Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,828 Year: 4,085/9,624 Month: 956/974 Week: 283/286 Day: 4/40 Hour: 4/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biblical Translation--Eden, 2
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 110 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 241 of 315 (462991)
04-11-2008 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by autumnman
04-10-2008 11:59 PM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
The "helper" which God will "build" for the human archetype will be that aspect of the human mind and consciousness that will fully distinguish "the human animal" from all other animals; the human creative intellect will be the "helper as opposite to the human brute animal. The human creative intellect will be metaphorically represented by "a strong support" which God "builds" and then will be metaphorically designated as "woman/wife," the pro-creative half of the human species.
I understand what you are saying from your perspective but one would wonder if the BHS text removes or does not speak of all the specifics that are mentioned past 2:21. In other words if Eve is not real then why are there so many SPECIFICS concerning her and the enter play between God, Adam and Eve. Was all of this made up from your perspective. It seems as though atleast the English translation consider her as real. Ofcourse one of these other very gifted individuals on here can present what I am saying better, Im sure
D Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by autumnman, posted 04-10-2008 11:59 PM autumnman has not replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 110 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 242 of 315 (462992)
04-11-2008 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by autumnman
04-10-2008 11:59 PM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
AM writes
The "helper" which God will "build" for the human archetype will be that aspect of the human mind and consciousness that will fully distinguish "the human animal" from all other animals; the human creative intellect will be the "helper as opposite to the human brute animal. The human creative intellect will be metaphorically represented by "a strong support" which God "builds" and then will be metaphorically designated as "woman/wife," the pro-creative half of the human species.
I understand what you are saying from your perspective but one would wonder if the BHS text removes or does not speak of all the specifics that are mentioned past 2:21. In other words if Eve is not real then why are there so many SPECIFICS concerning her and the enter play between God, Adam and Eve. Was all of this made up from your perspective. It seems as though atleast the English translation consider her as real. Ofcourse one of these other very gifted individuals on here can present what I am saying better, Im sure
D Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by autumnman, posted 04-10-2008 11:59 PM autumnman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by autumnman, posted 04-11-2008 11:43 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 110 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 243 of 315 (462995)
04-11-2008 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 239 by jaywill
04-11-2008 7:47 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
jaywill writes
He was an extraordinary scholar who took the initiative to persecute the Christian church, a star student of Gameliel. He received mercy and was chosen by Christ to "complete the word of God."
" ... I became a minister according to the stewardship of God which was given to me for you, to complete the word of God." (Col. 1:25)
I see your intimation and perspective. Paul percieved it as literal, correct, so there is no reason we should not?
All of you fellas abilites and understanding here is nothing short of immpressive. You have given me much to consider. Ill will wait for your next responses.
D Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 7:47 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 9:52 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1968 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 244 of 315 (462996)
04-11-2008 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 238 by IamJoseph
04-11-2008 6:43 AM


