Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 76 of 1482 (782689)
04-27-2016 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by New Cat's Eye
04-27-2016 4:18 PM


Re: Chronology?
Hi Cat,
Cat writes:
Can you list the verses in the Bible in chronological order?
I think that was done around 1100 AD.
I don't know if they got the order of the verses correct or not.
But I do know that Genesis 2:4 claims to be the history of the day God created the heavens and the earth.
All generations list follow the declaration of these are the generations of.....
Just as the one in chapter 5.
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 73 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-27-2016 4:18 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-27-2016 5:01 PM ICANT has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 1482 (782690)
04-27-2016 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by ICANT
04-27-2016 4:53 PM


Re: Chronology?
Can you list the verses in the Bible in the order in which they occurred in time?
Like this:
Gen 1:1
Gen 2:4 - ?
Gen 1:2 - Gen 2:3
Gen 5? - ???
Edited by Cat Sci, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 4:53 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 9:52 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 78 of 1482 (782712)
04-27-2016 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by New Cat's Eye
04-27-2016 5:01 PM


Re: Chronology?
Hi Cat,
Cat writes:
Can you list the verses in the Bible in the order in which they occurred in time?
Genesis 1:1 took place in the beginning whenever that was.
Genesis 2:4 is the history of the day God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 2:5-4:24 is the history of the day God created the heavens and the earth and took place the same day God created the heavens and the earth.
That is what the text says.
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 77 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-27-2016 5:01 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-28-2016 9:46 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 79 of 1482 (782713)
04-27-2016 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by jar
04-27-2016 4:46 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
Hi jar,
jar writes:
It is a shame that Christianity has tried to create the impression that the Bible (any of the different Canons) is actually one book with some consistent purpose. It's not. Trying to claim that Jeremiah is in anyway related to Genesis 1 or that Genesis 2&3 are related in anyway to Genesis 1 other than by being stories selected by a committee of Canon is doing the Bible a great disservice.
At what time was the earth in the condition described in Jeremiah 4:23-26 according to the Bible?
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 75 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 4:46 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by jar, posted 04-28-2016 8:46 AM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


(1)
Message 80 of 1482 (782714)
04-27-2016 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by jar
04-27-2016 8:18 AM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
Jar writes:
The fable is the justification for the Jewish week and the Sabbath. The whole of Genesis 1 through Genesis 2:4 is where the week and the Sabbath are created.
On each of six days the god character works and on the seventh day the god character does no work.
Each day begins with evening and runs trough the night and the next daylight or as it is named in the story "Day" But "a day" the period of time, is a Night and a Day.
The Jewish week is composed of seven days, each begins at sundown and runs until the next sundown. On six consecutive days Jews work but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, they can do no work.
While I don't agree with jar's denigrating descriptions of divinely inspired Scripture, I agree with the gist of what he says here. The early chapters of Genesis emphasize Sabbath (and also Temple). The creation has been put into a seven-day structure in order to model the human work week and Sabbath (see Ex 20). But the Sabbath emphasis is already present in Gen 1:1 (Count the words in Hebrew; there are seven. The same thing could have been said in five words.)
In addition, there is a Temple emphasis in the first few chapters of Genesis. As some biblical scholars have noted, Eden seems to be a sort of cosmic temple. Man is told to "tend and keep" the garden; these same verbs are used of priestly temple duties later.
jar writes:
That is all there is in Genesis 1.
I disagree; there's a LOT more in the text than this!
For one thing, there is a strong polemic against pagan sun and moon gods. After the strong emphasis on "naming" things in the first three days, the sun and moon are buried in the middle of the account (on day 4) and are NOT named, but just described as the "greater" and the "lesser" lights. This "dissing" of the sun and moon stresses the fact that they are merely created objects, not deities.
Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.
Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 8:18 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by jar, posted 04-28-2016 8:57 AM kbertsche has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 81 of 1482 (782715)
04-27-2016 11:44 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by kbertsche
04-27-2016 7:34 AM


Hi kbertsche
kbertsche writes:
What makes them proper nouns is the fact that they are names for things. The text says that God called (קָרָא ) the light "Day". If you look up קָרָא in BDB, you'll see under the Qal stem:
quote:
6. call = name
a. (early and most common usage), call one’s name (שֵׁם ) so and so
.
What happened to the first 5 definitions.
Biblical Hebrew Overview
A noun is the name of a person, place, or thing.
Properties 1) Gender, 2) number, 3)person, 4) case.
I don't find anything about proper nouns.
Why is it that most people today that talk about Biblical Hebrew want to make it a modern language. It has been dead for over 2,000 years.

