Why I believe Creation is factually accurate – The Reality!

Originally posted by uva3021

Originally posted by edmc^2

Organic evolution says:

That “life comes from non-life”. No creator needed.

You don't say?

I know what you mean - abiogenesis - but I'm just using Dawkin's take.

Bottom line is - none so far whatever theory/process has disproven the fact that "life comes only from life" not the other way around - spontaneous gen or abio.

ty,
edmc2

reply to post by Sigismundus


Sigimundus – there’s no need to keep repeating yourself. I understand and know exactly what you’re saying – the mechanics / narrative behind it. But my question is very simple:

Is the word “ADAM” according to Strong's numbers correct?

That it can also mean “MANKIND” or “MAN” (plural) not just the “single” man/human Adam?

That is:

Strong's H120 - 'adam אָדָם

Transliteration
'adam

Pronunciation

ä•däm' (Key)



1) man, mankind

a) man, human being

b) man, mankind (much more frequently intended sense in OT)

c) Adam, first man

d) city in Jordan valley

Part of Speech ---- masculine noun ----- Root Word (Etymology) = From אָדַם (H119)

If yes then my statement stands that referring to BOTH MALE AND FEMALE as “ADAM” or “MAN” is correct.

That is:

Gen 5:1 : ‘MALE AND FEMALE created he them, and he called THEIR name ADAM in the day in which they were made…’

Here’s a very simple example:

“Man” is imperfect and prone to make mistakes.

Note: “Man” is plural meaning “ALL of MANKNIND”.

If not why not? Why do you think that Stong’s Concordance is in error on this specific subject?

A simple explanation will suffice – as the one you’ve provided is as you say “Clear as mud”.

I hope this is crystal clear enuff.

Ty,
Edmc2.

Originally posted by edmc^2
Bottom line is - none so far whatever theory/process has disproven the fact that "life comes only from life" not the other way around - spontaneous gen or abio.

Again with the same failed logic. No one has to disprove it. Those that support it have to prove it.

That is why someone asked if you could disprove pink unicorns on titan (or something like that). By your logic if you can't then they must be real.

reply to post by Sigismundus


here you go, maybe more than just the two languages will help with your confusion-

And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?

anh em đã được lại sanh, chẳng phải bởi giống hay hư nát, nhưng bởi giống chẳng hay hư nát, là bởi lời hằng sống và bền vững của Đức Chúa Trời.

And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.

כִּ֣י ׀ הִנֵּ֣ה הָאֶ֗בֶן אֲשֶׁ֤ר נָתַ֙תִּי֙ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹושֻׁ֔עַ עַל־אֶ֥בֶן אַחַ֖ת שִׁבְעָ֣ה עֵינָ֑יִם הִנְנִ֧י מְפַתֵּ֣חַ פִּתֻּחָ֗הּ נְאֻם֙ יְהוָ֣ה צְבָאֹ֔ות וּמַשְׁתִּ֛י אֶת־עֲוֹ֥ן הָאָֽרֶץ־הַהִ֖יא בְּיֹ֥ום אֶחָֽד׃

Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. If David therefore himself calleth him Lord; how then can he be his son? And the common people heard him gladly.

مَنِ ارْتَقَى إِلَى السَّمَاءِ ثُمَّ هَبَطَ مِنْهَا؟ وَمَنْ جَمَعَ الرِّيحَ فِي حَفْنَتَيْهِ؟ مَنْ صَرَّ الْمِيَاهَ فِي ثَوْبٍ؟ مَنْ أَرْسَى جَمِيعَ أَطْرَافِ الأَرْضِ؟ مَا اسْمُهُ وَمَا اسْمُ ابْنِهِ؟ أَخْبِرْنِي إِنْ كُنْتَ تَعْلَمُ.

For if Jesus had given them rest, he would never have afterwards spoken of another day.

Thi dersom Josva havde skaffet dem Hvile, da vilde han ikke tale om en anden Dag siden efter.

And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof. And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.

