Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 120 (8783 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-23-2017 11:51 AM
372 online now:
Coyote, jar, JonF, kbertsche, New Cat's Eye, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), RAZD, Stile, Taq (11 members, 361 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,826 Year: 21,432/21,208 Month: 1,865/2,326 Week: 320/881 Day: 38/107 Hour: 14/12

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
45Next
Author Topic:   Hast Thou ENTERED INTO the treasures of the snow?
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12989
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 31 of 66 (718845)
02-09-2014 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Jaf
02-09-2014 3:53 AM


What is obvious is that you took one word out of context and jumped to conclusions about what it meant - conclusions that the text does not support.

It is also obvious that the "storehouses" translation fits the text much better.

And the only person who seems to want to ignore or erase those obvious facts is you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Jaf, posted 02-09-2014 3:53 AM Jaf has not yet responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12523
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 32 of 66 (718864)
02-09-2014 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Jaf
02-09-2014 3:55 AM


Re: Who is worst of the Bunch?
Hi Jaf,

When you return, any type of participation that is not constructive and on-topic will be met with an immediate permanent suspension. We encourage members to express their opinions, but their participation must conform to the Forum Guidelines.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Jaf, posted 02-09-2014 3:55 AM Jaf has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:01 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15710
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 33 of 66 (718866)
02-09-2014 9:22 AM


My Own Interpretation
My NRSV version says something like this:

Job:38:21-23 writes:

"You know, for you were born then, And the number of your days is great! Have you entered the storehouses of the snow, Or have you seen the storehouses of the hail, Which I have reserved for the time of distress, For the day of war and battle?"

I interpret this not as a reference to storehouses of snow and hail, but to storehouses against "the time of distress," like bad weather or war.

--Percy


    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13473
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 34 of 66 (718909)
02-09-2014 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jaf
02-08-2014 12:36 AM


Jaf writes:

Question: How can you ignore this scripture as to God's REVEALING His knowledge of the wonders of snow 5000 years before the microscope?


By understanding it.

I like your poetic interpretation of the verse. It just doesn't seem to be what the verse is actually saying.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jaf, posted 02-08-2014 12:36 AM Jaf has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:05 AM ringo has responded

  
Jaf
Member (Idle past 1195 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 01-30-2014


Message 35 of 66 (719310)
02-13-2014 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Admin
02-09-2014 9:02 AM


Re: Who is worst of the Bunch?
Fair enough Sir, I'm sorry for being a bit of a hooligan chaps and chapess's.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Admin, posted 02-09-2014 9:02 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
Jaf
Member (Idle past 1195 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 01-30-2014


Message 36 of 66 (719311)
02-13-2014 5:05 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by ringo
02-09-2014 2:00 PM


No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
But how can my "interpretation" be an "interpretation" per say, when a plain surface reading of the text confirms it's meaning?

Why is every one resorting to perversions of scripture and every form heathen gnostic text to wash over the plain reading of the text in my OP.

I trust this view point is valid and on topic because it is my sincere desire to be so.

Edited by Jaf, : No reason given.

Edited by Jaf, : No reason given.

Edited by Jaf, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by ringo, posted 02-09-2014 2:00 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Modulous, posted 02-13-2014 6:10 AM Jaf has responded
 Message 38 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-13-2014 10:07 AM Jaf has responded
 Message 39 by ringo, posted 02-13-2014 10:46 AM Jaf has not yet responded
 Message 40 by DrJones*, posted 02-13-2014 11:11 AM Jaf has not yet responded
 Message 41 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-13-2014 11:20 AM Jaf has not yet responded
 Message 42 by arachnophilia, posted 02-13-2014 6:47 PM Jaf has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7418
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 37 of 66 (719312)
02-13-2014 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Jaf
02-13-2014 5:05 AM


Re: No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
But how can my "interpretation" be an "interpretation" per say, when a plain surface reading of the text confirm it's meaning?

Are you saying the plain surface text reading is that God knows scientific truths about ice crystals that Job doesn't?

Why is every one resorting to perversions of scripture and every form heathen gnostic text to wash over the plain reading of the text in my OP.

