Questions of Reliability and/or Authorship

To ICANT and AM,
I think this is exacally what we were looking for at this point. Thank you ICANT for stepping up to the plate with the Hebrew imput and other information. I know AM appreciates it as well. I think I will set back and observe this discussion until such time as I see an appropriate time to jump in. This is a very interesting discussion so far, especially the way you two are approaching it. Outstanding!!D Bertot Edited by bertot, : No reason given.

ICANT wrote: You are not hearing what I am attempting to share with you. First of all, there will always be differences between the two different creation texts, because they are two different narratives written in two different styles, focusing on two different aspects of creation.If you will notice, Gen. 1:11 & 12 describe grasses and trees being brought forth from the earth prior to there being a sun and a moon to indicate seasons, days, and years upon the earth. This is a deliberate contextual anomaly. The author knew quite well that without the sun and the moon grasses and trees would not be able to grow. The author is saying, “Do not try to take this narrative factually or literally.”Gen. 1:11 states, “And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree...”
Gen. 1:12 states, “And the earth brought forth grasses, and herbs yielding seed after his kind, and the trees yielding fruit...”God did not plant seeds! God told the earth to bring forth grass, herb, tree, and the earth complied. How is that different than Gen. 2:9 where it states, “And God caused to sprout from the ground all trees...”? Gen. 1:12 states that, “the earth brought forth ... the trees” because God told it to, and Gen. 2:9 “God caused to sprout from the ground all trees”.The two different narratives are not identical, but they are similar. Plus, the human archetype that is “formed of dust from the ground” in Gen. 2:7, is taken and put into Eden”away from the ground from which it was taken”in Gen 2:8. There is no human archetype on planet earth when the trees are caused to sprout in Gen. 2:9. There is no human archetype on planet earth when the earth brings forth grasses, herbs, and trees in Gen. 1:12.Are you able to see the correlation? The two Narratives are not supposed to be identical, but there is a relationship.

quote:

---

autumnman writes:the beasts of the field and fowl of the air of Gen. 2:19 & 20 would correspond with Gen. 1:24 & 25

---

The Eden Narrative purposely omits any mention of any water-established aquatic creatures. I have already explained my perspective as to why the author chose this omission”to focus the narrative on the creation of human consciousness. Gen. 2:7 is the initial step of God’s creation of humanity and human consciousness on the earth. The next step is God putting the human archetype within the garden in Eden, which is not part of planet earth or the ground from which the human archetype was initially taken (see Gen. 3:23 “God sent it/him forth from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which it was taken.”). Compare Gen. 3:23 to Gen. 2:5 where it states that the human archetype was “to work the ground.”If the human archetype is not fully created in the garden of Eden - thus not yet part of the earth - until Gen 3:22, and does not return from the garden of Eden to the earth “to work the ground from which it was taken” until Gen. 3:23 & 24, then the flying creatures of the air and the beasts of the field are formed from the ground, Gen. 2:19 & 20, prior to there being a human species on planet earth. This “woman” you claim is mentioned in Gen. 2:22 is in fact the manifestation of the “helper” mentioned in Gen. 2:18 and 20. Am I correct? So, according to your interpretation of the text, this “helper/woman” was not found among the beasts of the field and flying creatures of the heavens. Does that actually make sense to you?Furthermore, the Hebrew masculine noun for “helper” denotes “strength” in its verb root, whereas the Hebrew feminine noun for “woman” denotes “weakness” in its verb root. Why would God literally “build” a weak helper called woman? God would not!It is also important to point out that the Hebrew terms for “male and female” are never used anywhere in the Hebrew Eden Narrative. This is an extremely important fact that is commonly disregarded by those who attempt a “pseudo-historical” rendering of the two different narratives. God is a “spirit” and does not have a physical “image”, therefore, God’s image would be non-corporeal; alluding to the root of the Hebrew term for “image” which denotes “a shadow”. The terminology of “after God’s likeness” denotes “God’s creative abilities” since the Hebrew term literally means, “to imagine, form an idea, think, devise.” Read what I wrote above and perhaps some of this confusion will be cleared up. Furthermore, let’s go on the assumption that God got his stories straight, but it is we who have not yet been able to comprehend what God is conveying.I will respond to your other post regarding "death, Cain, Abel" in a bit.Regards,
Ger