"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 69 by kbertsche, posted 04-27-2016 7:34 AM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2016 2:14 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 85 by kbertsche, posted 04-28-2016 7:28 AM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 82 of 1482 (782716)
04-28-2016 12:26 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by kbertsche
04-27-2016 7:06 AM


Re: The heavens and the earth
Hi kbertsche
kbertsche writes:
I agree; Gen 1 is narrative, not poetry. But it is highly stylized and highly structured narrative. Although it is not poetry, it contains numerous poetic elements such as imagery, figures of speech, and repetition.
Genesis 1 and Genesis 1:1 are two different things.
Genesis 1:1 is a complete declarative statement of completed action by God producing the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 1:2-2:3 is the story of God repairing damage caused to the earth by an unknown cause.
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 68 by kbertsche, posted 04-27-2016 7:06 AM kbertsche has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2016 2:18 AM ICANT has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 83 of 1482 (782717)
04-28-2016 2:14 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by ICANT
04-27-2016 11:44 PM


I don't find anything about proper nouns.
As I have remarked to you on previous occasions, saying you cannot 'find' something is not an argument. In this case what you appear to be doing is simply declaring a hole in your own knowledge. I recall that you advanced a similar 'argument' to claim that you could not find a description of gravity as the warpring of space-time by mass despite the fact that I provided you with three article references and a textbook stating exactly that principle.
I can easily find references to proper nouns in ancient Hebrew in the following places:
http://www.hebrew4christians.com/..._construct_relation.html
Hebrew Bible & Ancient Near Eastern Studies (HBANES) | Near Eastern Languages & Civilization | University of Washington
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/lessons_14.html
Category:Hebrew nouns - Wiktionary
And in many other places. It turns out that proper nouns in ancient languages are both distinct from indefinite nouns, and are defined pretty much the same way we define them in English.
Why is it that most people today that talk about Biblical Hebrew want to make it a modern language.
Why is it that one self described expert fails to notice that even ancient folks had definite names for person, places and things?
Beyond that, I am sure everyone noticed that nothing you have posted refutes the point kbertsche actually made. Namely that the term day is used both to refer to the daylight of a day and to the entire 24 period including evening and morning. Can I resume that you have no response to that question other than to admit your own lack of knowledge within a topic on which you claim to be proficient?
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 11:44 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by ICANT, posted 04-29-2016 12:42 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 1482 (782718)
04-28-2016 2:18 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by ICANT
04-28-2016 12:26 AM


Re: The heavens and the earth
Genesis 1:2-2:3 is the story of God repairing damage caused to the earth by an unknown cause.
Unknown cause? Neither cause nor effect is described in the text.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by ICANT, posted 04-28-2016 12:26 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by ICANT, posted 04-29-2016 12:55 AM NoNukes has replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 85 of 1482 (782729)
04-28-2016 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by ICANT
04-27-2016 11:44 PM