IAJ,
This question has baffled many. IMHO, the events described of the garden are not on the earth, but in another realm, signified by talking serpents, the 'US" which refers to angelic beings, and the casting out from the garden of Cain, and its re-entry barred.
I thought that I provided an answer why the issue should not baffle us. The whole matter is solved by two keys:
1.) The longevity of early humans
2.) God's permitting of the first humans to marry close relatives
Concerning the different realm of Eden ...
Is there a need to remove Eden from the physical planet in order to make sense of the story? I don't think so.
When God met Moses in the incedent of the burning bush He told Moses to take his shoe off of his feet. The reason was that the place on which he stood was "holy ground."
And He said, Do not come near here. Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.
Exo.3:5)
A burning bush in which Moses met God is as mysterious as a tree of life. Yet it was on "holy ground" on the planet. Am I right?
The same occured with Joshua. He also stood on holy ground:
And the Captain of Jehovah's army said to Joshua, Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy. And Joshua did so.
(Jos. 5:15)
This too was an epiphany of the Angel of Jehovah with the angelic army ready to fight in the heavenly realms against the demonic and evil principalities of Canaan. Yet the scene took place on the earth on holy ground.
I can believe that a spot on the planet was reserved for a garden of the first human being. Everything about the description of the physical surroundings suggest that it was on the earth.
Indeed the earth is crucially important to God. It is His will which is to be done "on earth" as it is in heaven.
I do acknowledge that the talking serpent is atypical. But we have the miracle of the talking donkey also in the book of Numbers which occurs on the earth -
" ... a dumb beast of burden, uttering with a man's voice, restraining the madness of the prophet" (2 Peter 2:16 comp. Numbers 22:`21-30)
I admit that the talking serpent is a mystery. But it does not for me require that the garden of Eden need be transfered into another realm. Nature may have been in a realm unfamilar to us on this side of the fall of man.
I have already written that the divine "Us" of Genesis and Isaiah is, I believe, the Triune God. He is the same as the Divine "We" in the gospel of John verse 23. Only One of the Godhead has been incarnated as a man in Jesus:
Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him. And We will come to him and make an abode with him. (John 14:23)
The Divine Person of the Trinity spoke in the creation of man - "Let Us make man ...". And the Divine Person of the Trinity spoke just before the crucifixion of Christ promising that the Son and the Father as the Divine mysterious "We" would, in Christ's resurrection, come to His lovers to make an abode within them.
I do not believe that any angels assisted God in the creation of man, such that God would say "Us" - meaning He and some angel/s.
Gen Ch 3/
23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
24 So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubim, and the flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way to the tree of life.
Well, "another realm," I think, would not mean so "another" that it could not be located on the planet. Cain moved to the east of Eden. So whatever the nature of your propsed "another realm" I think the record shows physical and directional aspects related to it.
Gen 4/16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
Can one move to the "east" of a existential realm? Where is east of another realm? Where is east of another dimension?
In modern terms would we say, "I moved to the east of Cyberspace." The two concepts don't make sense in the same sentence.
Further, the bestowing of a life form with speech is also not of this earth, signified by no life forms on earth have acquired this attribute, despite the premises of adaptation, which is a time based factor. Humans acquired speech despite being the newest life form, bypassing the evolutionary thread. Here we find, the concept of reproduction is a factor which does not relate to angelic beings, who do not experience death or sexual desires. Reproduction only occurs on earth:
How many other animals spoke or why Eve displayed no surpise when the serpent did speak are a mystery to me.
I have no answer for those things at this time. But G.H. Pember writes about biblical issues regarding animals. I have not read that particular book. But much of his exposition on Genesis has been extremly helpful to me. Namely Earth's Earliest Ages is a book I would recommend to any serious student of Scripture.
That is the first half of the book dealing with Genesus chapters 1 through 6 or so. I don't like the second half where he goes into a lot of history of mythology.
Perhaps the next time I speak to someone about the talking serpent in Genesis I will have studied what Pember had to say about that.
Further, we see that Cain left th Garden, and met speech endowed humans same as he was:
Gen 4/16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. 17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bore Enoch; and he builded a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son Enoch.
Thus the garden of eden report is not of this earth, and a epiphany occured, whereby humans were bestowed with speech not via evolutiuon, but from a decision in another realm. IOW, when Adam and Eve were given speech, a Gdlike attribute, it was simultainiously bestowed upon the human species which began with Adam. We note that Adam is a generic term in Gen 1, but it becomes a proper noun thereafter.