הִנֵּ֨ה אָנֹכִ֜י שֹׁלֵ֤חַ מַלְאָךְ֙ לְפָנֶ֔יךָ לִשְׁמָרְךָ֖ בַּדָּ֑רֶךְ וְלַהֲבִ֣יאֲךָ֔ אֶל־הַמָּקֹ֖ום אֲשֶׁ֥ר הֲכִנֹֽתִי׃

הִשָּׁ֧מֶר מִפָּנָ֛יו וּשְׁמַ֥ע בְּקֹלֹ֖ו אַל־תַּמֵּ֣ר בֹּ֑ו כִּ֣י לֹ֤א יִשָּׂא֙ לְפִשְׁעֲכֶ֔ם כִּ֥י שְׁמִ֖י בְּקִרְבֹּֽו׃

כִּ֣י אִם־שָׁמֹ֤עַ תִּשְׁמַע֙ בְּקֹלֹ֔ו וְעָשִׂ֕יתָ כֹּ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֲדַבֵּ֑ר וְאָֽיַבְתִּי֙ אֶת־אֹ֣יְבֶ֔יךָ וְצַרְתִּ֖י אֶת־צֹרְרֶֽיךָ׃

the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you

але дорогоцінною кров'ю Христа, як непорочного й чистого Ягняти

These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

Þessir munu heyja stríð við lambið. Og lambið og þeir, sem með því eru, hinir kölluðu og útvöldu og trúu, munu sigra þá, _ því að lambið er Drottinn drottna og konungur konunga."

His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

this that was borun after the fleisch pursuede him that was aftir the spirit, so now. But what seith the scripture? Caste out the seruaunt and hir sone, for the sone of the seruaunt schal not be eir with the sone of the fre wijf. And so, britheren, we ben not sones of the seruaunt, but of the fre wijf, bi which fredom Crist hath maad vs fre.

And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

Seine Augen sind wie eine Feuerflamme, und auf seinem Haupt viele Kronen; und er hatte einen Namen geschrieben, den niemand wußte denn er selbst.Und war angetan mit einem Kleide, das mit Blut besprengt war; und sein Name heißt "das Wort Gottes".

God, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all,
In these days hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world.Who being the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high.

Après avoir autrefois, à plusieurs reprises et de plusieurs manières, parlé à nos pères par les prophètes,
Dieu, dans ces derniers temps, nous a parlé par le Fils, qu'il a établi héritier de toutes choses, par lequel il a aussi créé le monde,et qui, étant le reflet de sa gloire et l'empreinte de sa personne, et soutenant toutes choses par sa parole puissante, a fait la purification des péchés et s'est assis à la droite de la majesté divine dans les lieux très hauts

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain One new man, so making peace

την εχθραν εν τη σαρκι αυτου τον νομον των εντολων εν δογμασιν καταργησας ινα τους δυο κτιση εν εαυτω εις ενα καινον ανθρωπον ποιων ειρηνην

For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

And whanne thei weren not yit borun, nether hadden don ony thing of good ether of yuel, that the purpos of God schulde dwelle bi eleccioun,not of werkis, but of God clepynge, it was seid to hym, that the more schulde serue the lesse, as it is writun, Y louede Jacob, but Y hatide Esau. What therfor schulen we seie? Whether wickidnesse be anentis God?God forbede. For he seith to Moyses, Y schal haue merci on whom Y haue merci; and Y schal yyue merci on whom Y schal haue merci.Therfor it is not nether of man willynge, nethir rennynge, but of God hauynge mercy. And the scripture seith to Farao, For to this thing Y haue stirid thee, that Y schewe in thee my vertu, and that my name be teld in al erthe.

For if there had been a law given which could give life, verily justice should have been by the law.

For Y passide, and siy youre maumetis, and foond an auter, in which was writun, To the vnknowun God. Therfor which thing ye vnknowynge worschipen, this thing Y schew to you. God that made the world and alle thingis that ben in it, this, for he is Lord of heuene and of erthe, dwellith not in templis maad with hoond, nethir is worschipid bi mannus hoondis, nether hath nede of ony thing, for he yyueth lijf to alle men, and brethinge, and alle thingis; and made of oon al the kinde of men to enhabite on al the face of the erthe, determynynge tymes ordeyned, and termes of the dwellynge of hem,to seke God, if perauenture thei felen hym, ether fynden, thouy he be not fer fro eche of you.