ICANT writes:
kbertsche writes:
What makes them proper nouns is the fact that they are names for things. The text says that God called (קָרָא ) the light "Day". If you look up קָרָא in BDB, you'll see under the Qal stem:
quote:
6. call = name
a. (early and most common usage), call one’s name (שֵׁם ) so and so
.
What happened to the first 5 definitions.
They are there in BDB, as you can check. They are variations of "to call, proclaim", which is the main meaning of the word. But for its use in the first three days of Gen 1, definition 6 is the appropriate one.
ICANT writes:
Biblical Hebrew Overview
A noun is the name of a person, place, or thing.
Properties 1) Gender, 2) number, 3)person, 4) case.
I don't find anything about proper nouns.
Why is it that most people today that talk about Biblical Hebrew want to make it a modern language. It has been dead for over 2,000 years.
I assume you have a copy of "GKC" (Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar)? I believe it is public domain and is available online in a few places. It has a section on "proper names":
quote:
125. Determination of Nouns in general. Determination of Proper Names.
Brockelmann, Grundriss, i. 466 ff.
[ 125a] 1. A noun may either be determinate in itself, as a proper name or pronoun (see below, d and i), or be made so by its context. In the latter case, the determination may be effected either by prefixing the article (see 126), or by the connexion of the noun (in the construct state) with a following determinate genitive, and consequently also (according to 33 c) by its union with a pronominal suffix ( 127 a). It is to be taken as a fundamental rule, that the determination can only be effected in one of the ways here mentioned; the article cannot be prefixed to a proper name, nor to a noun followed by the genitive, nor can a proper name be used in the construct state. Deviations from this rule are either only apparent or have arisen from a corruption of the text.
[ 125d] 2. Real proper nouns, as being the names of things (or persons) only once met with, are sufficiently determinate in themselves. Such names, therefore, as ‏יהוה‎, ‏דָּוִד‎, ‏יַעֲקֹב‎, ‏כְּנַעַז‎, ‏סְדֹּם do not admit of the article, nor can they be in the construct state. On the other hand, not only gentilic names (as denoting the various individuals belonging to the same class), but also all those proper names, of which the appellative sense is still sufficiently evident to the mind, or at least has been handed down from an earlier period of the language, frequently (often even as a rule) take the article (according to 126 e), and may even be followed by a genitive.
[ 125i] 3. Of the pronouns, the personal pronouns proper (the separate pronouns, 32) are always determinate in themselves, since they can denote only definite individuals (the 3rd person, also definite things). For the same reason the demonstrative pronouns ( 34) are also determinate in themselves, when they stand alone (as equivalent to substantives), either as subject (Gn 5:29) or as predicate (e. g. זֶה הַיּוֹם this is the day, Ju 4:14; ‏אֵלֶּה חַדְּבָרִים these are the words, Dt 1:1), or as object (e. g. ‏אֶר-זֹאת‎ 2 S 13:17), or as genitive (‏מְחִיר זֶה‎ 1 K 21:2), or finally when joined to a preposition (‏לְזֹאת‎ Gn 2:23; ‏בָּזֶה 1 S 16:8, see 102 g).

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 11:44 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by ICANT, posted 04-29-2016 1:36 AM kbertsche has not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


(2)
Message 86 of 1482 (782731)
04-28-2016 8:39 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by ICANT
04-27-2016 4:42 PM


Re: Immutable word of God
But when it comes to the actual beginning to exist of the universe science is silent.
That is because science does not make proclamations that it cannot support with evidence. This is in sharp contrast to what creation stories do.
Science can go only so far back in time and it comes to a place where the math will not work so nothing can be seen past that point.
And that is a fact. If we cannot see then we cannot see. Speculation, while useful, is a poor substitute for observation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 4:42 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by ICANT, posted 04-29-2016 1:40 AM Dogmafood has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 87 of 1482 (782732)
04-28-2016 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by ICANT
04-27-2016 10:11 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
ICANT writes:
At what time was the earth in the condition described in Jeremiah 4:23-26 according to the Bible?
According to the Bible that state that exists in Jeremiah 4:23-26 only exists in that passage and it is not referring to a beginning but a threatened ending, a period of destruction.
That is the great error of quote mining, to loose context and meaning. That passage itself shows it is not referring to Genesis 1 since it talks of cities being torn down and fruitful places made desolate.
The passage goes on:
quote:
27 For thus hath the Lord said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.
28 For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black; because I have spoken it, I have purposed it, and will not repent, neither will I turn back from it.
29 The whole city shall flee for the noise of the horsemen and bowmen; they shall go into thickets, and climb up upon the rocks: every city shall be forsaken, and not a man dwell therein.
30 And when thou art spoiled, what wilt thou do? Though thou clothest thyself with crimson, though thou deckest thee with ornaments of gold, though thou rentest thy face with painting, in vain shalt thou make thyself fair; thy lovers will despise thee, they will seek thy life.
31 For I have heard a voice as of a woman in travail, and the anguish as of her that bringeth forth her first child, the voice of the daughter of Zion, that bewaileth herself, that spreadeth her hands, saying, Woe is me now! for my soul is wearied because of murderers.
The Bible is not one book, not one story but an anthology of anthologies and should not be treated as one thing with one purpose.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 10:11 PM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(2)
Message 88 of 1482 (782733)
04-28-2016 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by kbertsche
04-27-2016 11:42 PM