God created the earth for His kingdom. After the second coming of Christ there is a restoration of the planet for a period of 1,000 years in which the surviving and saved nations enjoy God's original intention. Listen to what Jesus says as He judges the nations left alive from His throne in Jerusalem:
But when the Son of Man comes in His glory and all the angels with Him, at that time He will sit on the throne of His glory. And all the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them from one another, just as the shepherd separates teh sheeep from the goats. (Matt. 25:31,32) ... Then the King will sau to thjose on His right hand, Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (vs. 34)
"[A]ll the nations" refers to all the Gentiles who remian at Christ's coming back to the earth. That is the Gentiles who were not destroyed who followed Antichrist at Armageddon (Rev.16:14,16;19:11-15,19-21).
This will be the judgment of the living before the millenium [b](Acts 10:42; 2 Tim. 4:1). It differs from His judgment of the dead at the great white throne after the millennium (Rev. 20:11-15).
The "sheep" on the left hand of Christ the Judge will be allowed to inherit the kingdom prepared on the earth "from the foundation of the world". Though we may say the kingdom is in another realm, it is still on the earth. From the foundation of the world in the garden of Eden God prepared a kingdom for man. This was the realm in which Adam lived in the earth.
The saved Gentiles will be subjected to the priestly saved Israelites who will have Christ reigning over the planet from Jerusalem. This is why I say this kingdom is not other worldly. It was not in Adam's day. And it is not at that time in the future when the saved Gentile "sheep" inherit the kingdom of God which was prepared from the foundation of the world.
After the judgment at Christ's throne of glory, the "sheep" will be transferred into the millennium to be the people living under the kingly ruling of Christ and the overcoming believers (Rev. 2:26-27; 12:5; 20:4-6) under the priestly ministry of the saved Jews (Zech. 8:20-23). In this way the "sheep" will inherit the (coming) kingdom. In the millennium there will be three sections:
(1) the earth, where the blessing of God's creation will be, as mentioned in Genesis 1:28-30;
(2) the nation of Israel in Canaan, from the Nile to the Euphrates. from which the Jews will rule over the whole earth (Isa. 60:10-12; Zech. 14:16-18); and
(3) the heavenly and spiritual ection (1 Cor. 15:50-52), the manifestation of the kingdom of the heavens, where the overcoming believers [in Christ] will enjoy the kingdom reward ([Matt.] 5:20; 7:21). The kingdom that the "sheep" will inherit consists of the first section.
The blessings of the first section in the millennium, the blessings of God's creation, was prepared for the "sheep" from the foundation of the world, whereas the blessings in the third section, the blessings of the heavenlu and spiritual kingdom, was ordained for the believers before the foundation of the world (Eph.1:3-4).
Footnotes 34(1) and (2) of Matt. 25:34, The Recovery Version.
Jesus said "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." (Matt.5:5) This kingdom is in "the earth" according to the words of Jesus.
Luke 19:17,19 say that Jesus will reward His faithful servants with authority over so many cities respectively:
And he said to him, Well done, good slave. Because you have become faithful in the least, have authority over ten cities ... Amd he said to this one as well, And you, be over five cities.
These cities over which Christ's rewarded servants are to rule are in the inhabited earth when He returns. I don't think that they will be in another realm as you describe the garden.
1.) The coming "earth" is to be subjected not to angels but to the human servants of Christ:
"For it was not to angels that He subjected the coming inhabited EARTH, concerning which we speak. (Heb. 2:5 my emphasis)
2.) Christ returns to establish His kingdom not in another realm but in the inhabited earth:
"And when He brings again the Firstborn into the inhabited EARTH, He says, And let all the angels of God worship Him." (Heb. 1:6).
By comparing the facts about Christ's return and restoration of the earth and the facts of early Genesis - "the foundation of the world" we can ascertain that the garden kingdom/paradise was earthly. It may have been in a quality which was in another realm from what we know today. But I do not think it was in another dimension or not on the surface of the geophysical planet.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 6:43 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 11:03 AM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1968 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 245 of 315 (462999)
04-11-2008 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 243 by Dawn Bertot
04-11-2008 9:24 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
Bertot,
I didn't see to what the exchange concerning Paul was about.
I'm sorry if my comment did not address that. I was only burdened to point out that there is no way anyone had more revelation into the Old Testament than the Apostle Paul.
We simply do not have more inspired insight into the Scriptures than Paul had.
What we do need to come up to speed to is, Paul's revelation. He is not fully appreciated by us.
Now what was it that you all were discussing about the literalness or not of?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-11-2008 9:24 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 11:20 AM jaywill has replied
 Message 255 by ICANT, posted 04-11-2008 9:30 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 268 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-12-2008 2:44 PM jaywill has not replied

