|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Junior Member (Idle past 5042 days) Posts: 14 From: Lebanon Township, New Jersey, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
ringo said: All three words mean the same thing.
And quoted Isaiah 43:7. No three words mean the same in any language including English.When three similar appearing words are found in an English text that was written by one who knows English, the use of the words are defined not by the redundancies that they share but the differences as per context. In that quote of Isaiah 43:7 ... created means the soul was brought into existence. formed: means the body was shaped and constructed. made: means the God did all the work associated with the final result. Which includes bringing the man to life. It isn't saying, I made him, I made him, yea, I made him. The semicolon is the clue that the last clause merely concludes the thought of the preceeding clauses.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:This is a very basic mistake that you are making here. You don't drift off into space because the lump sum of the local gravity is high. This result occurs only after the lumping of matter has occurred not before. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Greyseal said:
quote:The error is again quite obvious. Gravity is the weakest force known. It can't pull together any dispersed matter that has more powerful forces acting upon them. The most notable being HEAT. The orbiting of the sun, the attraction of the planets is due to the lumped sum value of their constituent matter. and, that is not the situation before there were such clumps of matter. There is no known force by which one can explain the condensation of matter from a cloud into a clump.Heat alone will disperse the cloud as is common experience concerning any kind of cloud. The vector momentum of the particles after cooling will not change since the attraction between greatly dispersed particles is of no consequence. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:You have not proved that there is nothing..
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
jar said:
quote:You use a lot of poor excuses. I don't read or speak new speak so your argument here is silly. Create...form...make. These can share definitions. And, they have definitions they don't share. Spelling has nothing to do with what I said. It is quite simple.It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English and to re-translate as you wish so as to pretense one's self to be correct. Others also don't realize that the LORD God who put the Bible together speaks perfect English and specifies all his terms and meanings. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Noma&Nopaakaan Orphan said:
quote:This is a good point. And, athough one might pick at this poster for attitude, nevertheless, an intelligent person would admit that the OP was merely the pontification of a popular assumption, since, as the above quoted poster said, where's the evidence? As for me the evidence is in English, and is found in the Bible I read and it isn't difficult to understand it as some here seem to find it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:I don't believe the Hebrews had no way to express titles, names etc. Your idea that if Hebrews didn't capitalize letters then no translated text should have them is ludicrous. quote:You would have a better argument than, assuming I made something up, if you explained why it is indeed capitalized. And further, why you assume it means nothing. I didn't expect you to grasp the understanding since you may not be well read with respect to the Bible. And, you seem to have great difficulty with a plethora of simple English usage. Anyway, the Hebrew this or that argument carries no weight with me, because I think it is certain that you have no understanding of Hebrew comparable to any of the translators of the Bible I read. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Jar said:
quote:Concerning putting the throne of God on the earth. Well, that is what the end of the matter is all about as the book of the Revelation reveals, and with which it closes the Bible. Solomon was fully aware of this and speaks of it in his discourse and prayer at the dedication of the temple.One reason David was said to be a man after God's own heart is because David realized that building a permanent temple was a wise thing to do. Previous to that, in the course of revelations from God, when God brought the children of Abraham out from Egypt by use of Moses, then he taught them they were a church and he commanded Moses to build the tabernacle tent that moved from place to place. In the same way that the dove found no rest until it found an olive branch, and in the same way the dove that was the manifestation of the Holy Ghost rested upon the man Jesus of Nazareth, so, the tabernacle of God moved about until a resting place was found. This is one of the main revelations of the Bible. Which is why is noted so early in the message. For the temple of God, where his throne is, involves not only the physical manifestation of a final temple upon the earth, but also in the heart of them that receive him by faith. So, your notion that there is nothing involved deeper than you have thus far surmised is simply, ignorance. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Someone asked about which heaven is which.