The book of Enoch is not a heathen gnostic text but a Jewish text that was eventually excluded from the canon. It's inclusion in the discussion, along with other canon references serves to show what these people generally meant when they referred to 'treasures of the snow' and how one might 'enter into it'.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:05 AM Jaf has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 7:34 PM Modulous has responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15948
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 38 of 66 (719330)
02-13-2014 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Jaf
02-13-2014 5:05 AM


Re: No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
But how can my "interpretation" be an "interpretation" per say, when a plain surface reading of the text confirm it's meaning?

But it doesn't.

To start with, a plain surface reading of the text shows that the text is saying exactly the same thing about hail as it does about snow. Are we meant to believe that the author used exactly the same word ( אֹצְרוֹת ) in the same verse in a classic example of Hebrew literary parallelism, and yet was using it to mean something completely different in the two halves of the same sentence?

By analogy, if I were to say "Abraham Lincoln was an impressive President; James Madison was an impressive President also", is it a "plain surface reading of the text" that I mean that Madison was a good President and that Abraham Lincoln was a tall one?

Why is every one resorting to perversions of scripture and every form heathen gnostic text to wash over the plain reading of the text in my OP.

If you don't like the book of Enoch, how about Psalms 135:7? "He causeth the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth; he maketh lightnings for the rain; he bringeth the wind out of his treasuries ( אֹצְרוֹת )."

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:05 AM Jaf has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 7:47 PM Dr Adequate has responded
 Message 46 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 8:14 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13473
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 39 of 66 (719332)
02-13-2014 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Jaf
02-13-2014 5:05 AM


Re: No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
Jaf writes:

But how can my "interpretation" be an "interpretation" per say, when a plain surface reading of the text confirm it's meaning?


Job 38:22 calls both snow and hail "treasures", so it is clearly not about the wonderful crystal structure. Verse 23 explains that God can use both snow and hail as weapons in wartime. That's the "plain surface reading".

As I said, I like your interpretation but it's only useful as a secondary interpretation. It doesn't suggest that the author of Job had any scientific knowledge.

Jaf writes:

Why is every one resorting to perversions of scripture and every form heathen gnostic text to wash over the plain reading of the text in my OP.


I, for one, am not. I know nothing about gnostic texts and I haven't mentioned them.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:05 AM Jaf has not yet responded

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1673
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 40 of 66 (719334)
02-13-2014 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Jaf
02-13-2014 5:05 AM


Re: No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
But how can my "interpretation" be an "interpretation" per say, when a plain surface reading of the text confirm it's meaning?

Because the text doesn't mention crystals, or the uniqueness of each snowflake, you are interpreting " treasures" to mean these things.

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:05 AM Jaf has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11676
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 41 of 66 (719336)
02-13-2014 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Jaf
02-13-2014 5:05 AM


Re: No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
Question: How can you ignore this scripture as to God's REVEALING His knowledge of the wonders of snow 5000 years before the microscope?

There isn't really any knowledge revealed, its just a metaphor.

And if you look to the context of the passsage, you can see that the Lord was questioning Job's ability to question the Lord, because, as the Lord asserts, Job doesn't have enough knowledge of the world to qualify him for questioning the Lord.

I'll just use the NIV version of the Bible, as that's the default for the website I'm using, if you prefer a different version, let me know.

quote:
Job 38

Then the Lord spoke to Job out of the storm. He said:

2 Who is this that obscures my plans
with words without knowledge?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
4 Where were you when I laid the earths foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?
8 Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,

...

19 What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!
22 Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no one lives,
an uninhabited desert,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
28 Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?


The author is simply employing poetic license. The "father" of the rain, the "storehouses" (or treasures) of the snow, the sea bursting forth from the "womb", etc.

The passage you quoted is not saying that a snowflake is a "treasure" because of the microscopic beauty it contains.

But how can my "interpretation" be an "interpretation" per say, when a plain surface reading of the text confirm it's meaning?

It isn't really a plain surface reading of the text, though. You think the "treasures" are referring to microscopic beauty, but that's not really indicated by the context.

And plain surface readings can often miss the point. Do you think the Lord is actually saying that there is a "womb" for the sea?

