|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total) |
|
| |
| ChatGPT | |
| Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0 |
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Creation as presented in Genesis chapters 1 and 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member  Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi greyseal,
greyseal writes: I did not say god was irrelevant, I said that asking how long the days in genesis 1 were was irrelevant. And it still is. I was not asking how long the days in Genesis was. I asked did God say a period of light was day? I also asked did God say a period of light combined with a period of darkness was the first day? You said that was irrelevant. That means you were saying what God said was irrelevant making God irrelevant. So then do you care to answer the questions?
greyseal writes: also still irrelevant. - evening is first, morning is after, ergo a day (when talking about light+dark) is evening->morning where it's "of the" or "were the". I guess some bibles change were to of, or of to were. What does evening bring to a close? How many hours can you get from evening until morning? The phrase "and the evening and the morning were the first day" means that the close of one light period which became evening followed by a dark period that came to a close at the beginning of the next light period was the first day.
greyseal writes: That word is still yom and it can still mean an age, in the same way that day can mean an age. English usage of the word day can not control how the Hebrew language presents a day, or an age. In Hebrew the word יןם is a single day anywhere it is used in the Bible. This is the only form used in Genesis chapter one and two that is translated day. In Genesis 2:4 it has a prefix that points to a specific singular day according to the Hebrew text. It can be used of the light period and it can be used of the evening and morning which includes a light period and a dark period. The Hebrew word ימים is used for a multiple of evenings and mornings.
greyseal writes: As before, as I have said, as the dictionary says, as the hebrew dictionaries say, the word yom which you are very heartily spelling out for me can mean an indeterminate amount of time equal to what we would call in English an age. I know you keep pointing out what you believe. The problem what you believe is not supported by the Hebrew text. The Hebrew text has a word that I have pointed out to you that means a single day. That is the word used in Genesis chapter one and two. The only variation of the word is found in Genesis 2:4 where the Bet prefix is used to point to a specific day. Now if you disagree with the Hebrew then refute it.
greyseal writes: It is the same word. It is correctly translatable as day when it means daylight, 24 hours or "age". The Hebrew word יןםcan be used for the light period we call day and it can be used for the light period and dark period that we call day. And no it can not be use to mean a plural of days which would be necessary for an age or a period of days. The Hebrew word ימים would be used to desiginate an age or a period of days. Had the writer of the Bible wanted to specify an age he would have used the Hebrew word חלד which means, 1) age, duration of life, the world. Had the writer of the Bible wanted to specify a period he would have used the Hebrew word דיר which means, 1) period, age, generation (period of time).
greyseal writes: In all of the above the word "day" means "age". They would be translated into hebrew as "yom". Please provide proof they would not. You the Hebrew expert now. No they do not mean age they mean a multiple of days. If you want them to represent an age you would use the Hebrew word חלד which means, 1) age, duration of life, the world. OR The Hebrew word דיר which means, 1) period, age, generation (period of time). I will put it in English as you don't know the Hebrew. in Grandpa's day would be in the days of Grandpa. Ref. Gen. 14:1. in my day would be in my days in the days of my youth  in the good old days All the words days would be the Hebrew word ימיםwhich is the plural form of yowm. greydrsl writes: and I quote But you did not answer the question, Is English your first language?
greyseal writes: Did you just stop reading after the words "to know good and evil"? You shouldn't have. Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: No I stoped at the end of the declaration God made. "Behold the man is become as one of us, The man in past tense had become as God. Man had come to know good and evil by disobeying God. Therefore he could not be allowed to partake of the tree of life and live in disobedience for ever.
greyseal writes: But the man who ate the fruit was Adam, and he lived to be around a thousand years old... The man formed from the dust of the ground in Genesis 2:7 did not have a name, and he is the man who ate the fruit. The mankind created male and female in Genesis 1:27 did not have names. We are told that Adam is a transliteration of the Hebrew word אדמ which means man or mankind which would be determined as man unless the plural was used, then it would be mankind. But the transliteration would be adm so we have been sold a pack of lies as the name Adam is the product of the translators.
greyseal writes: That doesn't follow. What makes an aramaic scholar more of a scholar than an english scholar? It just makes him/her an Aramaic, Scholar. They are called Hebraist today. The English Scholar is an English Scholar and would know nothing about the Aramaic language. The Bible was written in Aramaic, Chaldee and Hebrew and if you don't know the languages you have to take what someone else tells you it says. An English scholar is great. My sister is one. She gives me a fit the way I butcher English.
greyseal writes: You seem to be one of these "jewish roots" type person who generally venerates antiquity far above it's station.
