99% evolutionists, suggestion for site maker

Ah, I see. Well, I'm convinced, for now at least.

Mr Jack responds to messenjaH:

quote:

---

quote:

---

...the bible, in genesis, it clearly says "day", I cant see how anyone can reinterpret that as being "billions of years".

---

​

Actually, MessanjaH, that's incorrect. The hebrew word used in the bible does not exactly translate to 'day'. 'Day' is one of it's possible meanings, it can also mean an 'unspecified' length of time. In a similar way to how in english one might say 'in my father's day' meaning the years during which one's father was a youngman, or an more elderly gent might refer to 'in my day'.

---

True, but misleading.That is, note what you did: You had to phrase it in a specific way such as "my father's day."If you were to say in English, "the evening and the morning of the first day," the general impression would be of a 24-hour, literal day.And the same thing exists in Hebrew. When Hebrew uses the phrase, "the evening and the morning," then it means a literal, 24-hour day.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

"When Hebrew uses the phrase, "the evening and the morning," then it means a literal, 24-hour day."Except when it doesn't, of course. Who knows what the original writer meant? Is there a footnote somewhere in the bible that stipulates exactly what was meant by 'day'? For all we know the writer was an exceptionally poetical person who took the liberty of describing eons with the term 'day'. After all, the god he describes is so awesomely big in every respect that eons must be as days for him. Or something along those lines. I guess we will never know.

buzsaw writes:

quote:

---

So to your last question, Schraf, the last person I'd want me or my children as health advisor/practitioner is a PHD doc.

---

I should hope not! A PhD doc is a researcher. The doctors you see in the hospital have an MD, not a PhD.You do understand the difference between a "doctor of medicine" and a "doctor of philosophy," yes?Why are you going to the research section of the hospital for your physical? Shouldn't you be seeing a general practitioner?

Parasomnium responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

When Hebrew uses the phrase, "the evening and the morning," then it means a literal, 24-hour day.

---

​

Except when it doesn't, of course.

---

And where doesn't it? That's the point: When Hebrew wants to use the word "day" to refer to an indefinite period of time, it doesn't use the construction of "evening and morning." Instead, that's an indication of a literal day.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

"When Hebrew wants to use the word "day" to refer to an indefinite period of time, it doesn't use the construction of "evening and morning." Instead, that's an indication of a literal day."There's an old riddle (I believe it's from greek mythology, but that's irrelevant here) that goes, loosely paraphrased:"What goes on four legs in the morning, on two during the day, and on three in the evening?"Imagine that translated to Hebrew.You're not going to tell me that Hebrew doesn't allow poetic license, are you?[This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-12-2003]

quote:

---

You're not going to tell me that Hebrew doesn't allow poetic license, are you?

---

This can't be used as an argument. You need something better than 'it could be poetic license' or you end up with a situation where anything can mean anything. There is nothing in Gen. 1 to suggest that YOWM means anything but an evening to evening day. Gen. 2 does use the construction BYOWM-- the 'B' meaning 'in'-- so you end up with 'in the day.' You might be able to argue that this means 'an indefinite time' but that doesn't fix Gen. 1.I've argued this point several times hoping that someone could provide some scholarly support for the assertion, but so far no one has.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

John,Why are you quoting me out of context? I wasn't talking about Genesis. Or the Bible, for that matter. Rrhain stated rather vehemently that if Hebrew (the language I take that to mean, not the body of Hebrew words that make up the Hebrew bible) wants to express an indefinite period of time by way of the concept 'day', then the words 'evening' and 'morning' cannot be used. And I gave an example of a sentence that uses those words to indicate an indefinite period of time and asked him to imagine it to be translated into Hebrew. That's not an impossibility, is it? (If it is, then, frankly, Hebrew sucks.) My reference to poetic license merely queried the possibility to say something in Hebrew in a non-literal, symbolic way. And yes, that implies that things mentioned in the Hebrew bible could also be expressed in a non-literal, symbolic way, but I don't care. I simply pointed out a minor flaw in Rrhain's logic.But now that we ARE talking about Genesis, 'poetic license' doesn't necessarily mean you "end up with a situation where anything can mean anything." If someone wants his public to understand what he's talking about, his poetic license goes only so far. If he talks about concepts of time, he uses metaphors that can be understood as being about time. If his metaphors reminded people of refridgerators, they wouldn't do him much good, would they? I maintain that the argument of poetic license isn't a bad argument at all, vis-a-vis the meaning of what's said in Genesis.If you respond, please do it smilingly. I hate to be grumbled at.
(Put that in grammatically correct form, I dare you.)Cheers.