autumnman
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 621
From: Colorado
Joined: 02-24-2008


Message 246 of 315 (463003)
04-11-2008 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 240 by Dawn Bertot
04-11-2008 9:03 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
bertot:
Would you like to continue with Gen. 2:21 and the thardemah=deep sleep, the ethereal realm?
Let me know.
All the best,
Ger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-11-2008 9:03 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-12-2008 2:49 PM autumnman has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3695 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 247 of 315 (463010)
04-11-2008 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by jaywill
04-11-2008 9:32 AM


quote:
I thought that I provided an answer why the issue should not baffle us. The whole matter is solved by two keys:
1.) The longevity of early humans
? how does this impact - the early years were free of much contamination. The long life span are not limited t the first chapter either.
quote:
2.) God's permitting of the first humans to marry close relatives
The law was yet not given, concerning incest, this is true, and Jacob is not accounted as sinning by marrying two sisters. But we have in the text, that Cain went to Nod and married one who was not a relative.
quote:
Concerning the different realm of Eden ...
Is there a need to remove Eden from the physical planet in order to make sense of the story? I don't think so.
When God met Moses in the incedent of the burning bush He told Moses to take his shoe off of his feet. The reason was that the place on which he stood was "holy ground."
And He said, Do not come near here. Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.
The issue does not relate to holy and unholy, but that the text signifies a different realm. I gave some examples: the 'US' factor - which excludes humans, which signifies angelic beings; that snakes stood upright and spoke [why else would snakes be punished to crawl?]. I see a better repudiation of my premise being that the earth was also cursed - and that is not a reference to another realm, but you never pointed that out. I qualified my response as an opinion [IMHO], as this is a mysterious chapter, and not conclusively decipherable by any known source. It is clearly not written in the norm - an example of this is also seen in the passage where Abraham is suddenly in a deep sleep and taken above the universe to gaze at the host of the constelations - a sureal run away from the context; thus we can include the possibility this text is also leaning on the surreal. There are layers here which have a cadence - and they alternatively add and change paradigms, in a manner that appears purposely strange and coded for future generations from now.
quote:
I do acknowledge that the talking serpent is atypical. But we have the miracle of the talking donkey also in the book of Numbers which occurs on the earth -
" ... a dumb beast of burden, uttering with a man's voice, restraining the madness of the prophet" (2 Peter 2:16 comp. Numbers 22:`21-30)
I admit that the talking serpent is a mystery. But it does not for me require that the garden of Eden need be transfered into another realm. Nature may have been in a realm unfamilar to us on this side of the fall of man.
I have no problem with miracles - but this is not posited as a miracle. In the OT, miracles [overturning nature] is only done when a forewarning occurs. Here, in these chapters, the mode is matter of fact, as a laid back occurence, when no miracles are required.
quote:
I have already written that the divine "Us" of Genesis and Isaiah is, I believe, the Triune God. He is the same as the Divine "We" in the gospel of John verse 23. Only One of the Godhead has been incarnated as a man in Jesus:
Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him. And We will come to him and make an abode with him. (John 14:23)
The Divine Person of the Trinity spoke in the creation of man - "Let Us make man ...". And the Divine Person of the Trinity spoke just before the crucifixion of Christ promising that the Son and the Father as the Divine mysterious "We" would, in Christ's resurrection, come to His lovers to make an abode within them.
The text has to make sense w/o connection of another text which emerged 2000 years later: it must speak to all generations - and any connection with the NT would not make sense to people for 2000 years. Retrospective views and beliefs cannot impact on these texts:
HE SPEAKETH IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE PEOPLE; HE CONSIDERETH THE NATURE [SITUATION] OF MAN.
quote:
I do not believe that any angels assisted God in the creation of man, such that God would say "Us" - meaning He and some angel/s.
Clearly not, I agree. The creation verb is always in the singular, meaning no angels, and no anyone or any other entity whatsoever. The OT is an intergrated document, and there cannot be any manner of contradiction with another part of its texts:
'I AM THE LORD THERE IS NO OTHER'.
quote:
Gen Ch 3/
23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
24 So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubim, and the flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way to the tree of life.
Well, "another realm," I think, would not mean so "another" that it could not be located on the planet. Cain moved to the east of Eden. So whatever the nature of your propsed "another realm" I think the record shows physical and directional aspects related to it.
The verse you are quoting is *AFTER* the casting out of Eden - when a casting down to earth occured. The texts also says, re-entry was barred by angels with fiery swords turning every which way: how do you reconsile that with earth?
quote:
How many other animals spoke or why Eve displayed no surpise when the serpent did speak are a mystery to me.
There is an inference here, that a talking snake posed no surprise to Eve - again signifying another realm.
quote:
God created the earth for His kingdom. After the second coming of Christ there is a restoration of the planet for a period of 1,000 years in which the surviving and saved nations enjoy God's original intention. Listen to what Jesus says as He judges the nations left alive from His throne in Jerusalem:
What you are saying is - the text does not make much sense if not alligned with the gospels. I reject this view. We see also that there is a mandated law in the OT which says 'NOT TO ADD OR SUBTRACT ANYTHING FROM THIS BOOK'. The text has to make total and non-wanting sense on its own, and is a very exacting, pristine and mathematical treatise - each alphabet is also a numerical value, as a safe guard of additions and subtractions. It is not subnject to the NT or Quran. The latter have to follow the OT, which is the light unto the nations - it is not the other way around. We see this affirmed by the prejected premise the OT laws are fullfilled and not encumbent anymore; this is not true, because all the laws are active today, and the world turns by them exclusively. In fact, there is not a single law the world at large accepts and uses in its institutions from elsewhere.