Well I am 1/4 scottish, 1/4 Irish throw in a little German, a little french, a little dutch, a little American indian from the Apache and Cherokee tribes and I don't know what else and that is my roots. Now when it comes to the OT Bible we are discussing it was written about 3300 years ago by Moses in a language that has not been spoken for about 2800 years. I think that leads to antiquity. We can not make the words written by Moses agree with what we want it to say. It says what Moses wrote. Man has changed what Moses wrote to suit themselves and are changing it all the time. Satan's followers or people being used by him has corrupted God's message to mankind. That is why Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to lead His chrildren in all truth. To everybody else the Bible is foolishness. 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 Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: Since you're the one making a positive claim, it's up to you to back it up. But sure, here's a comment from Answers in Genesis: You never trust AIG until it backs your position. You do realize the article was written by one man. So that pits me against him. So let me introduce you to Judaism 101. Here Scroll down to the prefixes and the second one is the Bet they call it Beit. My vocabulary calls it Bet. Here the Bet that was called a preposition in the article is not as presented. It is a prefix. When added it modifies the meaning of the word it is placed in front of.
ב In, on, with, by, etc. Beit as a prefix sometimes makes the soft sound (v). Bereishit (in the beginning); u'vayom (and on the day). ringo writes: It's one of the few things AiG ever got right.
It seems like Paul James-Griffiths, didn't get it right so AIG didn't get it right either. So it can be in or on but nowhere can it be when.
ringo writes: ICANT writes:
Yeah, they do. See above. But Hebrew has no such phrase in it. Well no Hebrew has no such phrase as "in the day". That is not a Hebrew construst but an English construct that we have used to convey what was said when ביןם appears in the Hebrew text.
ringo writes: ICANT writes:
Yup. See above. Do you have any references to scholars that state that the phrase "in the day" means an indefinite period of time? How many times over the years have you ripped me up for presenting such flimsey evidence. Especially when it is incorrect. So do you want to try again?
ringo writes: It was the first hit on my Google search. Did you google in the day? I googled with and without quotes and could not get your reference on the first two pages. 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 Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi greyseal,
greyseal writes: I don't want to discuss this particular aspect too much further. I will seek out what qualified scholars of hebrew say about "yom", but it will take time to make something coherent enough to be worthwhile. Take your time. I been working on it for 45 years.
greyseal writes: You are mistaken, and the dictionary itself should have been your first source. Well when you are looking for the definition of a Hebrew or Chaldee word you have to consult a Hebrew Chaldee Lexicon.
greyseal writes: I am telling you now, with absolute certainty, that the phrase "in Grandpa's day" refers NOT to a single day, but to an amount of time we could call "an age" and which means the same as "in the days of Grandpa". If "in Grandpa's day and in the days of Grandpa" are the samething,what is the fuss? Because all you are saying is that when we use "in Grandpa's day" is that we are being lazy and not adding the plural to day.
greyseal writes: We could even write it "in the day of Grandpa" and it would still mean an age, but such use is rather ambiguous and should be avoided. It still doesn't mean it is wrong, however. Here is the Definition from Source Definition of AGE 1a : the time of life at which some particular qualification, power, or capacity arises or rests ; specifically : majority b : one of the stages of life c : the length of an existence extending from the beginning to any given time d : lifetime e : an advanced stage of life 2: a period of time dominated by a central figure or prominent feature : as a : a period in history or human progress b : a cultural period marked by the prominence of a particular item c : a division of geologic time that is usually shorter than an epoch 3 a : the period contemporary with a person's lifetime or with his or her active life b : a long time usually used in plural c : generation 4: an individual's development measured in terms of the years requisite for like development of an average individual The Hebrew word חלדwhich means 1) age, duration of life, the world. Agrees with our English age. But our English age does not agree with the meaning of the Hebrew word יןם until you start streaching יןם beyond the breaking point.
greyseal writes: If you won't believe me, and you won't believe the dictionary, there's not much I can do. But I do believe the Hebrew dictionary which is called a Hebrew Lexicon. I just don't agree that our English extensions of the definition which disagrees with the definition found in the Hebrew Lexicon which agrees with the definition in Genesis 1:5.
