...people began to call upon the name of the LORD

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

a reply to: Seede

KJV is an archaic and extremely terrible translation. You are aware of that?

Top 10 Bible Translations (From Nielsen 2016 rankings) are ---
New International Version - King James Version - New Living Translation - English Standard Version - New King James Version - Reina Valera - New International Reader’s Version - Christian Standard Bible - Common English Bible- The Message.

The NIV does print Gen. 1:1 as heavens plural which is corrupt. -- The KJV does print Gen. 1:1 as heaven singular.

The NIV translation is wrong just as some other modern translations are also corrupt.

The Jewish Publications Society translates Gen. 1:1 as heaven - singular - which is in accord to the Masoretic [Aleppo Codex]. The new JPS translation according to the traditional Hebrew Text [1988] also records Gen. 1:1 as heaven -singular.

The overwhelming evidence is that the plurality of heavens in Gen. 1:1 cannot be accurate and it matters not whether it is archaic or modern. The DSS and Masoretic texts are the prevailing correct translations. Age has nothing to do with truth as well as the KJV Masoretic text was not a work of English translators. The KJV NT is very accurate and trustworthy translation that continues to be used by many scholars.

a reply to: Seede

KJV is Satan's translation:
==> KJV: And I stood upon the sand of the sea
==> ESV: The dragon stood on the shore of the sea.


KJV is te Bible of Satan

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

a reply to: Seede KJV is Satan's translation: ==>
KJV: And I stood upon the sand of the sea ==>
ESV: The dragon stood on the shore of the sea.

KJV of Revelation 13:1
Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

ESV of Revelation 13:1
Rev 13:1 And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads.

ABP+ of Revelation 13:1 using Strong's concordance numbers ---
AndG2532 I stoodG2476 uponG1909 theG3588 sandG285 of theG3588 sea.G2281 AndG2532 I sawG1492 from out ofG1537 theG3588 seaG2281 a wild beastG2342 ascending,G305 havingG2192 [2hornsG2768 1ten]G1176 andG2532 [2headsG2776 1seven],G2033 andG2532 uponG1909 G3588 his hornsG2768 G1473 tenG1176 diadems,G1238 andG2532 uponG1909 G3588 his headsG2776 G1473 a nameG3686 of blasphemy.G988

I do not see your point. I have just checked with 15 translations of Revelation 13:1 and find all but one that verify Strong's numbers. The interpretations of all translations confirm Strong's numbers

I then checked with the Jewish New Testament [David H. Stern] and see the very same Hebrew understanding of Rev. 13:1.

Stern's translation
Quote - then the dragon stood on the seashore, and I saw a beast come up out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads. On its horns were ten royal crowns and on its heads blasphemous names. - Unquote

The author of Rev. 13:1 is strictly an observer and not a player and is not the dragon as some cannot understand. You can also check Young's translation and you will find it agrees with Strong's translation.

a reply to: Seede

Forgery in KJV:

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: Seede

Forgery in KJV:

en.wikipedia.org...

KJV: And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

EST: Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: Seede

KJV is Satan's translation:
==> KJV: And I stood upon the sand of the sea
==> ESV: The dragon stood on the shore of the sea.


KJV is te Bible of Satan

There should be no doubt about it.

The creator God rested on the seventh day as stated in Genesis Chapter 2 verse 2.

Lord God is the imposter who took credit for Gods creation. And then implemeted his own in Chapter two and so forth.

Lord God even goes as far as to state that he "made" the Earth and the Heavens. The order this is stated in is not even alined With Genesisi Chapter 1: In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth.

- Why would God the creator,.....create more then one heaven?

The once who think that the City, New Jerusalem is some sort of heaven should think twice about that, by Reading what is stated in Revelations Chapter 22. verse 2. You should be able to understand that the Bride. New Jerusalem is actually Lord Gods Garden of Eden.

- Lord God planted a garden eastwards in Eden. There he put the tree of life. Now what is located in the streets of New Jerusalem? Read Revelation Chapter 22 verse 2.

- An other Clue is that Lord God created the beast...the serpent. Where is the serpent still located? Yeah, it is still located in the garden of Eden. The serpent was never cast out by Lord God.

- There are more Clues in Revelations that the City, New Jerusalem is Lord Gods heaven (hell). The verse in Reevelation Chapter 22. verse 4. Actually hints you to what is mentioned in Revelations 13, verse 16. If this dosent bring up some serious thought i dont know how.....

a reply to: spy66

- Why would God the creator,.....create more then one heaven?

God only created the one terrestrial heaven in Genesis 1:1 which is the heaven of the sun and moon and heavenly host.

He then made another terrestrial heaven in Genesis 1:7-8 as He then separated the waters and made a firmament (heaven).