quote:
But when the Son of Man comes in His glory and all the angels with Him, at that time He will sit on the throne of His glory. And all the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them from one another, just as the shepherd separates teh sheeep from the goats. (Matt. 25:31,32) ... Then the King will sau to thjose on His right hand, Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (vs. 34)
Again, you cannot explain the OT with NT verses - there are immense contradictions which are disregarded. We see that the quran does the same thing - it explains the NT via its own paradigms, and the result is a widespread chaos - because there are contradictions between the NT and Quran.
[quote] "[A]ll the nations" refers to all the Gentiles who remian at Christ's coming back to the earth. That is the Gentiles who were not destroyed who followed Antichrist at Armageddon (Rev.16:14,16;19:11-15,19-21).
This will be the judgment of the living before the millenium [b](Acts 10:42; 2 Tim. 4:1). It differs from His judgment of the dead at the great white throne after the millennium (Rev. 20:11-15).
The "sheep" on the left hand of Christ the Judge will be allowed to inherit the kingdom prepared on the earth "from the foundation of the world". Though we may say the kingdom is in another realm, it is still on the earth. From the foundation of the world in the garden of Eden God prepared a kingdom for man. This was the realm in which Adam lived in the earth.
The saved Gentiles will be subjected to the priestly saved Israelites who will have Christ reigning over the planet from Jerusalem. This is why I say this kingdom is not other worldly. It was not in Adam's day. And it is not at that time in the future when the saved Gentile "sheep" inherit the kingdom of God which was prepared from the foundation of the world.
After the judgment at Christ's throne of glory, the "sheep" will be transferred into the millennium to be the people living under the kingly ruling of Christ and the overcoming believers (Rev. 2:26-27; 12:5; 20:4-6) under the priestly ministry of the saved Jews (Zech. 8:20-23). In this way the "sheep" will inherit the (coming) kingdom. In the millennium there will be three sections:
(1) the earth, where the blessing of God's creation will be, as mentioned in Genesis 1:28-30;
(2) the nation of Israel in Canaan, from the Nile to the Euphrates. from which the Jews will rule over the whole earth (Isa. 60:10-12; Zech. 14:16-18); and
(3) the heavenly and spiritual ection (1 Cor. 15:50-52), the manifestation of the kingdom of the heavens, where the overcoming believers [in Christ] will enjoy the kingdom reward ([Matt.] 5:20; 7:21). The kingdom that the "sheep" will inherit consists of the first section.
The blessings of the first section in the millennium, the blessings of God's creation, was prepared for the "sheep" from the foundation of the world, whereas the blessings in the third section, the blessings of the heavenlu and spiritual kingdom, was ordained for the believers before the foundation of the world (Eph.1:3-4).
Footnotes 34(1) and (2) of Matt. 25:34, The Recovery Version.
Jesus said "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." (Matt.5:5) This kingdom is in "the earth" according to the words of Jesus.
Luke 19:17,19 say that Jesus will reward His faithful servants with authority over so many cities respectively:
And he said to him, Well done, good slave. Because you have become faithful in the least, have authority over ten cities ... Amd he said to this one as well, And you, be over five cities.
These cities over which Christ's rewarded servants are to rule are in the inhabited earth when He returns. I don't think that they will be in another realm as you describe the garden.
1.) The coming "earth" is to be subjected not to angels but to the human servants of Christ:
"For it was not to angels that He subjected the coming inhabited EARTH, concerning which we speak. (Heb. 2:5 my emphasis)
2.) Christ returns to establish His kingdom not in another realm but in the inhabited earth:
"And when He brings again the Firstborn into the inhabited EARTH, He says, And let all the angels of God worship Him." (Heb. 1:6).
By comparing the facts about Christ's return and restoration of the earth and the facts of early Genesis - "the foundation of the world" we can ascertain that the garden kingdom/paradise was earthly. It may have been in a quality which was in another realm from what we know today. But I do not think it was in another dimension or not on the surface of the geophysical planet. [/quote]
'God is not like man' [Samuel]
'The son shall not pay for the father, not the mother for the daughter' [OT Law]
These laws are non-negotiable. Your views are based on a premise the revelation at Sinai was wanting - such a premise has no end - and calls for the Quran and any other new treatise negating the Gospels again. One cannot be selective where one starts and ends - as this can be negated equally as you do with the OT. Of coz, the issue of belief impacts here, but the OT is not based on belief, as is the NT: the hebrews did not accept Moses' word and demanded proof in OPEN revelation. And they got it. This is not the case with the Gospels - which says they believed in third party reportings: they should have asked for proof - and demanded that only the one who gave the law at Sinai can speak for himself - they did not do so. There is a difference here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 9:32 AM jaywill has not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3695 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 248 of 315 (463011)
04-11-2008 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by jaywill
04-11-2008 9:52 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
One clear error with Paul is: its not what goes in of one's mouth but what goes out. This was used as a basis for negating the OT laws.
Clearly, what comes out is dependent on what goes in.
The other is that the Sinai revelation was deficient - this would make all revelations deficient in a cyclical mode.
Paul was rejected by the original Nasserites and Ebonites which were the first two group to follow Jesus; Paul was only accepted by those who never followed the OT, in effect constituting an audience desperate to abandon Hellenism and Romanism; an exploitation occured here. Aside from a revelation alledgedly subscribed to Paul, we have other reveations made by Islamic sources - in dire ciontradiction of the gospels. Where does it end? It seems blatant the OT cannot be alligned with anything else for its ture contextual meanings - and any divergence is based on retrospective beliefs which appear more political than substantial.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 9:52 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 12:26 PM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 251 by autumnman, posted 04-11-2008 12:33 PM IamJoseph has replied
 Message 252 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 12:38 PM IamJoseph has not replied