Parasomnium responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

When Hebrew wants to use the word "day" to refer to an indefinite period of time, it doesn't use the construction of "evening and morning." Instead, that's an indication of a literal day.

---

​

There's an old riddle (I believe it's from greek mythology, but that's irrelevant here) that goes, loosely paraphrased:

​

"What goes on four legs in the morning, on two during the day, and on three in the evening?"

---

Are you deliberately being obtuse?Where in that sentence do we find the specific phrase, "and the evening and the morning"?The point, Parasomnium, is not that whenever we find the words "evening" and "morning" anywhere within a single utterance that includes the word "day" that it means a literal, 24-hour day.It is that when Hebrew uses the very specific phrase, "the evening and the morning" to describe a "day," that specific phrase, no interruptions with other words, then it means a literal, 24-hour day.

quote:

---

You're not going to tell me that Hebrew doesn't allow poetic license, are you?

---

Of course it does.But where in that phrase would you insert the specific phrase, "And the evening and the morning were the first day" or something akin to that? You don't get to break up the words "the evening and the morning." They have to stick together in that, specific phrasing. And they have to both be in reference to the single object, "day." That is, you don't talk about the morning as a separate entity from the evening but rather, you must use "evening" and "morning" as a modifier for "day."For example, in English there is a stock phrase, "black as ink." It means very, very dark. But it has to be phrased in that way. You can't just mix up those words and expect it to mean the same thing. "As I was in a rush, I used the pen I had which had red ink, not black." That simply doesn't mean the same thing. Even though it has all the words of the phrase, you only get the meaning of "very, very dark" when you construct the specific phrase, "black as ink."For you to pretend that the Riddle of the Sphinx has any relation to the phrasing of the Bible, simply because it uses the words "evening" and "morning" and "day" is disingenuous at best.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

quote:

---

Why are you quoting me out of context?

---

How can I quote you out of context when your post is just above mine? The context is less than twenty lines away.

quote:

---

I wasn't talking about Genesis. Or the Bible, for that matter.

---

This branch of the thread has been about Genesis since about post # 61. You responded to post # 107, which is quite plainly about Genesis. Post #106 concluded a brief exchange Mr. Jack and I had about Genesis. Since you posted to the thread it seemed fairly reasonable to assume that you were joining the conversation.

quote:

---

Rrhain stated rather vehemently that if Hebrew (the language I take that to mean, not the body of Hebrew words that make up the Hebrew bible) wants to express an indefinite period of time by way of the concept 'day', then the words 'evening' and 'morning' cannot be used.

---

I believe that Rhhain meant rather specifically the phrasing in Genesis of 'and the evening and the morning were the first day.' I don't think he meant the words 'evening' and 'morning' couldn't appear anywhere in the sentence, no matter how it is constructed.

quote:

---

And I gave an example of a sentence that uses those words to indicate an indefinite period of time and asked him to imagine it to be translated into Hebrew. That's not an impossibility, is it?

---

No. It could be done, which is why I didn't argue about your suggestion but instead pointed out that it doesn't get you anywhere. Given the context of the thread, it seems an appropriate response. If your sole purpose was to argue a theoretical possibility, I suppose there is no more to be said.

quote:

---

But now that we ARE talking about Genesis, 'poetic license' doesn't necessarily mean you "end up with a situation where anything can mean anything."

---

You don't talk much with fundamentalists do you?

quote:

---

If someone wants his public to understand what he's talking about, his poetic license goes only so far. If he talks about concepts of time, he uses metaphors that can be understood as being about time.

---

Ah... correct. Now we are moving out of 'what can be done' and into 'what actually was done.' In other words, we are getting better than 'it could be poetic license' by analysing the text and trying to find what sort of symbolism the ancient Hebrew authors actually used.

quote:

---

I maintain that the argument of poetic license isn't a bad argument at all, vis-a-vis the meaning of what's said in Genesis.

---

Yes, if you could demonstrate similar word usage elsewhere in the text. I agree with you in a sense. It could be poetic license, but I see no reason to think it is; and the simple fact that it could be-- with no further evidence-- poetic license is effectively meaningless.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Parasomnium responds to John:

quote:

---

Rrhain stated rather vehemently that if Hebrew (the language I take that to mean, not the body of Hebrew words that make up the Hebrew bible) wants to express an indefinite period of time by way of the concept 'day', then the words 'evening' and 'morning' cannot be used.

