Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,925 Year: 4,182/9,624 Month: 1,053/974 Week: 12/368 Day: 12/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Do atoms confirm or refute the bible?
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2795 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 74 of 153 (369564)
12-13-2006 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by AnswersInGenitals
10-29-2006 2:00 AM


Devil in the Details
Greeting Mr. Genitals
Your challenge calls two things to mind.
1. Paul's statement: Hebrews 11:3 (KJV)
quote:
"... what is seen was not made out of things that are visible." ESV (English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway Bibles)
Which makes me think he may have been reading Democritus.
AND
2. The definition of Tohu, especially when it appears in combination with Bohu, as in these verses:
Genesis 1:2 "... without form and void ..."
Septuagint reads: "unsightly and unfurnished" (Brenton)
Jeremiah 4:23 "... without form and void ..."
Living Bible says: "... ruins ..."
Tohu itself is sometimes translated 'wilderness' (bold emphasis mine):
quote:
"He found him in a desert land, and in the waste howling wilderness; ..." Deuteronomy 32:10
quote:
"He taketh away the heart ... and causeth them to wander in a wilderness ..." Job 12:24
The KJV renders Tohu in a variety of ways including once, and only once, as: "nothing." This in a description of where caravans go when they get lost. Here (Job 6:18) the majority of modern versions give it something else, such as: "nowhere," (NKJV); "wasteland," (NIV); or "desert." (NLT)
Thayer's commentary:
quote:
"... that which is wasted, laid waste, ..."
Strong's etymology (#8414): (bold emphasis mine):
quote:
"... from an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), i.e. desert; figuratively - a worthless thing; ..."
Seems to me the fact that the committee translated Tohu as "without form" (i.e. amorphous) might reveal a bias toward the plum pudding concept of matter. Alternatively it could be an attempt to support the idea that God was not indebted to pre-existing matter; that the universe existed in his mind but was not yet material, as Philo teaches.
This last would tend to refute the ancient notion that the universe was made from water and in water (as Genesis and St. Peter attest). It would also deny an alternative interpretation whereby Genesis describes the re-building of a devastated civilization, or the reclamation of a trackless waste. There is certainly no other place in scripture where Tohu is asked to convey the meaning which so many want to give it here, in Paragraph One of Book One.
What Say Ye?

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 10-29-2006 2:00 AM AnswersInGenitals has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 12-14-2006 12:33 AM doctrbill has replied

doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2795 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 76 of 153 (369687)
12-14-2006 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by AnswersInGenitals
12-14-2006 12:33 AM


Re: Devil in the Details
I would have to agree, of course, with most of what you have said but would stop short of blaming the book itself for all the evil that is done in its name. It is, after all, just a book. The evil is done by the charlatan class (clergy) and the army of ignorant believers which they hold in thrall.
I believe the "chinese menu" analogy is a good one, given the 100+ translations (most currently out of print) which have been created in the English language alone. The oldest texts themselves, while they may be varied in reading from one edition to the next are, I think, more true to the times in which they were written, or edited, or revised. It is the sheer antiquity of it which best holds my interest. That and the opportunity to contradict the dogma by way of analyzing the script. The dogma which has so negatively influenced my life.
I am not a political scientist but my impression is that church and state have been united in most ages and most states prior to advent of the American constitution. Under such circumstance civil and religious codes become indestinguisable. The law of the king is the law of god and vice versa. You know the drill: Let God rule our country. Hail King Jesus. Notice that it is never modernized. They never laud him: President Jesus. There is no democracy under theocracy. No religious liberty for sure.
You are absolutely right. If there is a God who has a message for modern man then he should say so. I don't need Jehovah's Witnesses coming to my door to tell me what God wants. He can send me an email, or ring my cell phone, or drop by for a personal visit. Otherwise I'll just have to assume that the universe is operating according to 'his' plan.
God gets what God wants; doesn't he? Isn't that what being God is all about?

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 12-14-2006 12:33 AM AnswersInGenitals has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024