I know there will always be differences as they are two different events taking place at two different times.There is no way to mesh them into one event, although that is the method put forth by most Bible students. It is kind of hard to know where you are coming from in Genesis 1:11, 12. As you have not given your interpretation of them yet.I only have the LXX to go by which says: According to its kind on the earth. Seed kind already on the earth.These two verses plainly state the seed was already on the earth and the seed is where everything came from. Where did those seed come from?LXX Genesis 2:9 says: No seed is mentioned. So since the man was put in Eden to keep the trees and plants and grasses and etc. He was not on the planet earth.So are you saying Eden was on some other planet?If so how did God plant the trees and all the other stuff in it?How did the river flow from Eden and water all the face of the earth? So it is your contention that the man was not complete in Genesis 2:7. Yes/No.It is your contention that Eden was on some other planet or place. Yes/No.Please explain what the man was supposed to cultivate and keep.
As stated here: If Eden was not on the planet earth how did the man dwell over against it? So was Jesus God in the flesh as He claimed when He said I and my Father are One? Yes/NoWas Jesus lying when He said, "If you have seen Me you have seen the Father"? Yes/No I know God got it right because He was there.We have just been brainwashed by religion to the point we can't read simple sentences and understand them.I have been told for 45 years that I am crazy with what I believe about what Genesis says about creation. I have been admonished by my college professors and brethren of like faith as well as those of other faith's. As far as eternity goes it really makes no difference what I believe. God is true and every man a liar.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."

ICANT: Let me start at the conclusion of your post: I tend to agree with you. I have a little saying, “The truth is I lie; do you believe me?” I am not claiming that what I have found in my research is “the truth.” I am claiming that what I am sharing with you is what I have found in my research. I do not claim to “be correct” or “an authority.” I am merely trying to share with you and bertot, and anyone else who may be interested that which I have discovered in the Kethib Hebrew Eden Narrative. If I can learn to convey what I have discovered in a coherent fashion I think you would find the discovery as amazing as I find it. I am still working on the “conveying” part of the equation. One of these days I may figure out how to properly explain what I find so astonishing in the Kethib Hebrew Eden Narrative. I agree with you and the same goes for me. Although not exactly the same, I too have been exposed to similar experiences. I guess that’s just part of the experience. I agree with the statement that, “we have been brainwashed by religion.” More than any other social and cultural force, “religion” essentially manipulates human language and with language, human thought and one’s worldview are manipulated also. The Spirit of God is in all of our noses {Job 27:3 ...and the spirit of God is in my nose). Wherever the “Spirit of God” dwells so there dwells God, and anyone who realizes this fact, they and The Father are One. So, Yes! Jesus was/is God in the flesh and he and the Father were/are One. No! Jesus was not lying. The following quote you gave from the Septuagint does not correspond with either the Samaritan Pentateuch or the Masoretic Kethib Text.

quote:

---

LXX 3:24 and caused him to dwell over against the garden of Delight,

---

quote:

---

Samaritan 3:24 and he drives out = the human species and he establishes from ancient time to the garden of Eden the krubiym...

---

quote:

---

Masoretic 3:24 and he drives out = the human species, and he establishes from ancient time to the garden of Eden the krubiym...

---

I do not know what Hebrew Text was employed in the 3rd century BCE when the Septuagint was rendered, but it is clear that neither the Samaritan Pentateuch or the Masoretic Kethib Hebrew Text correspond to what the Septuagint claims in Gen. 3:24.Back to your question:
Eden is not of planet earth, and the five rivers describe it as not being of planet earth. Yes! That is my contention. Yes! That is my contention.

quote:

---

LXX 15 And the Lord God took the man whom he had formed, and placed him in the garden of Delight, to cultivate and keep it.