Re: what Genesis 1 is all about.
kb writes:
jar writes:
That is all there is in Genesis 1.
I disagree; there's a LOT more in the text than this!
For one thing, there is a strong polemic against pagan sun and moon gods. After the strong emphasis on "naming" things in the first three days, the sun and moon are buried in the middle of the account (on day 4) and are NOT named, but just described as the "greater" and the "lesser" lights. This "dissing" of the sun and moon stresses the fact that they are merely created objects, not deities.
You are right; I should have said, as I have in other posts in this thread, "That is all that is created in Genesis 1."
And you raise a good point, one I have tried to make many times here at EvC when dealing with Genesis 1 as well as Genesis 2&3, there are other important things in the stories. Your point about the sun and moon not being named is a great example. There is also the god described in Genesis 1 that is entirely different than the God found in the earlier Genesis 2&3 tale. The god character in Genesis 1 is far more sophisticated then the somewhat bumbling god of Genesis 2&3; it is supremely competent, creating by thought alone, overarching, methodical, sure, but also aloof, apart and not interacting with the creation.
I have long been fascinated by two facts, that the younger story was placed first and that no attempt was made to make the two creation myths jib. I have reached a tentative conclusion on those issues but that may be better in another thread.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by kbertsche, posted 04-27-2016 11:42 PM kbertsche has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Aussie, posted 04-28-2016 2:34 PM jar has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 1482 (782737)
04-28-2016 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by ICANT
04-27-2016 9:52 PM


Re: Chronology?
Genesis 1:1 took place in the beginning whenever that was.
Genesis 2:4 is the history of the day God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 2:5-4:24 is the history of the day God created the heavens and the earth and took place the same day God created the heavens and the earth.
That is what the text says.
Where does the text say to omit Gen 4:25-26 from the history of that day?
So this is how it goes:
Gen 1:1
Gen 2:4 - Gen 4:24or26
Gen 1:2 - Gen 2:3
Then it goes to Gen 5?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by ICANT, posted 04-27-2016 9:52 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2016 1:51 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 102 by ICANT, posted 04-29-2016 2:03 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 90 of 1482 (782756)
04-28-2016 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by New Cat's Eye
04-28-2016 9:46 AM


Re: Chronology?
ICANT writes:
Genesis 1:1 took place in the beginning whenever that was.
There appear to be uncountable ways to look at the text, all of which are at least self-consistent. I personally have always looked at Genesis 1:1 as an introduction to Genesis, similar in construct to the "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..." in a Tale of Two Cities. I don't think there are any real strong cues forcing my interpretation, but in my opinion, the interpretation seems to work.
On the other hand, ICANT's interpretation requires making up stuff. The universe was created in 1:1, and then silently fell apart before 1:2? Where does that come from? Then a complete denial that day 4 is part of creation? No creation week then? ICANT claims that the ancient Hebrew used in 1:1 absolutely requires his reading.
I think ICANT's reading comes from an attempt to manage some kind of consistency with science. He buttresses his reading with an appeal to expertise in ancient Hebrew. But any of us who have seen his debates with other people having some knowledge understand that his language interpretation arguments quickly devolve into a kind of numerology with meaning swinging from hinges that are fastened in a door frame of ambiguity.
Defending OEC based on a literal reading of the text requires a far greater straining against the text than does defending YEC. In fact I have seen many atheist on these forums express the opinion that YECs are at least sincere about their reading of the Bible as compared to OEC. Of course being a YEC absolutely requires denial of current reality. Neither approach is viable in my opinion.
Genesis 1 and 2 are written by someone who may or may not have been capable of smelting iron. Some things written therein don't seem to be right. Is that really surprising?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-28-2016 9:46 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-28-2016 2:39 PM NoNukes has replied
 Message 103 by ICANT, posted 04-29-2016 2:39 AM NoNukes has not replied
 Message 112 by kbertsche, posted 05-01-2016 11:32 AM NoNukes has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024