greyseal writes: that's all well and good, but god did not define the meaning of the word itself directly in the bible, did he? He might have defined the thing itself, and I see where you're going with this "he defined the thing, therefore he defined the word" idea but I don't buy it. God doesn't say "the word yom as written in this book means this and that, but never the other" Did God call the light in Genesis 1:5 something that Moses recorded as יןם ? Did God call the light period that ended with evening coupled with the following dark period that ended with morning something Moses recorded as יןם ?
greyseal writes: But very well, I will search for "yom" being used in other fashions inside the bible. I find it hard to believe that - if these other scholars I keep hearing about are right - the word yom could not have been used in these alternate and apparently valid meanings. You can do your search Here It will give you the number of times day is used in the Bible as a definition. It will not tell you the actual Hebrew word that is in the Hebrew text and as you can see from what I have presented there are several with different meanings. The problem with the search is it will not show you the actual word that is in the Hebrew text, as it shows no inflected Hebrew words. But have fun and point out any that are interesting and post the texts where they are found. Then I will look the word up in the Hebrew text and we can discuss it.
greyseal writes: jews, and muslims, define a day as starting in the evening. that means the day starts in the evening. This is why the bible says "it was the evening and the morning of". So they define a day from evening to evening. So What? No the Bible says the evening which is the close of a light period and the dark period when it ended with morning was the end of the first day.
greyseal writes: The evening started the day and the morning ended it. Do you ever read what you write? If evening begins at 6 PM and morning begins at 6 AM you have a day composed of 12 hours of darkness. Let me try something here I have never tried. I will use 6 PM for evening and 6 AM for morning for ease of reference.
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Starting with the morning that ended the sixth day and going backwards through the dark period to the preceeding evening I have 12 hours. Preceeding backwards through the light period to morning at 6 AM I have 12 hours which constituted the sixth day.
1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. Proceeding backwards through the dark period to 6 PM I have evening, 12 hours. Proceeding backwards through the light period to 6 AM I have morning, 12 hours. The fifth day.
1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. Proceeding backwards through the dark period to 6 PM I have evening, 12 hours. Proceeding backwards through the light period to 6 AM I have morning, 12 hours Which is the fourth day.
1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Proceeding backwards through the dark period to 6 PM I have evening, 12 hours. Proceeding backwards through the light period to 6 AM I have morning, 12 hours which is the third day.
1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Proceeding backwards through the dark period to 6 PM I have evening, 12 hours. Proceeding backwards through the light period to 6 AM I have morning, 12 hours. Which is the second.
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Proceeding backwards through the dark period to 6 PM I have evening, 12 hours. The first day. I got a problem because I am not starting out with a יןם I am starting out with a period of darkness. Now if I add a light period as declared in:
2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, I now have 6 light periods and six dark periods in which God created the Heaven and the Earth.
greyseal writes: yes, I am. The fruit was of the tree of the knowledge of good AND evil. What properties of that fruit was that knowledge stored in? I maintain they knew good as God is good.I maintain they did not know what evil was until the man disobeyed God. Eating the fruit is just the law that God gave to the man who was told not to break that law without dire consequences. If you will check you will find the womans eyes were not opened by eating the fruit. Her eyes were opened when the man ate the fruit.
greyseal writes: Without that knowledge, they could do no evil Actually the woman did no evil. The man willfully disobeyed God as he was not deceived by the serpent. He ate because the woman had and he chose to eat with her. Now I'll speculate a little. He had been by himself so long before God made the woman for him when she told him what she did he just said I will eat and die also I don't want to be alone. Remember the statement he made when God brought the woman to him.
2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. He meant what he said and gave up everything for the woman. It teaches good when I am counsling young people who are preparing to get married. Because I want them to make the same kind of commitment to each other.
greyseal writes: Nevertheless, god made it possible for them to do something he could deem wrong. god made a creature which could tempt them to do something wrong. god allowed that creature to tempt them into committing that act and god allowed them to commit it. Yes the man was given a choice eat and die. He chose to eat and die. Yes God provided the creature that deceived the woman. The creature had nothing to do with the man's decision. He made that decision all by himself. So no God allowed that creature to deceive the woman but that had nothing to do with the man making his choice. God allowed that man to make his choice just like He lets us make our choices today.
greyseal writes: No, I don't understand why either. If that man had not disobeyed God we would not be here talking about it. He would still be in the garden.
greyseal writes: If you paint god as omnipotent and omniscient, the whole apple-thing could never have occurred without god knowing about it and allowing it. Nothing has ever happened that God did not know was going to happen. Just like he knew you were going to write this sentence and I would answer it as I have. He did not make you write nor did He make me answer but He knew it before He formed that first man and place him in the garden. God resides in an eternal now. He sees the beginning and the end simultaneously. I know that is hard for us mortals to grasp.