As Solomon said, the heaven, and the heaven of heavens, cannot contain God. This is a quote that shows that the sky is one heaven, the outer space is another, and the heaven of heavens is where God's throne was originally and still is until after the great white throne judgment. Genesis verse one is the heaven where God dwelt with his hosts of heaven, where the rebellion against God began. The deep was a deep well in that heaven filled with many waters (metaphically means many opinions).The earth was at the bottom of that deep place and sat as described in verse two, in darkness without light, void of life, and unformed as is a lump of clay awaiting a potter. The earth was created at the same time as the heaven of verse one, because God was prepared with all his legal evidences before any rebellion against his throne ensued. The earth was left in it's basest form and condition because by it's being the most base of all things created, it was the perfect legal device to prove that the seeming foolishness (as men think) and foolish things of God are wiser than any of the highminded rebels. Thus, by setting his seal to the clay he evidences his truth's in the clay man, Jesus of Nazareth and thusly, legally exposes and disposes of all rebellion in an orderly way. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add blank lines.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:And I pointed out how your statement carried no logical weight. Get over it and move on. quote:And I appreciate anyone who publishes the Bible. thanks. quote:And you are making up the notion that I'm making things up. You see? It's not an argument to make unsubstantiated claims. In case you are not aware of this, I am pleased to inform you that the Bible is a teaching. That is why God created all things in six twenty-four hour days. He wasn't showing off. He could've done in no time at all. Or, he could've taken his sweet time. But, he did it in the manner described in Genesis to teach man a thing or two. Now I know this is of no interest to you but, that has nothing to do with the Bible. If you want to pretend nothing is being taught or meant and have concluded that it's all a fable then you are free to remain in the dark. It's your choice. But, as for any logical argument of merit? well...you haven't made any and it should be noted I think. Anyone can make endless claims as to what they opinionate about whatever. so what? Opinions is that thing I care least about, so you're going to have to do better I think. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:There is meaning there right in front of your nose. You are simply picking and choosing your determinations according to personal whim. You reveal no tendency towards equity. Is the Hebrew language in the English text? No. Is the signature of the supposed authors in the text? No. Is your limited viewpoint evidenced anywhere in the text? No. Again, such excuses as you have thus far been using aren't useful in debate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote: Judgment and righteousness do indeed flow parallel. But, judgment and righteousness are two different things. And that is the thing about parallelism, it means diddly squat when one says the water flowed as the other water flowed. It has meaning when two distinct things run parallel. Thus, in the above quoted verse, judgment runs down as waters, means that the judgment of God from the throne runs down as many kinds of waters and in many streams applying to many, and even all matters, some small and some great. Whereas, righteousness as a mighty stream teaches that God's righteousness as evidenced by his many judgments, focuses the power of the waters into a stream that can't be withstood by anything. Regardless, the Isaiah quote had nothing to do with anything parallel as far as I can tell.The semicolon denoted the the phrase "yea, I made him" is referring to the the previous to steps involved with doing so, which steps were...creating the soul...and forming it's body. I also failed to mention that the ones referred to in that quote are not all men but a select kind of men. Which then introduces a thing not explained in that sentence, which is the spirit of the ones referred to. Which spirit the others among mankind do not possess in kind. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add more blank lines.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:I already pointed out that the capitalization denotes OWNERSHIP. And I asked you to present a reason for the capitalization that counters the obvious meaning, which I noted, and am aware is in agreement with the whole Bible. Your argument is that it shouldn't be there. But, I see no evidence that it shouldn't. However, it stands out to me because... The heaven of verse one is singular. The heaven of verse one is where God's throne was. Thus, capitalizing the heaven where men dwell is notable. Indeed, capitalization is a notable thing in English. So, claiming it to be seemingly strange that I would note it is absurd. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:The subject was the making of the whole man and referred to his distinct and seperable parts. As for your claim of emphasis only. Where is the proof of that? Why would a semicolon be used to seperate that very exact same things. As I said, one does not convey meaning by saying.. I made man, I made man ; yea, I made man. But, saying in effect...Yea, I made man; I created him, and I formed him, conveys the understanding that creating a lump of clay, and then forming a lump of clay is not the same thing, (as the definitions of the words allow) and that, both of these seperable actions were indeed required to make a man.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4971 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
quote:I guess we are done sharing out understandings on these chapters then. I appreciated your responsiveness but, I see no reason to discuss clues that I myself don't see in the text.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024