---

The Septuagint Greek translation is again incongruent with both the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Masoretic Kethib Hebrew Text:

quote:

---

Samaritan 2:15 so God leads = the human species and he guides it through the garden of Eden in regard to serving her and preserving her.

---

quote:

---

Masoretic 2:15 so God leads = the human species and he guides it through the garden of Eden in regard to serving her and preserving her.

---

The two-fold command God issues in Gen. 2:16 & 17 is God leading and guiding the human species through the Garden/Paradise of Eden and showing the human species how to “serve” Paradise and “preserve” Paradise. That is what the Samaritan Pentateuch and Masoretic Kethib Hebrew Text describe.The phrase in the LXX, “took the man whom he had formed,” is only found in Gen. 2:8 according to the Samaritan and Masoretic Texts. Some other realm is more like it. Perhaps God’s abode and Eden are one and the same. At least that is what is indicated to me. Only metaphorical and symbolic “trees” exist in Eden/God’s abode. Real trees grow out of the ground of planet earth. Gen. 2:9 makes no mention of plants and grasses; only “trees, wood, articles of wood, gallows” all of which are the applications of the Hebrew masculine noun . The “first-un-named” river flows from God’s abode/Eden, and is therefore most likely “The River of Life.” From Eden “The River of Life” flows into the Garden/Paradise where exist = the human species, the tree of the life, and wood the knowledge of good and evil, and after nurturing Paradise, The River of Life divides and becomes four beginnings: 1. Surrounds the land to the East/spring. 2. Surrounds the land of the South/summer. 3. Flows eastward of Assyrian which is West/autumn of the Holy Land. 4. Is the Euphrates, the river of the North/winter.Eden is therefore the Sacred Central Mountain of God from which all life flows. All five of the rivers are metaphorical, figurative, and symbolic in nature. None of these five rivers are “real”, for the Tigris and Euphrates rivers do not flow from a single watershed, as well as many other reasons.Let's try to get some of this ironed out before too much starts cluttering the thread. What do you think?Regards,
GerEdited by autumnman, : No reason given.

The JPS MT says: If I am not mistaken serving her and preserving her would be taking care of the needs of the garden whatever they were.If I am not mistaken for man to dress and keep the garden would be taking care of the needs of the garden whatever they were.The LXX says cultivate and keep it. If I am not mistaken that means to take care of the needs of the garden whatever they were. Since that was 1000 years prior to Masoretes starting their work between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. It stands to reason that they were privy to manuscripts that was much older than the ones used by the Masoretes.The Septuagint was done by 6 scribes from each tribe of Israel. They would have used the best available copies of the day as is bore out by the DSS. Do you have a scripture for this belief or just your belief.In other words what is the reasoning for such a position? So is your reasoning that it has to be metaphorical because the Tigris and Euphrates rivers are not as described in Genesis?My question is, Why would they be the same.In Genesis 1:9, & 10 all the water was in one place and all the land was in one place. As in the scientific pangea.Since the earth was divided in the days of Peleg by God, why would everything be in the same place today as it was in the beginning?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."

ICANT: Your point is?????I see you did not address”

quote:

---

AM wrote: The phrase in the LXX, “took the man whom he had formed,” is only found in Gen. 2:8 according to the Samaritan and Masoretic Texts.

---

”which is not in the Samaritan Pentateuch that dates to the 5th century BCE:

quote:

---

Samaritan Pentateuch, Gen. 2:15 reads: so God leads = the human species and he guides it through the garden of Eden in regard to serving her and preserving her.

---

And you also did not address”

quote:

---

AM wrote: The two-fold command God issues in Gen. 2:16 & 17 is God leading and guiding the human species through the Garden/Paradise of Eden and showing the human species how to “serve” Paradise and “preserve” Paradise. That is what the Samaritan Pentateuch and Masoretic Kethib Hebrew Text describe.

