Genesis 1:1

[Earthling]

The more relevant question is: can you ask an honest one? I note this because the asking of honest questions is typically foreign to intellectual fraud.

Can you say Jehovah?

 

[Jedster]

May I ask you a question? What is נפׁש nephesh i.e. Nepes etc?

This is from google:
Nephesh (נֶ֫פֶשׁ‬ nép̄eš) is a Biblical Hebrew word which occurs in the Hebrew Bible. The word refers to the aspects of sentience, and human beings and other animals are both described as having nephesh. Plants, as an example of live organisms, are not referred in the Bible as having nephesh.

 

[sojourner]

This is from google:
Nephesh (נֶ֫פֶשׁ‬ nép̄eš) is a Biblical Hebrew word which occurs in the Hebrew Bible. The word refers to the aspects of sentience, and human beings and other animals are both described as having nephesh. Plants, as an example of live organisms, are not referred in the Bible as having nephesh.

Nephesh means “living being,” and refers to humans being infused with the breath of God. God breathed into the man’s nostrils, and the man became nephesh.

 

[Thief]

Genesis 1:1 The Hebrew verb consists of two different states. The perfect state indicates an action which is complete, whereas the imperfect state indicates a continuous or incomplete action.

At Genesis 1:1 the word bara, translated as created, is in the perfect state, which means that at this point the creation of the heavens and the Earth were completed. Later, as in verse 16 the Hebrew word asah, translated as made, is used, which is in the imperfect state, indicating continuous action. The heavens and Earth were created in verse 1 and an indeterminate time later they were being prepared for habitation, much the same as a bed is manufactured (complete) and made (continuous) afterwards.

I say....and you may quote me...

the void was perfect
the creation of light is an abberation

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

anima

 

[Earthling]

6 literal 24 hour earth days is kind of ridiculous because these are not solar days. They are 6 days by the pure Light of God. It's not a solar day. Everything was created in the Light of God.

Well, in the Hebrew, as well as in the modern day English a day can stand for different periods of time. The word can be used in three ways, and it is used in three ways in the creation account. It can mean the daylight hours, which is only part of a day, it can mean the solar day which is 24 hours and it can mean any period of time of a specific event. Like, in my grandfather's day. The seventh day of creation began at the end of the creation day, and continues to this day, thousands of years later.

 

[Earthling]

I say....and you may quote me...

the void was perfect
the creation of light is an abberation

Okay, but that doesn't mean anything to me, I don't understand what it means. Can you explain?

 

[Earthling]

Both barah and asah are in the perfective state. The imperfective of asah would be ya'aseh (e'eseh, ta'aseh, etc). In verse 16 (and 7 and 25), the vav-conversive changes the imperfective aspect to the perfective. So "ya'as" = imperfective and "va'ya'as" = perfective.

I think the vav-conversive is complete nonsense. That's probably what @Jayhawker Soule was referring to when he insulted me. You have to watch out for scholars because they often cling to modern day tradition rather than the original language.

Concerning this theory, O. L. Barnes, in his work A New Approach to the Problem of the Hebrew Tenses and Its Solution Without Recourse to Waw-Consecutive, Oxford (1965), pp. 4, 5, wrote: “The matter has been needlessly complicated by the introduction and slavish adherence to the doctrine of Waw Consecutive, or its more ancient forebear Waw Conversive (the latest name proposed for it is Waw Conservative). Very briefly, though there have been a variety of modifications of the theme, this states that the ‘and – Waw ו’ appearing before the first of a series of consecutive Hebrew Verbs in the Imperfect Tense, if preceded by a Hebrew Verb in the Perfect Tense, indicates that all of them should be read or taken as Perfects (instead of what they really are: Imperfects) and vice versa, provided of course certain vowels associated with the Waw ו in the Imperfect are present."

“We may rightly ask why the ‘and – Waw ו’ has this strange converting power. Some recent grammars, in an attempt to by-pass the absurdity, state that it is not really the ‘and – Waw ו’ that has this converting power, but it is the key or guide we must look for to indicate the conversion; in end-result, therefore, it amounts to precisely the same thing. I trust it will be evident from what is stated here that in fact the ‘and – Waw ו’ neither has this power, nor is its assumption necessary to explain the rapid, sometimes abrupt, change in sequence of the Hebrew Tenses. In other words, we may dispense completely with the mythical Waw-Consecutive theory invented by grammarians.”

 

[Earthling]

The sun is made on day 4. The Light on day 1.

Patience, grasshopper, we haven't got to the first day yet.

 

[Earthling]

This is from google:
Nephesh (נֶ֫פֶשׁ‬ nép̄eš) is a Biblical Hebrew word which occurs in the Hebrew Bible. The word refers to the aspects of sentience, and human beings and other animals are both described as having nephesh. Plants, as an example of live organisms, are not referred in the Bible as having nephesh.

Nephesh means “living being,” and refers to humans being infused with the breath of God. God breathed into the man’s nostrils, and the man became nephesh.