Deus qui fecit mundum et omnia quae in eo sunt hic caeli et terrae cum sit Dominus non in manufactis templis inhabitat nec manibus humanis colitur indigens aliquo cum ipse det omnibus vitam et inspirationem et omnia
fecitque ex uno omne genus hominum inhabitare super universam faciem terrae definiens statuta tempora et terminos habitationis eorum

In Christ Jesus there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for are all One

Han vil gjøre oss levende efter to dager; på den tredje dag vil han opreise oss, og vi skal leve for hans åsyn.

And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again.

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
www.biblegateway.com... en.wikisource.org...(Wycliffe) bible.cc...

"The Father of Modern Genetics"
Dr. Lejeune explained that within three to seven days after fertilization we can determine if the new human being is a boy or a girl. "At no time," Dr. Lejeune said, "is the human being a blob of protoplasm. As far as your nature is concerned, I see no difference between the early person that you were at conception and the late person which you are now. You were, and are, a human being.

“Government’s responsibility for the political community begins with the protection of (a) the lives of its citizens and (b) the life-generating, life-sustaining institutions of marriage and family.”.. Life-generation and human community together form the foundation of human life. Absolute autonomy of any man or woman is a false and unobtainable ideal.

While many pregnancies occur in circumstances that are less than optimum for the future well-being of an unborn child, we must recognize that “the generation of new human life belongs, by the Creator’s design, to married couples, who bear primary responsibility for the care and upbringing of their children.” In other words, government’s responsibility to protect life entails protecting and promoting marriage and family life.
www.capitalcommentary.org...

For the nation or kingdom that will not serve you will perish; it will be utterly ruined.

Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

September 24, 2005
Mother Russia now sees more abortions than babies bornBy her 50th birthday, Russia’s population could have halved, based on current trends.. By Russian standards, she is lucky to have made it even this far: last year, there were 1.6 million registered abortions in Russia and 1.5 million births..“The situation is critical,” said Vladimir Kulakov, deputy head of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences and an adviser to President Putin on the demographic crisis. “The most important thing for every nation is to have confidence in its future.”..Russia’s population has been in decline since 1992 ..Mr Putin raised the issue in April, calling it a “national crisis”, but the Government has yet to respond. Mr Putin is now under pressure to dip into the Stabilisation Fund, designed to save excess oil revenues, to arrest the population decline. www.timesonline.co.uk...

Fri May 6, AUSTIN, Texas
In a victory for anti-abortion advocates, Texas will join the ranks of states that require doctors to perform a sonogram before conducting an abortion.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Righteousness lifts up a nation-Prov14

reply to post by Rustami


What the hell does this have to do with creationism? Honest question.


Seriously, there is no justification of creationism within the scientific literature. Please, find me a single scientific paper that provides evidence that can only be supported by creationism.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul



EVERYTHING!

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb.-Ps139

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him-Colossians1

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him-Gensis1

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit-1Corinthians15

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited-Isaiah45

God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things-Acts17

If you attempt to refute science with quotes from the bible, you've automatically lost the argument.

reply to post by Rustami


Ok, and what proves these claims? I'd like to see the evidence in support of them rather than you taking the Bible as fact without anything beyond faith.

Originally posted by Rustami
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

EVERYTHING!

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb.-Ps139

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him-Colossians1

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him-Gensis1

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit-1Corinthians15

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited-Isaiah45

God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things-Acts17

edit on 9-5-2011 by Rustami because: (no reason given)

ya know just because it says it doesn't make it true

how do you even know you god is the right god?

Originally posted by john_bmth
If you attempt to refute science with quotes from the bible, you've automatically lost the argument.

Ditto, the bible is so full of inconsistencies and blatantly wrong stuff, using it as evidence is beyond laughable. UNLESS you're trying to prove what people BELIEVED around 2,000 years ago. It's a pretty accurate description of how people back then saw the world given their limited knowledge.

reply to post by edmc^2

Hi edmc -

Cool - so you DO understand my posts - I wasn't sure you did.

