis 1:1 it has to be in there somewhere.
Genesis 5:1 would come after Genesis 2:3 as it claims to be the beginning of the generations of the man created in Genesis 1:27.Genesis 5:1 is not the beginning of the generations of the man formed from the dust of the ground in Genesis 2:7. So you are not atheist.
You are not Christian.
That only leaves one of the branches of descendants of Abraham. You can publish the branch if you desire. If you would like to inform me in private my e-mail is available.Now as far as individuals like me. You have never met someone like me. You have never met anyone that put forth the proposals that I have and you probably never will.I have searched for 50 years to find someone who shared my ideas with no results.I am just glad to get to be able to sit here and type the information where it can be read.I am 69 years old and probably don't have too many years to live on this earth in it's present condition. So I could care less about what you think about what I believe.Everyone is entitled to their opinion and Everyone has one.I have mine and I am Entitled to it.I will find out whether God keeps His Word when I stand at the judgment, because I have committed my soul unto His keeping as Abraham did, I believe God.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

ICANT: Gen. 1:1 was completed where it states = “the earth.” Gen. 1:1 employs only the Completed Act of the Pure Verb ‘ = created. Gen. 1:1 is an introductory verse to the 6 Times of creation that follows. That creative process concludes with what is conveyed in Gen. 2:1.I am sure that does not sit well with you, but that is how the Hebrew Kethib happens to read. Gen. 2:4 does not make that claim. That is why you have to rearrange the Text. Try not rearranging the Text, and try not to gloss over any anomalies in the Text you might find. Read the text precisely as it is written and learn from what it conveys.As a hermeneutic key I suggest using what is written in Proverbs 1:6.God’s truth is not found in “words” but rather in that which the words describe. Everyone’s opinions are truly entitled, but opinions do not constitute facts or truth.Regards,
Ger

I notice that you are good at making distinctions without a difference. The meaning is the same, imo. Why don't you address my point that interpretation is always part of any reading of scriptures whether one wants to admit it or not?

---

"I cannot control what you choose to say or do to me, but I can control how I respond."

When I solicited "ICANT's" help on this thread, I never anticapated that it would get this good. Thanks to ICANT and AM, this is really good stuff guys, keep up the great work. Thanks also, from your understandings of the Hebrew, very enlightening.D BertotEdited by bertot, : No reason given.

deerbreh:It is great to have a fresh voice on this thread. As to what you posted: I agree with you completely.Even an interpres translation of any ancient Kethib Hebrew Text is rendered according to the interpretive mindset of the translator. For this reason it is extremely helpful to get as many eyes and minds as possible looking at and interpreting the translation, for the through debate there is a much greater possibility of eventually arriving at the most accurate translation and interpretation of a given text.I look forward to you further insights.Regards,
Ger

bertot:It's good to hear from you, my friend.I look forward to when you feel you can join the debate.I've got to continue my fence repair project, but I'll be back this afternoon or evening.All the best to you and your family;
Ger

quote:

---

So you are not atheist.
You are not Christian.
That only leaves one of the branches of descendants of Abraham.

---

Quite off topic but what kind of nonsense is this? All religions are encompassed in atheist, Christian, and the descendants of Abraham? And what would you call a descendant of Abraham who happens to be an Atheist? Or a Christain? Or is such a scenario impossible in your world of neat little boxes? Where do Buddhists fall, I wonder? Rastufarians? Hindus?

deerbreh: Let's try to stay on topic, eh? These little labels have nothing to do with anything, unless we want to shoot one another.I would really like to continue with our research into the "Creation Narratives" of the Hebrew Tanakh.I truly think the ancients who composed these Texts had a worldview modern humanity could perhaps benefit from.All the best,
Ger

Masoretic Text The Septuagint LXX Text King James Version Text My version Text Message 60If you pay close attention all of these say:These = ????????????
Are the generations of
The heavens and the earth.autumnman Text Message 6Explanation Message 19Explanation of feminine plural noun ?????? by assertion Message 63In Message 68 you state: Now that is some pretty stiff charges in message 68. Especially when you compare my version of Genesis 2:4 to the MT, LXX, OR KJV.But your version matches nothing.Further interpretation by autumnman Message 70You further state in Message 73 more clarification. Yet more explanation in Message 75I don't have a problem reading your posts.I do have a problem taking you at your word. Like your word is the final authority.Give me one reason I should accept what you say.You make a big deal about 'the Kethib' that which is written.Then you preach the 'Qere ' what you think should be read.You keep telling me to read what is written and then you tell me what I should read it to say.If I am to believe you why should I read anything? Just take your word for it and if you are wrong we would both end up in the same place.No thanks.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

ICANT That is utter nonsense. I have never claimed that my translation and interpretation is “the final authority.” All I am doing is attempting to make my case. That is “My Case”. I do not expect anyone to merely “take me at my word.” That would be ridiculous. I, like most if not all humanity, am far too prone to error.This is what I wrote deerbreh in post #84:

quote:

---

Even an interpres translation of any ancient Kethib Hebrew Text is rendered according to the interpretive mindset of the translator. For this reason it is extremely helpful to get as many eyes and minds as possible looking at and interpreting the translation, for the through debate there is a much greater possibility of eventually arriving at the most accurate translation and interpretation of a given text.