And the word nephesh is most often translated to soul, which is mortal. It dies. Though scholars will often disagree, having been wrongfully influenced by Greek philosophy, such as Plato and Socrates. Ezekiel 18:4. When the Bible says one thing and scholars say another thing, believe the Bible.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I think the vav-conversive is complete nonsense. That's probably what @Jayhawker Soule was referring to when he insulted me.

You think wrong yet again.

You have to watch out for scholars because they often cling to modern day tradition rather than the original language.

Damn scholars!

 

[Tumah]

I think the vav-conversive is complete nonsense. That's probably what @Jayhawker Soule was referring to when he insulted me. You have to watch out for scholars because they often cling to modern day tradition rather than the original language.

Concerning this theory, O. L. Barnes, in his work A New Approach to the Problem of the Hebrew Tenses and Its Solution Without Recourse to Waw-Consecutive, Oxford (1965), pp. 4, 5, wrote: “The matter has been needlessly complicated by the introduction and slavish adherence to the doctrine of Waw Consecutive, or its more ancient forebear Waw Conversive (the latest name proposed for it is Waw Conservative). Very briefly, though there have been a variety of modifications of the theme, this states that the ‘and – Waw ו’ appearing before the first of a series of consecutive Hebrew Verbs in the Imperfect Tense, if preceded by a Hebrew Verb in the Perfect Tense, indicates that all of them should be read or taken as Perfects (instead of what they really are: Imperfects) and vice versa, provided of course certain vowels associated with the Waw ו in the Imperfect are present."

“We may rightly ask why the ‘and – Waw ו’ has this strange converting power. Some recent grammars, in an attempt to by-pass the absurdity, state that it is not really the ‘and – Waw ו’ that has this converting power, but it is the key or guide we must look for to indicate the conversion; in end-result, therefore, it amounts to precisely the same thing. I trust it will be evident from what is stated here that in fact the ‘and – Waw ו’ neither has this power, nor is its assumption necessary to explain the rapid, sometimes abrupt, change in sequence of the Hebrew Tenses. In other words, we may dispense completely with the mythical Waw-Consecutive theory invented by grammarians.”

That is a ridiculous proposition that will needlessly complicate any sort of translation of the text. Take Gen. 1:5
Converting vavs are red, imperfectives are blue, perfectives are green:
ויקרא אלקים לאור יום ולחשך קרא לילה ויהי ערב ויהי בקר יום אחד
Common reading:
And G-d called the light 'day', and to darkness He called, 'night'. And it was evening and it was morning, a first day.
Your reading:
And G-d will call the light 'day' and the darkness He called 'night'. And it will be evening and it will be morning, a first day.

As you can see, the sentence is not consistent. The whole chapter would be like that. We start with an introductory statement about G-d's having created the heavens and earth in the past, but every other verb talks about something that G-d has not done yet if you assume no converting vav. The whole narrative becomes a confused mess of continuity. Using the converting vav, the narrative becomes unified.

 

[nPeace]

Genesis 1:1 The Hebrew verb consists of two different states. The perfect state indicates an action which is complete, whereas the imperfect state indicates a continuous or incomplete action.

At Genesis 1:1 the word bara, translated as created, is in the perfect state, which means that at this point the creation of the heavens and the Earth were completed. Later, as in verse 16 the Hebrew word asah, translated as made, is used, which is in the imperfect state, indicating continuous action. The heavens and Earth were created in verse 1 and an indeterminate time later they were being prepared for habitation, much the same as a bed is manufactured (complete) and made (continuous) afterwards.

Not bad at all. Did you also look up the words used for light, in Genesis?

 

[nPeace]

The sun is made on day 4. The Light on day 1.

May I ask, what you think the light emits from in verse three? Two different Hebrew words as used for light, in verse 3, and verse 16.

 

[Earthling]

Not bad at all. Did you also look up the words used for light, in Genesis?

Oh yeah. We'll hopefully get to that. But think about it. How much that one little verse, the first in the Bible, has been misunderstood and can be corrected. The earliest reference I can find on the subject is 1890's.

 

[nPeace]

Oh yeah. We'll hopefully get to that. But think about it. How much that one little verse, the first in the Bible, has been misunderstood and can be corrected. The earliest reference I can find on the subject is 1890's.

I agree.
I think it depends on how much effort persons put into research and study.

 

[sojourner]

And the word nephesh is most often translated to soul, which is mortal. It dies. Though scholars will often disagree, having been wrongfully influenced by Greek philosophy, such as Plato and Socrates. Ezekiel 18:4. When the Bible says one thing and scholars say another thing, believe the Bible.

Uh, no. The scholars know about Greek influence. They watch for it.

 

[rosends]

May I ask, what you think the light emits from in verse three? Two different Hebrew words as used for light, in verse 3, and verse 16.

What word do you think is used for light in 16?

 

[sojourner]

You have to watch out for scholars because they often cling to modern day tradition rather than the original language

Blatantly false. Scholars RELY on the original languages. Who are you trying to snow here?

 

[Earthling]

Blatantly false. Scholars RELY on the original languages. Who are you trying to snow here?

Uh, no. The scholars know about Greek influence. They watch for it.

Does the soul die? Ezekiel 18:4