Those are the only two terrestrial heavens in our universe. One is for the heavenly host [Sun and moon] and the other for the air that we breathe.

But tradition tells us that there are other celestial heavens of which some say there are as many as ten. Of course there is no way of proving this because we cannot see them or verify them.

a reply to: Seede

He then made another terrestrial heaven in Genesis 1:7-8 as He then separated the waters and made a firmament (heaven).

No. God did not.
I will show and explain you how to understand genesis Chapter 1.

- Verse 1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. This is what God is going to create, and in that order.

Verse 2 explaines what emptyness/nothingness looks like.

- Verse 2: And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

This is what Moses saw according to verse 2.


Verse 3. This is where the Word of God comes into reality, and this is what it would look like.

- Verse 3, And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.


This light that appears don't come from nothing. Light needs a Source. This light needs to be emitted from something. And this something is the firmament. as explained in verse 6.

Our universe was a very very compressed energy mass when it was formed. This compression is what created the light that Moses saw in verse 3.

- This thing is what Moses call's the firmament. It is this thing God formed when he said: let there be light. It is Our universe.....the firmament.



This thing we today Call the singularity/Our universe will expand. This is the seperation that is mentioned in verse 7.

In verse 8 God Calls this heaven. And that about adds up. Earth is not created yet. So this must be heaven. as stated in verse 8.

Earth starts to take shape from verse 9. But first the firmament needs to expand and cool Down so that Earth can be made.



- God created the heaven and the Earth...... In that order. Dont let anyone tell you anything else. Because that is not what Genesis Chapter 1 is telling you.

a reply to: Seede

Hashamayim means two names alt. two heavens.

a reply to: spy66

Verse 1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. This is what God is going to create, and in that order.

You may be using a different translation that I have shown but the Masoretic text is what I use in the 1611 KJV translation.
------------------------
1611 KJV - Gen 1:1-5
(1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
(2) And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
(3) And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
(4) And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
(5) And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
-------------------------
It is very plain that this translation of Genesis 1:1 does not say that God will create anything. It says that God has already created a heaven and a earth. This is prior to verse 6-8 where He then made the firmament which created another heaven.

1611 KJV - Gen 1:6-8
(6) And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
(7) And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
(8) And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
-----------------------

This is what Moses saw according to verse 2.

Moses did not see the anything of this formation in creating.
------------------------
The Genesis text clearly shows you that verses 1-5 are the first day as I have highlighted.
The Genesis text then clearly shows you that verses 6-8 are the second day as I have also highlighted.

I believe you are totally confused in watching movies which are simply other people's opinions. Stay with the text and true translation.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

a reply to: Seede Hashamayim means two names alt. two heavens.

Yes you are correct. It can mean more than one heaven and it can mean skies also which a few translations will show. But along with that you must consider that it can only be used in certainty and not conjectures.

The text clearly distinguishes a day one creation and a day two creation. Day one clearly is written that a heaven was created in that day. There is no assumption but is exactly what the this text says. Day two also tells us that another heaven came into existence with the second creation of a firmament.

So even though hashamayim can mean two heavens it does not qualify as plurality in this text simply because this text is written as two events of two eras of two creations.

a reply to: Seede

/shamayim/ is plural, or rather dual. KJV's translation Heaven is fallacy. Enen Textus Receptus which KJV relies upon in most 95% of its translation translates Shamayim as Heavens.

a reply to: Seede

I am just using King James.


When it comes to what God actually created,.....there should be no doubt that God did create the heaven and the Earth.


Earth never existed in Verse 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. That is pritty specificly described and explained in Genesis Chapter 1 verse 2.

If Earth is without form and void...... What did Earth actually look like if Earth does not have a form or a void? That is how you describe that Earth is not there.

Pay attention to details......

In verse 8. God specifically state that the firmament is the heaven. Earth is still without form and void. Earth is not mentioned until verse 10.

10. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

a reply to: Seede /shamayim/ is plural, or rather dual. KJV's translation Heaven is fallacy. Enen Textus Receptus which KJV relies upon in most 95% of its translation translates Shamayim as Heavens.

In the first place it matters not what bible the Masoretic text is found. It is not of Greek origin and must follow the original pattern as is presented in a great number of bibles in the Hebrew. There are only two codex's which are accepted and those are the Masoretic and Septuagint with the DSS as the most recent literature.

Deuteronomy_10:14 Behold,H2005 the heavenH8064 and the heavenH8064 of heavensH8064 is the LORD'SH3068 thy God,H430 the earthH776 also, with allH3605 thatH834 therein is.