So...according to the logic / understanding of the term ADAM to mean MALE AND FEMALE in BOTH of the Creation Myths of the Jews in Genesis, the ADAM in the 2nd Creation Myth (Gen 2:4b - 4:25) is BOTH male and Female too (i.e. 'mankind') i.e. the term is used EXACTLY the SAME WAY in BOTH myths - i.e. ADAM in Myth # 2 (who was not 'made' but 'formed from mud') was somehow able to reproduce and have a 'helpmate' with the SAME female half that is described in the 1st Creation Myth in Genesis (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a, cont;d 5:1ff ) when it is stated in the paleoHeb of the mangled texts

'In the Day in which THEY were created, ELOHIM (not Yhwh-elohim) made them MALE & FEMALE : and he called THEIR name ADAM, and blessed them'

which means, according to your warped logic, that even, BEFORE the character of the female ('eve') - 'HA VVAH' was ever in existence BEFORE, she had already been 'formed' by YHWH-ELOHIM from ADAM's rib AFTER the animals were 'formed' from mud?


Kind of makes the Ha vah ('Eve') component in Myth #2 redundant doesn't it?

Can't you see that the ORDER OF CREATION (inlcuding ADAM) in both Creation Myth #1 (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a - Adam created last) and in Creation Myth #2 (Gen 2:4b - 4:25 - Adam formed FIRST) is completely different?

What text are YOU reading ??!!

Originally posted by john_bmth
If you attempt to refute science with quotes from the bible, you've automatically lost the argument.

let me know how that works out for ya when an Angel bright like lightning shows up or you hear an audible invisible voice say "I am Jesus" sitting beside you

remember science is relative to KNOWING

for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door,[a] and sat on it. His countenance was like lightning-Matthew28

Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man.-John5

You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son

His body also was like the beryl, and his face as the appearance of lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour to polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a multitude.

and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire. and they sparkled like the colour of burnished brass..and like the appearance of lamps..the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning..appearance of the wheels and their work was like unto the colour of a beryl: and they four had one likeness: and their appearance and their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel..they turned not when they went.. their rings were full of eyes round about them..for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels..And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it..it had brightness round about. As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about.
www.biblegateway.com

Brass is a metal composed primarily of copper and zinc. Copper is the main component, and brass is usually classified as a copper alloy. The color of brass www.madehow.com

Brass contacts are hidden inside all electrical fittings

The Scientific 100:
A Ranking of the Most Influential Scientists, Past and Present
www.adherents.com

The King James version of the Bible is only a book. What can a book do in history? Well, whatever the reason, books have played a large part in the movements of men, SPECIALLY OF MODERN MAN. www.bible-researcher.com

SIMPLY PUT, THE BIBLE IS THE MOST influential book ever written. jyte.com

science
c.1300, "knowledge (of something) acquired by study," also "a particular branch of knowledge," from O.Fr. science, from L. scientia "knowledge," from sciens (gen. scientis), prp. of scire "to know," probably originally "to separate one thing from another, to distinguish," related to scindere "to cut, divide," from PIE base *skei- (cf. Gk. skhizein "to split, rend, cleave," Goth. skaidan, O.E. sceadan "to divide, separate;" see shed (v.)). Modern sense of "non-arts studies" is attested from 1670s. The distinction is commonly understood as between theoretical truth (Gk. episteme) and methods for effecting practical results (tekhne), but science sometimes is used for practical applications and art for applications of skill. Main modern (restricted) sense of "body of regular or methodical observations or propositions ... concerning any subject or speculation" is attested from 1725; in 17c.-18c. this concept commonly was called philosophy. To blind (someone) with science "confuse by the use of big words or complex explanations" is attested from 1937, originally noted as a phrase from Australia and New Zealand.

reply to post by Rustami

let me know how that works out for ya when an Angel bright like lightning shows up or you hear an audible invisible voice say "I am Jesus" sitting beside you

People have been "hearing voices" for thousands of years. The mind is a powerful trickster (best case), and sadly some people have a psychological illness (schizophrenia).

reply to post by MrXYZ


should listen to your own advice! I know exactly what I've seen and heard, your fear of men and their delusions won't change a thing

predictable much?-

they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.”

