Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9216 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: KING IYK
Post Volume: Total: 920,681 Year: 1,003/6,935 Month: 284/719 Week: 72/204 Day: 4/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Two Floods and a confusing type of god.
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 33 (63866)
11-01-2003 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by greyline
08-14-2003 8:06 AM


Re: reply
I am going to try to answer this but first an important note. Ive just started to read through some of the issues on these forums and one of the Problems i see is one of translation. MOst people here are using some kind of english translation which sooner or later, has error or at least some terrible misaccuracy. I read, write, and speak fluent hebrew and can read a decent aramaic so can view the material in the orginal. And here we have a simple problem of mistranslation. The verse in the original does NOt say G_d regretted - the verb used is: says: "Vayinachem" - which actually means G-d changed [his relationship] how he connects to Man -[here from mercy to judgment - same verb used in numbers 23, dueteronomy 32, exodus 32, samuel I ch 15 -all use the verb 'nicham' which means -change of thought/direction on relations with].... SO now judgment comes in the form of a flood. Hebrew helps a lot. Besides which, in the talmud there is a general rule about anthrpomophic Torah statements- the Torah spoke in the language of man - ie G-d is portrayed with human characterisitcs so that limited physical man can have an understanding G-d's "reaction". Since finite man can not ever truly grasp infinite G-d, these terms are necessary for imparting the message..but G-d does not regret or smile or cry or laugh oe smell sacrficies - so what does it mean that G-d smells etc? that G-d accepted the offering and its as if he 'smelled' the good aroma, the way a man would enjoy a good scent..ie it was "pleasureable" to G-d,meaning he agreed with Noah's action. If anyone is interested, a lot of these questions can be easily answered in the Medieval Jewish commentaries -Rashi, Eben Ezra, Ramban [Gersonides], Abrabanel, Sforno, Tosfot, Ralbag, and later ones like Malbim, Hirsch, Kli Yakar, Ohr Hachaim,...there are anthologies too like The Torah Anthology -tranlsated to english by Aryeh Kaplan.. please check them out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by greyline, posted 08-14-2003 8:06 AM greyline has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Brad McFall, posted 11-01-2003 9:41 PM mendy has not replied
 Message 21 by Rei, posted 11-02-2003 12:26 AM mendy has replied
 Message 22 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 11-02-2003 8:51 AM mendy has replied
 Message 23 by Brian, posted 11-02-2003 9:08 AM mendy has replied

  
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 33 (63947)
11-02-2003 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Rei
11-02-2003 12:26 AM


Re: reply
Thanx. i cant say that im well versed in rabbinical analyses of torah but i have some background. i am enjoying my stay here -but i just cant find the time to answer as often as i like. Maybe on weekends but i hope no one is surprised if i have long pauses in my answers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Rei, posted 11-02-2003 12:26 AM Rei has not replied

  
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 33 (63950)
11-02-2003 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Brian
11-02-2003 9:08 AM


Re: reply
i should be more careful. i speak hebrew to toher hebrew speakers, Israelis mainly- but that is modern hebrew.
original means any of the current Mikraot Gedolot hebrew editions, or Artscroll, Stone, KEter etc. - basically, the masoretic text

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Brian, posted 11-02-2003 9:08 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 11-02-2003 4:41 PM mendy has replied
 Message 30 by Brian, posted 11-04-2003 9:15 AM mendy has replied

  
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 33 (63954)
11-02-2003 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by ConsequentAtheist
11-02-2003 8:51 AM


Re: reply
well, i didnt say the view i brought down was theonly view- it is anotrher view which i think has merit. it comes from the second explanation of Rashi on that verse and he brings the folling examples where nchm is used as explained -changed:
here they are: numbers 23, dueteronomy 32, exodus 32, samuel I ch 15

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 11-02-2003 8:51 AM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 33 (63955)
11-02-2003 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by ConsequentAtheist
11-02-2003 8:51 AM


Re: reply
regarding ONkelos and YOnatan:
your source for onkelos reads:
And it repented the Lord in His Word that He had made men upon the earth
What is "and it repented" mean ? that he 'was sorry' ? can G-d be sorry?
Here is Onkelos in aramaic - i give my own understading "Vetav Ado-nai bememrei arei avad yat adam" -literal translation [as best i can] = and G-d returned in his word that he made the man - sowhat does that mean? so you are right that it does not mean the same as the Rashi i brought befiore -but i am giving an altrernat eexplanation which is valid.
BTW, i think the best answer to this and all similar anthropomorphic statments is that the Torah spoken in mans language....its not meanrt literally that G-d regreted.was sorry/returned but that man didnt live up to expectations.....ok got to go

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 11-02-2003 8:51 AM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 33 (63957)
11-02-2003 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by ConsequentAtheist
11-02-2003 8:51 AM


Re: reply
last post- thanx for the book -i will try to read it...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 11-02-2003 8:51 AM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 33 (64822)
11-06-2003 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by ConsequentAtheist
11-02-2003 4:41 PM


Re: reply
not everyone accepts that; certainly most orthodox jews dont. our traditionhas that all or most of the text is as the original. True, i dont have any original copies, but neither does anyone else. its definitly beyond the medieval ages.
proof:
when you look in quotes in the mishna, midrash, tosefta, braita and talmud - all works that can be dated to 3rd and 6th century...they are the same as today, more or less...
-this is hearsay for me so please correct me if im wrong - the tefillin [phylacteries] that they found in the cumran caves and the texts of prophets that they found [dead sea scrolls] also indicated that it was the same. so while you are right that the house of Asher in tiberius and others put together the masoretic NOTES to freeze the text -im saying its only a way of preserving the past.... true, they had some inconsistencies, due to scribal errors, but compared to the massive amoun tof letters of the Ot, the percentage is tiny....
now youll want proof on that and i ma not equpped to give it. but i ca disagree

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 11-02-2003 4:41 PM ConsequentAtheist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 11-06-2003 10:15 PM mendy has not replied

  
mendy
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 33 (64824)
11-06-2003 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Brian
11-04-2003 9:15 AM


Re: reply
so let me clarify again -
its modern hebrew - but i could definitely speak biblical hebrew as it is very very similar..almost identical....
in structure its not at all different from what you read in the text..same subject verb order etc.....the 'modren' part of modern hebrew is mainly the new words for new things...not too many biblical Tv's, planes or vaccuum cleaners....and not the structure or main words used..those all come from biblical hebrew.. so,yes i could speak to any biblical jew...or jew of the times of the mishna.....or any era.... reading their words in the bible just like reading a modern hebrew newspaper...if you can read one, you can read the other...
as for the 'revival'... well, i guess now some 6 million jews worldwide speak fluently, and hunfreds of thousands more read....anyone of you could do it too..learning to read it is simple...i really recomend it..you could read the torah in hebrew and its a COMPLETLY DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE... bc all translations do injustive bc some words just cant be translated [and many questions are cleared up]
one example, which you are all free to check. the hrebrew word 'et' [in hebrew spelled alef-tav] -it appears THOUSANDS OF TIMES in the torah, from verse 1 till the end

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Brian, posted 11-04-2003 9:15 AM Brian 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 © 2025