And wouldn't a plain surface reading indicate that Jesus, the Lamb of God, if God's pet baby sheep?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:05 AM Jaf has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 233 days)
Posts: 9068
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 42 of 66 (719376)
02-13-2014 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Jaf
02-13-2014 5:05 AM


heathen perversions of scripture
Jaf writes:

Why is every one resorting to perversions of scripture and every form heathen gnostic text to wash over the plain reading of the text in my OP.

hang on a second there, jaf. here's what my copy says:

quote:
הֲבָאתָ, אֶל-אֹצְרוֹת שָׁלֶג; וְאוֹצְרוֹת בָּרָד תִּרְאֶה.

have you ever considered that your versions might be some heathen perversion of the text? i mean, your reading it in a language that was first spoken by pagan barbarians centuries later, and half a world away. and that language has change substantially since that time, too. but right there? that's the original text, in the original language.

granted, it doesn't really matter for this particular verse, but it sure can for others.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 5:05 AM Jaf has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Jaf, posted 02-13-2014 7:51 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
Jaf
Member (Idle past 1195 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 01-30-2014


Message 43 of 66 (719378)
02-13-2014 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Modulous
02-13-2014 6:10 AM


Re: No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
My dear modulous, yes that is precisely what I am saying, did I not clearly convey this position in my OP? Phew, are you a little slow on the uptake or is this your way of being petulant and pedantic within forum guidelines? I'm just seeking the truth.

Enoch, cannon? Etc, I don't follow. The 66 books is Scripture not a fable that depicts fallen angels teaching women kind to put on make up. Have a titter of wit man.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Modulous, posted 02-13-2014 6:10 AM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Modulous, posted 02-13-2014 8:39 PM Jaf has responded

    
Jaf
Member (Idle past 1195 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 01-30-2014


Message 44 of 66 (719379)
02-13-2014 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Dr Adequate
02-13-2014 10:07 AM


Re: No "interpretation" is required or necessary.
1. it doesn't say EXACTLY the same thing, it doesn't say ENTER IN to hail, because as my learned friend said, one can observe the pattern in hail without a microscope not so with snow.

This is what you chaps are doing

Me "The quick brown fox jumped over the fence."

You Guys

"The book of Enoch would seem to suggest that said fox (actually a 14 billion year old axolotl) was not at all quick but clever because he in actual fact "darted" (the Greek for this word is darted but the word doesn't exist in Hebrew which makes the bible a lie) UNDER, do you see that UNDER not over the fence, which of course is what not only made him appear quick but also to appear like a fox jumping over a fence.

Editors note, it helps to take a large skull of peyote or mescaline before joining the forum.

Am I right?

Edited by Jaf, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-13-2014 10:07 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-13-2014 8:28 PM Jaf has responded
 Message 51 by arachnophilia, posted 02-13-2014 9:29 PM Jaf has responded

    
Jaf
Member (Idle past 1195 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 01-30-2014


Message 45 of 66 (719380)
02-13-2014 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by arachnophilia
02-13-2014 6:47 PM


Re: heathen perversions of scripture
Good one mate, that gave me good laugh. Put's into perspective what everyone's form is here. CHANGE WHATS BEEN SAID OR WRITTEN INTO SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT SAID OR WRITTEN! Even better change the language so no one can read it as if that makes some kind of valid and important point. IT DOESN'T! Although it was witty.

Your second point is off topic, but yes obviously I have considered it. I am left but with no excuse as to believe the Facts, the KJV is the best version in English we've got and all other English versions are in at least some way erroneous some of them are down write satanic its so obvious. Plus we have the Greek and Hebrew concordances of every word, we lack nothing, you don't even need to be a fool and waste years learning Hebrew and Greek thinking this is the only way you are going to know the truth.

I don't mean it foolish to learn either of these wonderful languages by the way. But Ive seen atheist say such things as Ive mentioned above as if to imply that because they have learned these languages they are far better qualified to discus scripture with some faith head Christian who hasn't, which is arrogance in the extreme not to mention utter rubbish!.

Edited by Jaf, : No reason given.

Edited by Jaf, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by arachnophilia, posted 02-13-2014 6:47 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by arachnophilia, posted 02-13-2014 9:23 PM Jaf has not yet responded

    
Prev12
3
45Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017