---

The Hebrew Tanakh documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls support the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Masoretic Kethib Hebrew Old Testament. The Date of the origin of the Samaritan Pentateuch dates to the 5th century BCE. The Septuagint Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures dates to the 3rd century BCE. The following is a quote from post 3 of this thread by bertot:

quote:

---

EVIDENCE OF RELIABLE BIBLE TRANSMISSION The Old Testament: The Dead Sea Scrolls serve as strong evidence for the integrity of the Old Testament text. Prior to 1947, the earliest known Old Testament manuscripts went back only to about A.D. 1000. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Bible scholars have been able to compare the present day text with the text from more than 2,000 years ago. Textual critics have found that these ancient copies of Old Testament books are amazingly similar to the Massoretic text. Indeed, they serve as proof that the Old Testament text has been transmitted faithfully through the centuries.

---

quote:

---

AM wrote: Eden is not of planet earth, and the five rivers describe it as not being of planet earth.

---

Let’s start with Revelation 2:7 “He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” Reasonable reality also supports the reasoning of such a position. Because the author {God or whoever} wrote these texts for our ancestors and for us. God uses the actually Euphrates river as a border of the Promised Land when speaking to Abram in Gen. 15:18 “Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates.” Using a different Euphrates river in Gen. 2:14 would not make any logical sense, since as far as our most ancient ancestors were concerned there was only one “great river, the river Euphrates.” You appear to be missing the concept of “authorship” and “time of composition”, as well as “the audience” these texts were intended to reach, touch, and inform.Regards,
Ger

I don't know where you got that date from. The study of the DSS dates the Samaritan Pentateuch during the second generation of the Maccabees. That would be 164 BCE to 63 BCE.The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint are more agreeable than the Samaritan Pentateuch and the MT. To the point some thought the Samaritan Pentateuch was translated from the Septuagint.The DSS agrees with the Septuagint in places where the MT disagrees with the Septuagint.My copy of the Masoretic text says: My point was what is the difference when the LXX and the MT says man was to take care of the garden? So God took the man on a personal tour and explained his duties.Please explain what you mean by "serve" and "preserve" if it does not mean dress and keep it. So where do you suppose this Paradise of God to be?Would it happen to be here:

quote:

---

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

​

21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

​

21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

​

21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

​

21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

​

21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

​

21:7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

​

21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

​

21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.

​

21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

​

21:11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;

​

21:12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:

​

21:13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.

​

21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

​

21:15 And he that talked with me had a golden reed to measure the city, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof.

​

21:16 And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.

​

21:17 And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel.

​

21:18 And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass.

​

21:19 And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;

​

21:20 The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.

​

21:21 And the twelve gates were twelve pearls: every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.

​

21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

​

21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

​

21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

​

21:25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.

​

21:26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

​

21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

​

22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

​

22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

​

22:3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:

​

22:4 And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.

​

22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.

---

New heaven, New earth, New Jerusalem, river of life, with the tree of life on both sides.Yep sounds like it is on earth to me. You never cease to amaze me. The earth was divided in the days of Peleg. This was around 2204 BC that the continents shifted to where they are today. Abraham lived some 392 years later. So yes everything in his day was as it is today. I believe the Bible is God's road map for man from the cradle to the grave on earth and beyond to the eternity that awaits everyone ever conceived.It is suficient to reach, touch, and inform all men until today and until Jesus returns.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."

autumnman I had some questions I wanted to ask but did not want to add them to my last post as it was getting long.Was all the water in one place at one time as stated in Genesis 1:9?Was all the land mass in one place at one time as stated in Genesis 1:9?Was the earth divided in the days of Peleg as stated in Genesis 10:25?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."