autumnman
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 621
From: Colorado
Joined: 02-24-2008


Message 249 of 315 (463017)
04-11-2008 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 242 by Dawn Bertot
04-11-2008 9:13 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
bertot: For some reason I have not been receiving notification of new posts. I'll just keep a close eye on the thread.
helper / woman
Eden is designated by five rivers, all of which do not coincide with the realities established by gravity on planet earth. They are metaphorical/proverbial rivers that designate the “Holy Mountain of God.”
Hebrew nouns are derived from verbs.
The verb roots of masculine or feminine nouns dictate the meaning and usage of the noun.
The masculine noun for “helper” = 0ezer is commonly employed to denote God’s interaction with humankind. The masculine noun for “helper” = 0ezer is derived from the verb root 0azaz which means, “to be strong”.
The feminine noun for “woman/wife” = >ishah is traditionally said to be derived from the verb root >anash which mean, “to be weak”.
According to the above grammatical structure of the masculine noun 0ezer=helper, employed in Gen. 2:18 & 20, and the feminine noun >ishah=woman, employed in Gen. 2:22 & 23, these nouns are antithetical, opposites, and grammatically incongruent; one cannot represent the other.
There is in fact a much more suitable translation of the Hebrew Eden Poem. If you are interested I will share with you what I have discovered.
All the best,
Ger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-11-2008 9:13 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-11-2008 7:17 PM autumnman has not replied
 Message 256 by ICANT, posted 04-11-2008 10:00 PM autumnman has replied
 Message 258 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 10:37 PM autumnman has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1968 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 250 of 315 (463021)
04-11-2008 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by IamJoseph
04-11-2008 11:20 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
IAM,
One clear error with Paul is: its not what goes in of one's mouth but what goes out. This was used as a basis for negating the OT laws.
Jesus took the lead to say that. And parellels can be found in the Old Testament too.
It was Jesus who said that certainly before Paul said it.
I don't think it negated OT law. I think it made a more penetrating point than OT law. It hightened the morality of OT law.
It is not what physically enters into the mouth which defiles a person, taught Jesus. It is what comes out of the heart that defiles a person. Some of what comes out of the heart comes out in spoken words which defile the person.
Jesus meant the things coming out of the heart - evil reasonings, fornications, thefts, evil speakings, etc.
He made the standard higher and more penetrating touching the innermost motive of the human heart.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 11:20 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 10:45 PM jaywill has replied