---

In the Commentary portion of the Jewish Publication Society’s Torah Commentary, Genesis, xvii; professor Sarna states:

quote:

---

For nearly two millennia and a half, the exposition of Scripture has been the subject of intense preoccupation on the part of Jewish scholars. In fact, Jewish intellectual and spiritual history may be said to be essentially the record of the variegated attempts to unfold the sense, meanings, purposes, intents, and applications of the biblical texts.

---

New Revised Standard Version Bible, To The Reader, Bruce M. Metzger, ii; states:

quote:

---

The vowel signs, which were added by the Masoretes, are accepted in the main, but where a more probable and convincing reading can be obtained by assuming different vowels, this has been done...because the vowel points are less ancient and reliable than the consonants.

---

There is no personal name “Adam” in the New Revised Standard Version of the Hebrew Eden Narrative. Brenton, Septuagint, Introduction, iii; states:

quote:

---

One of the earliest of those writers who mention the Greek translation of the Scriptures, speaks also of the version as not fully adequate. The Prologue of Jesus the son of Sirach (written as many suppose B.C. 130) to his Greek version of his grandfather’s work, states: “For the same things expressed in Hebrew have not an equal force when translated into another language. Not only so, but even the Law and the prophecies and the rest of the books differ not a little as to the things said in them.”

---

New Revised Standard Version Bible, To The Reader, Bruce M. Metzger, i; states:

quote:

---

Yet the King James Version has serious defects.

---

If I were preaching the ”Qere’ my personal translation and interpretation of the Hebrew Eden Narrative would be in line with the Masoretic ”Qere’ translation of the Kethib Text. Would it not? However, my personal translation and interpretation of the Kethib Hebrew Eden Narrative is not in line with either the Masoretic ”Qere’ translation, or the Greek Septuagint translation or the King James Version. However, in some respects, my personal translation of the Kethib Eden Narrative is congruent with the New Revised Standard Version; there is no personal name “Adam” in the Kethib Hebrew Eden Text. I am not telling you what the Kethib Hebrew Text “should” say. I am telling you what I am personally finding it “to say.” For example: Gen. 2:16 opens with the verbal clause and phrase:

quote:

---

and he lay charge yhwh God upon the human archetype in regard to saying...

---

God begins issuing His command in Gen. 2:16, and the remainder of Gen. 2:16 is the first portion of His command:

quote:

---

from all trees the garden eat you must eat.

---

The repetitive verbal clause at the conclusion of Gen. 2:16 further emphasizes God’s command. And yet, the KJV of this portion of God’s command reads:

quote:

---

Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat

---

The auxiliary verb, “mayest” or “may”, is completely incongruent with the verbal clause, “and he lays charge” as well as the repetitive verbal clause at the conclusion of Gen. 2:16, “eat you must eat.”I am telling you that is what I am finding in the Kethib Hebrew Eden Text. Do you see what I am saying? For heaven’s sake, ICANT, I’m not asking you “to believe me”. I don’t believe me. That is why I come to discuss what I find with individuals like you. You are supposed to question what I am sharing with you. You are supposed to challenge what I am sharing with you. Let’s find out what the Kethib Hebrew Scriptures are conveying together. I will share with you what I find, but that doesn’t make what I have found “The Truth.” It is my translation and interpretation of the Kethib Hebrew Text. Challenge me! Tell me what you perceive the Kethib Hebrew Text as saying. But, it is my personal opinion that rearranging the Text to fit one’s interpretation is not “translating” the Text.Please read the above carefully. I am telling you that I do not claim to be “an authority” or “correct”.All the best,
GerEdited by autumnman, : No reason given.

I understand you are telling me your interpretation of what you think the Kethib Hebrew Eden Text says.I hope you understand that I am quoting you what the MT, LXX, and the KJV say Genesis 2:4 says and that they are in totally agreement.I also agree with them. If you don't believe what you put forth, Why put it forth?You should study the information and make up your mind if it is correct or incorrect. In other words who do you trust?Remember I quoted you a scripture that says the things of God are spiritually discerned.There are too many preacher's and bible scholar's who do not know the source of the book and do not have the Holy Spirit to lead them and guide them in all truth.Many you and I read behind fall into that category.My dad gave me a piece of advice back in the 40's He said:

quote:

---

Son don't believe anything you hear, and very little of what you see.

---

I take that advice very seriously. There is no personal name "Adam" in the original. It simply means mankind. Is Masoretic Text supposed to be an answer as it is not in my message? Yes until the DSS it was frowned upon because it did not agree in everything with the MT. But It has many things that disagrees with the MT that agrees with the DSS.You mentioned 'Jewish Publication' what makes you think Jewish scholars are interested in anything Christian?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."