I think I have found a spot here where I could interject a questions in this discussion by you two very talented fellows. Given the idea that you (AM) believe this is "mostly" figurative and poetic and ICANT has forceabley argued that it could be a very real story and real setting here on earth, would it not follow that the same author of the narrative (Moses)and the rest of book of Genesis percieved and contemplated as a real actual story? In other words the rest of the book and author dont appear to think it was simply a Hebrew wisdom poem, with no basis of actuality regarding Adam and Eve, etc. Who would be in a better position to determine its literary content than the author himself (Pentatuch).Why would God set up angels to block the entrance to a place where they could not get back to anyway. Assuming Eden is not on earth and they were banished to earth.Do you think Eden is the same place Jody Foster went to in Contact?., Ha HaDont spend alot of time on this, because I do not want to interrupt you fellows dialouge, as I am enjoying it greatly. Sometimes it just takes two people with such knowledge of things to make it flow like a river, very good stuff fellas.D BertotEdited by bertot, : No reason given.Edited by bertot, : No reason given.Edited by bertot, : No reason given.

Which, people should be aware of, is a legend began by Aristeas. As you know 6 x 12 is 72, but there's an older legend based on Exodus 24:1-9 where 70 elders went with Moses to receive the tablets from Yahweh. So it makes sense that the first translation into Greek (which technically should only be applied to the Greek Pentateuch)should be carried out by 70 elders. Which contradicts the fact that the Septuagint was one of the poorest translations of the OT known to man!

Thanks for your opinion but the folks who have been comparing it to the DSS have a different opinion.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."

ICANT: The date of origin of the Samaritan Pentateuch came from:

quote:

---

Data For The Sigla of the BHS, by R. I. Vasholz: Samaritan Pentateuch; Date Of Origin, 5th B.C.

---

quote:

---

Genesis 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward, in Eden; and there He put the man whom He had formed.Genesis 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

---

In Gen. 2:15 the verb rendered “took” is — which means “to take” in a variety of applications: take in hand, take along, take from, take to, select, choose, receive, take up, fetch, lead, conduct, capture, carry off. BDBThe above verb, “took”, is a perfectly good rendition. I chose “lead or conduct.”In Gen. 2:15 the verb rendered “put” is which means: to lead, to guide. BDB The verbal clause = and he guides him is rendered in your example “and he put him. Your example is derived from the verb = “to rest in a variety of applications, one of which is “to put. There is in fact another verb that some scholars employ in this verbal clause, it is meaning “to deposit” in a variety of applications, one of which is “to place. These two more orthodox renditions of Gen. 2:15 are in fact quite questionable since in Gen 2:8 God had already or syncopated = put, place, set the human archetype into the Garden in Eden.I have employed the verb which means: to lead, to guide. BDB because it is also applied in the sense of ”giving instruction, giving a command, laying charge upon” which is precisely what occurs in the following verse, Gen. 2:16. The concept of “serving Paradise” denotes being a good steward of this Holy Environment; this does not mean to begin forcing it to meet one’s own personal desires, but rather to live in a state of harmony with Paradise. The concept of “preserving Paradise” is set forth in the Two-Fold command God issues in Gen. 2:16 & 17, and when this “preservation process”, i.e. God’s commands, are not followed, Paradise is lost.The Hebrew verb I have rendered “serve” is ‘ which literally means in this context: to serve as a subject in the same manner as one would serve God (BDB 713). The Hebrew verb I have rendered “preserve” is which literally means in this context: to keep as to preserve as one would preserve a covenant with God. No! I know you are reading all of Revelation as if it is literally describing actual events that will truly come to pass some day. I do not read Revelation in that supernatural-oriented, mystical fashion. If your interpretation of the Revelation Text is in fact correct, what we are discussing really amounts to naught, nothing, zip. When Jesus finally returns I will surely go into the lake of fire, and you will be able to enjoy life with your God without the likes of me to clutter up a perfect world.As to your question: That is like asking me, “Where is God’s abode?” The Holy Mountain of God is everywhere. The Holy Mountain of God is a metaphorical reference to the place where all life emanates and where all life returns. Whether this Holy Mountain is called Eden = “pleasure”, or Horeb = “desolation”, or Sinai = “my wilderness”, it is understood as the Holy Mountain of God. Most ancient cultures have their God reign from a High Place. There is generally an actual mountain that exists within the region in which those people reside, and that mountain would symbolically represent that Holy High Place of God; there is the actual cult symbol”the actual mountain” and there is the reference of the symbol”God’s Divine Abode. Well, I’m glad I can still amaze someone. I thought I had lost the talent. Let me amaze you again: What you are implying makes utter nonsense to me. It may make perfect sense to you, but other than what I have written, I have no response to what you have conveyed in the above quote. From trying to perceive the Bible from your perspective”which is somewhat difficult for me”I find “God’s road map” that you are describing as extremely confusing, contradictory, and confusing.” I am not saying that you are “wrong”; I am merely saying that I don’t get what you are getting out of what you are explaining. I’ll do my best to keep trying. I am enjoying our discussions insightful and enjoyable. Regarding your questions concerning Gen. 1:9; I can only respond with another question at this time: Do you literally accept that the earth brought forth grass, herbs, and trees prior to there being a sun and a moon? If you do take Gen. 1:11 & 12 literally even though the sun and the moon did not yet exist, there is no way I can reply to your questions regarding Gen. 1:9.Insofar as Gen. 10:25 and Peleg existing when the earth/land was divided, appears to be stating that the land of Peleg’s father was divided between Peleg and his brother Joktan. At least that is how I interpret the verse.Regards,
Ger