Here you see both singular shamayim [one heaven] and dual shamayim [as being H8064] -- As I had stated, you must consider that it can only be used in certainty and not conjectures. Now do you honestly expect to see a scholar read Deuteronomy 10:14 as "Behold,H2005 the heavensH8064 and the heavensH8064 of heavensH8064.

That would be silly to even contemplate such a corrupt presentation. As I have repeated, the Masoretic text is a Hebrew presentation and does not derive from the Greek except in the Septuagint from which the Septuagint actually derived from the master literature of Hebrew. Now the original translation from Hebrew to the Septuagint was only the Torah and not the Tenakh as most people imagine and those MSS are lost to us as well as the Septuagint has been edited many times and comes to us as corrupt. That is why we must now depend upon the Aleppo Codex and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

1Kings 8:30 And hearkenH8085 thou toH413 the supplicationH8467 of thy servant,H5650 and of thy peopleH5971 Israel,H3478 whenH834 they shall prayH6419 towardH413 thisH2088 place:H4725 and hearH8085 thouH859 inH413 heavenH8064 thy dwellingH3427 place:H4725 and when thou hearest,H8085 forgive.H5545

Here you see once again the word heaven as [H8064] which is a celestial heaven and not a terrestrial heaven and that is why I said that you must understand that this word is used loosely but must be understood in the context of meaning. If you were a Hebrew scholar you could insist that shamay is singular and shamayim is plural but here we are understanding a translator's understanding in the English language.

a reply to: spy66

When it comes to what God actually created,.....there should be no doubt that God did create the heaven and the Earth.

But you neglected to finish that God created the heaven and earth in day one. You cannot neglect that the text specifies "Day One".

Earth never existed in Verse 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. That is pritty specificly described and explained in Genesis Chapter 1 verse 2.

You said that the earth was created in verse 1 and now you say that it was not created in verses 2-8. You just contradicted your very own statement that there was an earth in verse 1. Verses 1-5 are a record of what was created in day 1. Verses 6-8 are the records of what was created on the second day. How can you then say that in verse 1 there was an earth and in verses 2-8 there was not a verse? You make no sense in your logic.

If Earth is without form and void...... What did Earth actually look like if Earth does not have a form or a void? That is how you describe that Earth is not there.

No one can say for certainty what the earth was when it was without form and was empty. All we can do is imagine what it really was. I imagine it was a mass of earth and water which I call mud. It may not even have been circular for all I know. It could have been a splat of mud floating about in the first created heaven [universe].

The universe [heaven] was totally dark and I imagine it was very cold from our understandings today. The primeval light was then given to lighten the heaven [universe]. Light was not created. Darkness is created by absence of light. God is light and not darkness. Most Hebrew scholars will believe that the universe was created first and then the earth and water placed in this first created heaven. That makes sense because that is what we see today. That is about all that was done in the first day.

The second day of creation was only one act of God and that was to create the firmament. This is told that God took this mud pack of earth and water and made a space between the waters which is our first heaven but is the second created heaven. This in effect is believed that the separation of water left the entire mud pack [world] engulfed in a canopy of water which surrounded the entire mud pack [world]. this is about all that was done on the second day.

The third day of creation was when God then took the mud pack [world] which was surrounded in a canopy of water and separated the mud pack [not the canopy of water] into one great body of water and one great body of dry earth. Now at this time is when I believe that God molded the earth into its circular shape as we see it now. This is when it ceased to be a mud pack and became formed. This is strictly my own belief and may be what you mean when you said earth never existed till verse 10. What is actually meant, as is explained in oral Torah, is that [dry] earth never existed till verse 10. Actually earth was always there in verse 1 even though it was a mud pack.

a reply to: Seede

But you neglected to finish that God created the heaven and earth in day one. You cannot neglect that the text specifies "Day One".

So, you are telling me that God created something that have no form and no void?

When Earth does not have a form: WHat form does it have? If it is created it must have a form of some kind. When Earth have no form it does not exist. That is even confirmed when it is mentioned that Earth have no void.

You said that the earth was created in verse 1 and now you say that it was not created in verses 2-8.

No, that is not what i said. I said: In the beginning God created Heaven and the Earth. Verse one is not the beginning.
The beginning starts in verse 3. That is when God said: Let there be light. Before verse Three there vas nothing but emptyness and darkness as explained in verse 2.

a reply to: spy66

So, you are telling me that God created something that have no form and no void? When Earth does not have a form: WHat form does it have? If it is created it must have a form of some kind. When Earth have no form it does not exist. That is even confirmed when it is mentioned that Earth have no void.

God created a substance of water and earth and it was not in any form of our understanding or purpose. It was simply a bunch of dirt and water. It was not formed as yet in verse 1.