autumnman
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 621
From: Colorado
Joined: 02-24-2008


Message 251 of 315 (463023)
04-11-2008 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by IamJoseph
04-11-2008 11:20 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
IamJoseph:
It seems blatant the OT cannot be alligned with anything else for its ture contextual meanings
For the most part, I am in agreement with you. I would go so far as to say, however, that the Hebrew Tanakh (OT) would be best used, in the case of the Eden Poem, in a concordance fashion, to see how biblical Hebrew bound morphemes, words, and clauses are typically used. In my opinion, the Hebrew Eden Narrative should be held only to its own specific context.
Do you agree?
Regards,
Ger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 11:20 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 11:09 PM autumnman has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1968 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 252 of 315 (463024)
04-11-2008 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by IamJoseph
04-11-2008 11:20 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
IAM,
Paul was rejected by the original Nasserites and Ebonites which were the first two group to follow Jesus;
D Bertot, Help! What's this? That they rejected Paul is a no brainer. That they were the FIRST to follow Jesus is surely your concoction of an idea.
Paul was only accepted by those who never followed the OT at some time.
Oh come on Joseph. WHERE do you get your stuff ???
His letters to the Galatians is one place that proves that those under his teaching knew and did follow the OT.
Same with Corinthians and Colossians. And if Paul wrote Hebrews, which I think he most certainly did, they were familiar with the OT and probably were proudest of the Hebrews cast into a delimma because of the truth of Christ that they could not ignore.
They discerned the voice of God speaking again in Christ.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by IamJoseph, posted 04-11-2008 11:20 AM IamJoseph has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by autumnman, posted 04-11-2008 12:45 PM jaywill has not replied

autumnman
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 621
From: Colorado
Joined: 02-24-2008


Message 253 of 315 (463026)
04-11-2008 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by jaywill
04-11-2008 12:38 PM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
jaywill:
I would really like to keep "Paul" out of this for a while. If you wish you could start up your own thread regarding "Paul".
Let's try to stay with the Eden Narrative.
All the best,
Ger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 12:38 PM jaywill has not replied

Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 110 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 254 of 315 (463063)
04-11-2008 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by autumnman
04-11-2008 11:43 AM


Re: Biblical Heb. Transliteration Convention
AM sorry another one of those days, I will try and get caught up on what has been said and respond later. Extremely busy, hold my place please.
D bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by autumnman, posted 04-11-2008 11:43 AM autumnman has not replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 255 of 315 (463078)
04-11-2008 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by jaywill
04-11-2008 9:52 AM


Re: Paul
Hi jaywill,
jaywill writes:
We simply do not have more inspired insight into the Scriptures than Paul had.
Paul was a Pharisee of the Pharisees. That meant he was a teacher.
He could probably have quoted the Pharisees Hebrew Bible as well as the Septuagint.
But he would have no idea what am is talking about as it came about a thousand years after Paul was in the presence of Jesus.
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."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by jaywill, posted 04-11-2008 9:52 AM jaywill 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