Brian: I agree with you. The Hellenic Jews that performed the Alexandrian-Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures were definitely influenced by Hellenic/Greek mythology. Thus, the Greek-style myth of Adam and Eve came into being and has since been accepted as the Authorized Version of the Hebrew Eden Narrative.Good to hear from you,
Ger

Really AM be serious here. Are we to assume that YOU and YOU alone have the right to decide what should be taken literally or figurative in passages. There is no reason to assume that REV 21, could not be considered as literal at some point in the future. You have a nact for setting up what you want as literal and figurative and assuming that all should consider as such because you translated a word here or there. It takes more than the translation of a word to determine the literal or figurative nature of a verse or context.Simply because you do not like or find contradictory, from your perspective the idea of Hell, does not make it not real. One can certainly percieve these concepts and interpretations of words as literal or figurative, but as I said it takes the rest of the word of God to determine the validy and literal or figurative standpoints.Example, when ICANT asked you where paradise (Eden)was you immediatley qouted Rev 2:7. Now from your perspective you automatically set this up as a literal place, even if it encompasses the whole of God (everything and everywhere), so to speak.However, when ICANT quotes REV 21, you immediatley chastise him for considering it as literal. Why the double standard here and where did you get the idea that only you should decide what is literal and figuraive? Why would the literalness of Rev amount to nothing, naught and Zip? Why would where you spend eternity have anything to do with the "value" of the text. This quote seems to emotionally charged with no logical sense behind it.D BertotEdited by bertot, : No reason given.Edited by bertot, : No reason given.

bertot writes: bertot, my friend: I am sharing with you my personal opinion. I don’t have the right to decide anything for anyone else. So you disagree with me. Wow! That’s a revelation. So, show me Hell and then Hell will be real. Better yet, ask you God to show me Hell, and while He’s doing so maybe he can clear up this thing about Him being kind to the unthankful and the evil. If that is how you comprehend all of these separate yet canonized text, then that is your personal prerogative. Good for you. If that works for you, then go for it. I will rarely if ever agree with that mystical interpretation of these ancient Hebrew and Greek texts. But that should come as no surprise by now. Give me a break here, my friend. I did not set Eden up as a “literal” place. You must have misread what I wrote. Furthermore, I have only my opinion; I do not have the idea that only I should decide what is literal and figurative. I am sharing with you guys my personal opinion based upon the research I have performed, but I have never claimed to be an authority or always correct. If you disagree, share your disagreement and your reasons for disagreeing. That should not be so hard. My personal opinion is that the NT Book of Revelation is not a literal account of things that are to come to pass. That is my personal opinion. If I am wrong it appears as though when Jesus finally returns he is going to cast me right into the lake of fire. I guess we’ll find out when all that comes to pass.
All the best,
Ger