greyseal writes: Strangely enough, the god in the OT is often not omniscient and rarely omnipotent. He has to travel to get to places, Such as.
greyseal writes: he has to ask questions to find things out, What makes you think God did not know the answer before He asked the question? Didn't Jesus answer questions before they were asked?
greyseal writes: he has to rest on day seven, Actually He did not rest. He ceased from doing creative work. The Hebrew word שבתtranslated rested is a verb that means 1) to cease, desist. So no God did not get tired.
greyseal writes: he takes six days to do the job...but this is OT Well actually it took a lot longer than that. It took those six days to clean up the mess found in Genesis 1:2, create the fish for Jonah and create mankind in His image/likeness, but creation began in the beginning of eternity past. If you ever figure that out let me know when it was.
greyseal writes: They became "as gods" (like god and his angels) when they ate the fruit - that's rather obvious Glad we can agree on something.
greyseal writes: and they would have become moreso if they'd eaten the fruit of the tree of life. Well if they had eaten of the fruit of the tree of life they would be living in the garden in a sinful condition forever.
greyseal writes: To be honest, genesis is rather confusing for a literalist because it has an imperfect god acting out his little power fantasies with creations which can't fight back until the snake gave them that power - maybe to spite god, sure. Sorry to see you don't believe in God. He is perfect. He don't have little power fantasies. He has all power. The man had the power to eat the fruit from the moment God placed him in the Garden. It was there and he was there what else was necessary?
greyseal writes: God may have been angry at the knowledge-fruit-eating God was not angry at the eating of the fruit. God was angry because man disobeyed a diret order and the man chose to disobey.
greyseal writes: . or he may have been worried about the immortality-giving fruit of life eating which he stopped from occuring as well (or instead), either way he kicks them out Why would God worry about anything. I learned from God there is no need to worry about anything.If you can change it just change it and don't worry about it. If you can't change it there is no need to worry about it. The only difference is that God can change anything He desires to change. So He did, He kicked them out of the garden so they could not eat of the tree of life and live for eternity with sin in them. 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 Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: I think this is it. It may not be the best reference but so far you have provided no references that the rabbis agree with your interpretation. That book was published in 1986. The one given for a reference which the material you presented was support for that material was printed in 1977 So they can not be the same book. If you google this taken from Message 527 :
ringo writes: Translation and commentary by Klotowitz R.M., Overviews by Scherman, R.N., Bereishis, Genesis: A new translation with a commentary anthologised from Talmudic, Midrashic and Rabbinic sources, vol.1 (a); Art Scroll Tanach Series, Mesorah Publications Ltd., p. 113, 1977. You will get This The book used to support the claims of your source does not exist.
ringo writes: But the prefix in the text isn't u'va, it's be. the translation is "in the day", meaning "when". Where do you get the information that the prefix means be, or with? You sure did not get it from Here. This intermediate text book says:
ב meaning In, on, with, by They give an example of the soft sound being on the day. ringo writes: But the prefix in the text isn't u'va, it's be. the translation is "in the day", meaning "when". You have made a big to do about "In Grandpa's day". So explain the difference in: In Grandpa's day he killed old betsy his cow. On Grandpa's day he killed old betsy his cow. In the day Grandpa killed old betsy his cow. On the day Grandpa killed old betsy his cow. Which one of those specify a specific day?
ringo writes: You keep switching back and forth between Hebrew and English. In English, it most certainly does make a difference whether you use "in" or "on". "On the day" refers to a specific 24-hour day. "In the day" refers to a period of time of unspecified duration. You wouldn't hear anybody saying in English, "In the day of my wedding." Why not? The Hebrew language has a definite article. Explain the difference in the following. In the day I got married I wrecked my truck. On the day I got married I wrecked my truck.
I asked for idioms and you give me a list of 78 phrases of which many are not in the Bible. Could you point out the phrases you you consider to be idioms rather than a statement of fact.
ringo writes: The question remains: Why are you the only person on earth who understands it? Why didn't the KJV translators understand it? Why do we not have a spacecraft we can go to the new planet just discovered and see if it has water on it? Would it be because no one has figured out or understand how to do that yet?
ringo writes:
Yes, the KJV uses the phrase "in the day" which means "when" in English, so it doesn't support your position. I am going to get in the car. I am going to when the car. Explain how those two sentences say the same thing. 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 Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