And he witnessith that thing that he hath seie, and herde, and no man takith his witnessing.
But he that takith his witnessyng, hath confermyd that God is sothefasten.wikisource.org...(Wycliffe)/John#Chapter_8

.

reply to post by Rustami

Hi Rus -

Was was this REPLY 'post' meant to answer some point(s) in one of my postings? if so which one, and if you want to respond intelligently to one of them, then feel free to do so, please.;..

Originally posted by Sigismundus
reply to post by Rustami

Hi Rus -

Was was this REPLY 'post' meant to answer some point(s) in one of my postings? if so which one, and if you want to respond intelligently to one of them, then feel free to do so, please.;..

words reflect a type of intelligence but nothing like "knowing", if english is a language you can comprehende-stick to just the english quotes, they are sufficient in addressing your creation Adam/male/female confusion

their teachings are but rules taught by men

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

reply to post by Rustami

Hi Rustami -

The original language of the (2) creation myths preserved in the so-called Hebrew Torah was paleo-Hebrew, originally complied using the Phoenecian paleo Hebrew 'horned letter aleph-beth' and later transcribed (with many errors) to the more-familiar Square Aramaic Type aleph-beth during the time of Ezra the Scribe (c. 430 BCE).

So any intelligent critical discussion about the content of the texts and the MSS textual corruption that occured over time with so many hand copied texts over so long a period and in so many diifferent physical locations in antiquity must FIRST begin with what paleo-Hebrew 'words' that have come down to us and in what forms those words have been transmitted and preserved.

Persuant to this present discussion about 'the two creation myths of the Jews being literal scientific fact' etc., the paleo-Hebrew word ADAM in the 1st Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a) is USED very DIFFERENTLY (i.e. in a different literal sense, as 'mankind' composed of TWO genders, viz. MALE-FEMALE) from the paleoHebrew use of the term ADAM in the 2nd Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 2:4b - 4:25) where ADAM is exclusively understood to be of ONE GENDER (not 'mankind' but 'a male' in search of a Helpmate')

As you read the 2nd myth, you see that Adam was 'formed from mud' FIRST, before a string of animals were brought to this single male, and only at the end of the process (not together as in the 1st myth) the figuie of a female counterpart to the single-lonely male ADAM is 'formed from his side' and brought to him - and in this 2nd Myth Adam is NOT created at the same time as MALE-FEMALE together using ADAM as a joint Compound name as it is used in the Hebrew use of the term ADAM 1st Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a, 5:1 ff)

So the Hebrew term ADAM is used in TWO quite different senses in each of the (2) Creation Myths.

The grammatical nuances of these (2) mutually exclusive Creation Myths can be best understood in the mangled hand-copied paleoHebrew copies that have come down to us if we make close use of what Hebrew is in front of us now with a view of preserving any nuances not present in English translations.

In addition to all the poetic 'literary puns' that are present in the Hebrew texts of these myths (which add meaning and flavour to them as literature and can be a guide as to why the text is worded the way it is, often obscure in translations), it is instructive at times to examine the exact name in Hebrew of the 'god' being mentiioned in any given text under discussion - in this case the diffferent names of the creator god in the (2) creation myths line up with the two different myths themselves showing a different writer was at work in each case...

- e.g. the Hebrew name for the god of Creation consistently used in the first myth ( Heb. 'ELOHIM') is actually different in HEBREW from the exact name of the god of CCreation found consistently throughout the 2nd Myth in Hebrew (Yahweh-Elohim), and there are other stylistic-vocabulary words that are also different in the Hebrew (the 1st myth uses BARA to 'make' things, whereas the 2nd creation myth (Gen 2:4b to 4:25) uses 'YATZAR' ('to mould out of something pre-existent' e.g. like mud etc.)

So like it or not, to understand what the 'text tradition is actually saying' we have to revert to the Hebrew texts (or the Hebrew underlay to the other conflicting copies of the texts found e.g. in the Greek Scriptures of the Hebrews, e.g. the Septuaginta (LXX), or Aquila, or Symmachus or Theodotion or some of the Dead Sea scroll versions - all of which presuppose a slightly different HEBREW textual underlay (Vorlage).