If you were a potter and you placed a bunch of potters clay on your plate, all you would have is a formless pile of clay. Meaning that it held no useful or purposeful form to you. It does not mean that it is not a substance of clay on your plate but only that it has not taken the form that you have in mind to give it. You may have planned to form it into a jar of certain use but have not done so as yet.

That is exactly what verse 1 is telling you. The earth is a bunch of dirt and water waiting for God to form it into what He had planned. It does not mean that dirt and water has not been created yet. That dirt and water has no life forms at this time. It is empty [void] of any sort of life in verse 1.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: SarMegahhikkitha
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

I'm not writing for your benefit, I'm writing for the benefit of others who don't know better, since I know you have no intention of actually reading what I write. If you think the example with "lighten" and "brighten" is absurd, then congratulations, you've just called your own claim absurd. Both claims are: a plural ending that had ceased to be productive in the author's time can be applied randomly. In my case, it's the /n/ plural being applied to "light", in your case, it's the dual plural being applied to "shem" (after THE DUAL CEASED TO BE PRODUCTIVE BY THE TIME OF BIBLICAL HEBREW). That means Moses couldn't just add "-ayim" to words randomly; only a limited number of words retained their ancient dual forms in his time. "Shem" is not one of them. Showing me other words that retained dual forms does not address my claim. Showing me that "shem" is masculine does not address my claim; so are avot, shulhanot, yeraqot, and halonot, yet do they all have dual forms? Gender had nothing to do with the reason "oxen" and "children" retained their /n/ plurals.

The only thing you can do to counter my claim is prove the usage of the dual form of "shem" in Biblical/Mishnaic Hebrew or prove that the dual form continued to be a productive category in Biblical Hebrew.

Oh dear. You keep rambling on claiming verbs can be plural in English, there never were, there sure aren't such a thing now, and I honestly doubt there will ever be plural verbs in any language. Read what you write for heaven's sake. It's like saying the genitive -s suffix in English is or once was (historical anachronism) the plural -s suffix. You are WRONG. And as for there not being any dual nouns in Biblical Hebrew. Hah bloody hah. Like I have shown there is one in the first verse of Genesis.

There are several nouns in Biblical Hebrew that takes the dual form. The nouns /mayim/ (waters/floods) and /shemayim/ (heavens, skies, alt. names) are two such. And here you have 28 occurences of /enayim/ dual of /ayin/ means (pair of) eye(s):

==> biblehub.com...

I could list a bunch of others, but I don't like to feed trolls, so shu! Your opinion may have been made popular, but there should be no doubt that hehe, the Hebrew biblical texts contain quite a few examples of the dual form.

Strong's Hebrew:
H3767 /kera/ «legs», has dual
H3610 /kilayim/ «kinds», is dual (of H3608 /kele/ «seperation»)
H7620 /shabua/ «weeks», has dual
H3608 /kele/ «prison», has dual

These are four more nouns taking the dual form. So again: You are utterly dead wrong! Your assertion may be popular at the moment, but the fallacy is so obvious. There are plenty examples of dual forms of nouns in the bible.

>The fallacy is so obvious

Yeah, it's called "straw man". It's when someone clearly states their arguments (i.e. "/n/ pluralization like 'oxen' and 'children' can't be applied randomly to /s/ plurals like 'lights' to form 'lighten', just like dual plurals in Biblical Hebrew only existed for a limited subset of nouns and can't be applied randomly") and you go off on a tangent pretending they said something else entirely. I very clearly wrote "a limited number of words retained their ancient dual forms in Moses' time" and you went on to disprove something I never claimed, that the dual form doesn't exist. I have very clearly claimed, again and again, that it CEASED TO BE PRODUCTIVE (i.e. could no longer be applied randomly).

This would really blow your mind if you had basic reading ability: Dual plurals in Biblical Hebrew were so much an artifact of ancient Hebrew, that for many nouns the dual form is simply their standard plural form, and doesn't connote 2, and the Bible has undeniable examples of this.

a reply to: SarMegahhikkitha

If you think the example with "lighten" and "brighten"– is absurd, then congratulations, you've just called your own claim absurd. Both claims are: a plural ending that had ceased to be productive in the author's time can be applied randomly.

Nouns have plural endings. Verbs dont. You don't comprehend basic grammar and you pick a fight with a linguist. Some might call you brave, I just call you silly. The your two brilliant examples of «verbs with plural suffix», I could inform you that they are both active in modern English. Tighten a lightbulb, fasten a screw, lighten up a room.

a reply to: Seede

God created a substance of water and earth and it was not in any form of our understanding or purpose.

So, God created a substance: A void of water and Earth.... But verse 2 state that Earth was without form and void.

Ok. I rest my case.