---

No, I did not.First, I meant Ancient Hebrew, not Modern Hebrew. Therefore, your assumption that I wasn't referring to "the body of Hebrew words that make up the Hebrew Bible" is mistaken. That is precisely what I was referring to.Second, I most certainly did not say anything even remotely akin to "the words 'evening' and 'morning' cannot be used with 'day' to refer to an indefinite period of time."Instead, what I specifically said was this: Now, what do you think this means? You do know what the word "phrase" means, yes? It means that I am referring to the entire expression taken as a whole exactly as written. It does not mean the individual words scattered haphazardly throughout the utterance.

quote:

---

And I gave an example of a sentence that uses those words to indicate an indefinite period of time and asked him to imagine it to be translated into Hebrew.

---

But the example you used could not contain the specific phrase I mentioned, "the evening and the morning" of the first day. It merely used the words "evening" and "morning" and "day" as independent entities. This is in complete contrast to the direct statement I made which tied "evening" and "morning" together into a single phrase and used it as a descriptor for "day."

quote:

---

I simply pointed out a minor flaw in Rrhain's logic.

---

Incorrect.You constructed a strawman. I did not argue what you claimed I did.

quote:

---

If he talks about concepts of time, he uses metaphors that can be understood as being about time.

---

Precisely! And in Ancient Hebrew, the phrase "the evening and the morning" when used to describe a day, especially an ordinal day, means a literal, 24-hour day.

quote:

---

I maintain that the argument of poetic license isn't a bad argument at all, vis-a-vis the meaning of what's said in Genesis.

---

Except that the metaphor used indicates a literal, 24-hour day. If the author wanted to indicate a time period longer than a day, then he would [b][i]not[/b][/i] describe it as "the evening and the morning of the first day." When you phrase it that way, it indicates a literal, 24-hour day.[The highlighted "not" in the next-to-last sentence added by edit. Thanks to Parasomnium for catching it.]------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM![This message has been edited by Rrhain, 08-13-2003]

Rrhain,I didn't know "the evening and the morning" is an expression in Hebrew and I also didn't understand that you actually were talking about the (limited) body of Hebrew in the Hebrew bible, instead of the (broader) language Hebrew. Hence the misunderstanding: my interpretation of what you said was too liberal.So far, so good.But you end with:"[...] the metaphor used indicates a literal, 24-hour day. If the author wanted to indicate a time period longer than a day, then he would describe it as "the evening and the morning of the first day." When you phrase it that way, it indicates a literal, 24-hour day."No you have me all confused again.

John,When I said you quoted me out of context, I meant that you picked out one sentence of mine, leaving out the rest which indicated I was talking about language, not a specific text. O well, nevermind."If your sole purpose was to argue a theoretical possibility, I suppose there is no more to be said."
I second that.Remind me not to talk to you about language anymore. It gives me a tremendous headache. Well, I suppose there really was a smile on your face then.Cheers.

Parasomnium responds to me:

quote:

---

But you end with:

​

"[...] the metaphor used indicates a literal, 24-hour day. If the author wanted to indicate a time period longer than a day, then he would describe it as "the evening and the morning of the first day." When you phrase it that way, it indicates a literal, 24-hour day."

​

No you have me all confused again.

---

Ah, see, this is an example of a very bad habit of mine which I try very hard not to do but for some reason it happens over and over again:I drop my nots in typing. I don't know why. It isn't a simple typo like how I switch "b" and "g" (on the QWERTY keyboard, they are both typed with the left index finger moving over to the right from the home row..."b" being on the bottom row and "g" being on the home row.) No, this is the complete removal of an entire word from my statement. I do it all the time and it always bites me in the ass.There needs to be a "not" in there and should read as follows: My apologies for the confusion. I'll try not to let it happen again, but it is a failing of mine I have not been able to get control over.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Ow! That's awful! I mean, you look so young and then... Does it hurt? O, wait a minute... Sorry, nevermind. I thought you said 'nuts'. Forget what I said.Seriously now, I thought as much. But, being a thick skulled foreigner, I could always be missing some subtle nuance in what you said. Thanks for clearing it up.
And take care of your nuts.!NOTS! Take care of your nots, sorry.(Damn!)[This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 08-13-2003]