In many cases, the 'English' translations gloss over the names of gods and other uncomfortable Hebrew (e.g. ELOHIM is rendered as GOD as if no other gods ever existed in any literature, and YHWH is rendered as THE LORD as if there is only one 'lord' and YHWH-ELOHIM is often rendered in the English translations as 'THE LORD God' which confuses alot of non-specialists.

It is best to use exact Proper names whevever possible as...well, exact Proper names e.g. Abraham Lincoln should be referred to in discussions as Abraham Lincoln, and not, e.g. Il Duce if we were speaking about him in an English translation, since there were more than one president of the US, all with different names.

When the Hebrew texts of the Torah speak of ELOHIM, we should render it as such. When it speaks of ELOAH (as in the poetical fragments of the book of Job for example) we should render the god's name as ELOAH. If a text should speak of EL-ELYON, then we should render it as such. If a Hebrew text should speak of EL-Shaddai then we should render it as EL-SHADDAI (and not 'God Almighty') in order to preserve any possible links to the use of previous literary source materials.

And this all naturally requires that we have to quote a text in paleoHebrew - especially when Theodotion's or Symmachus' Hebrew Vorlage (Hebrew textual underlay) presupposes a QUITE DIFFERENT *(and often older / more original) Hebrew consonantal version of the text than say the later Masoretic (or even the proto-Masoretic consonantal text without the later vowel pointings put.)

All this would have been superfluous if the texts were written in modern English originally and if there was ONLY ONE version of those texts.

Unfortunately, such is not the case with the mangled liquid textual mess of the hand copied and transmitted Hebrew Scriptures down to our own times in various places and literal and political environments, especially since all those much older manuscripts were discovered since Nov 1946 among the Dead Sea Scroll material.

A careful study of the Original Language is an absolute pre-requisite for any understanding of any text under discussion (no matter what language we are speaking) - so when dealing with these (2) myths in Genesis, a firm grounding in paleoHebrew is essential - and relying soley on English translations can never be an adequate substitute

(We recall the Japanese high school student back in the 1950s who studied Shakespeare in Japanese, having never becoming fluent in English - who tried to re-translate his own Japanese translation into English ' To be or not to be - Is that a Question ?' as he used to quote (he thought verbatim (!) from the English text of 'Hamlet'.

Had our Japanese student been a little more 'conversan't in the original language that Shakespeare wrote and acted in (English), our student would have been more accurate in his understanding of the text - and the same thing holds true for any modern discussion of the 'bible' which even scholars working in the original languages find difficult to understand at times !

reply to post by edmc^2


I said I think he sums it up best... What don’t you understand about that?

You like to use the word creation, but I like the word invention. If God does exist I see him as an inventor, a scientist to end all science. Is it so wrong of me to think like that?

I have one last question for you and then I’m done with this subject because its quite obvious that its you who ridicules the belief of others because they don’t conform to your personal beliefs.

Why is it so important to you to try and justify your beliefs as fact and attempt to discredit anyone else who disagrees?

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
(Hebrews 11:1)

reply to post by Sigismundus


bla bla bla
let me be a little more specific one more time-
the original language I heard a FACTUAL audible invisible voice as the scriptures declare and as I began to open just the cover of a Gideon NT after an abortion had taken place said IN PLAIN ENGLISH -my name then "I am Jesus, I died for your sins, believe in Me and you will never perish" and the Angel I had seen as a kid when the man across the street had hung himself in his garage was with real eyes (he turned and looked directly into mine) that even my friend from Scouts had seen as it was flying back and just happen to kill himself later on as well

d o y o u u n d e r s t a n d ?

you seem to have missed the very first line in first post

And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe (scholar)? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.

Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness”; and again, “The LORD knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.”

As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. 4 Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?”
And he said, “Who are You, Lord?” Then the Lord said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It is hard for you to kick against the goads.”

blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

though don't get it stereotypically twisted through your and others lack

But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.”The Jerusalem CouncilNow the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”

Originally posted by Rustami
bla bla bla

That pretty much says it all now doesn't it. You can't listen or accept anything, but your mentally insane view of things.