EnhancedSpirit
High Priestess
Neither is a book telling me that I evolved from a monkey.Lycan said:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Understanding the bible
- Thread starter Lycan
- Start date
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
cardero
Citizen Mod
There are many TRUTHs that are proven and revealed within our lifetimes that we do not desire to apply to our lives. Exercising and eating healthy is a TRUTH that I have accepted and that I have proven that I do not currently apply to my life. The Bible (as well as other published manuals) I am sure
is inundated with such TRUTHs. TRUTHs that people have understood and possibly accepted but do not have any understanding or desire of how to apply these practically to their own lives.
Belief and knowledge are the keys towards understanding. Faith is a seasoning. If you are trying to use keys to open a door to get through the other side why would you sprinkle or shake faith on them? Its not going to make the understanding process go any faster and it is not going to make the TRUTH taste any better.
EnhancedSpirit
High Priestess
Any time a translation is done, there are certain problems that arise. Let me demonstrate this to you in Spanish. I know nothing about Spanish, so when I hear "Juan tiene frio," I have to look up what it means. What I find is that the words literally mean "John has cold." To me, that could mean that John has a cold (that he is ill) or it could mean John is cold (he is shivering). Which does it mean? My friend, tells me that it means John is cold. "How do you know that," I ask. "I took it in high school and they explained that the culture would understand it that way," she replies.
Another example that is more complicated: "Juan me cae bien gordo" literally translates "John me falls well fat." This is not a comment on my weight; it simply means "I don't like John very much." Literal translations can give mistaken concepts if the culture in which the translation is made is not considered.
This becomes very relevant to a literal understanding of Genesis 1. In the original Hebrew language, there are two concepts about how God brings things into existence. One way God does things is by a miraculous process that only God can do. The Hebrew word bara was used to indicate this process. This word is never used in reference to something that man can do. It is a term reserved exclusively to describe God's actions in the Creation. The Jewish Publication Society says, "The Hebrew bara is used in the Bible exclusively of divine creativity. It signifies that the product is absolutely novel end unexampled, depends solely upon God for its coming into existence and is beyond the human capacity to reproduce" (Sarna, Nahumn M., Genesis, the JPS Torah Commentary, Jewish Publication Society, 1989). The Jewish scholar Jacob Newman Leiden says in his Commentary of Nahmanides on Genesis 1-6 (Brill Publishing, 1960), "We have in our holy language no other term for 'the bringing forth of something from nothing' but bara." In Appendix A is a writing of the King James version of Genesis with the Hebrew words written above the English wording of Genesis. You will notice that bara is used in Genesis 1:1 and again in Genesis 1:20 and 1:27
There is another way that God brings things into existence This is a process that does not involve a miracle but rather is a shaping or molding of something already created. The Hebrew words used to describe this process are asah and yatsar. These words are not just used in reference to things that God can do; they are also used in reference to things that men can do. We see it used in phrases like "make me to laugh," "make a feast," "make war," etc. These are not miracles--these are things that man can do. God is described as having asahed things in the biblical record with everything from verse 2 through verse 19 being included in this process. Yatsar is used in Genesis 2:7,8, and 19 meaning to mold or squeeze into shape as a potter would work with clay. Denominational creationists have refused to take the Bible this literally. They attempt to suggest that bara and asah mean the same thing.
One of the texts that is used to argue against what has been said here is the discussion of the formation of man. In Genesis 1:27, we are told that God created (bara) man in God's image; and yet in Genesis 2:7, the Bible says God formed (asah) man of the dust of the ground. Are these two verses referring to the same thing? The answer is emphatically NO! Genesis 1:27 is referring to that which is in God's image--man's spiritual make up. Genesis 2:7 is referring to man's body--that which is made of the dust of the earth and will return to the dust. The two words are describing completely different subjects. A further challenge might come from Genesis 1:26 where God says, "Let us make (asah) man in our image...." But the statement is made to the Godhead, not to the physical world. The us in the passage is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit so the process is not miraculous. From their perspective, this is a making_ not a miraculous creating. From our perspective as three dimensional beings who are not divine and cannot really create anything, what God does is miraculous. To make sure we do not misunderstand this vital point, the Bible ends the creation story by saying that God "rested from all his work which God created (bara) and made (asah)." According to God, both processes were used.
Another example that is more complicated: "Juan me cae bien gordo" literally translates "John me falls well fat." This is not a comment on my weight; it simply means "I don't like John very much." Literal translations can give mistaken concepts if the culture in which the translation is made is not considered.
This becomes very relevant to a literal understanding of Genesis 1. In the original Hebrew language, there are two concepts about how God brings things into existence. One way God does things is by a miraculous process that only God can do. The Hebrew word bara was used to indicate this process. This word is never used in reference to something that man can do. It is a term reserved exclusively to describe God's actions in the Creation. The Jewish Publication Society says, "The Hebrew bara is used in the Bible exclusively of divine creativity. It signifies that the product is absolutely novel end unexampled, depends solely upon God for its coming into existence and is beyond the human capacity to reproduce" (Sarna, Nahumn M., Genesis, the JPS Torah Commentary, Jewish Publication Society, 1989). The Jewish scholar Jacob Newman Leiden says in his Commentary of Nahmanides on Genesis 1-6 (Brill Publishing, 1960), "We have in our holy language no other term for 'the bringing forth of something from nothing' but bara." In Appendix A is a writing of the King James version of Genesis with the Hebrew words written above the English wording of Genesis. You will notice that bara is used in Genesis 1:1 and again in Genesis 1:20 and 1:27
There is another way that God brings things into existence This is a process that does not involve a miracle but rather is a shaping or molding of something already created. The Hebrew words used to describe this process are asah and yatsar. These words are not just used in reference to things that God can do; they are also used in reference to things that men can do. We see it used in phrases like "make me to laugh," "make a feast," "make war," etc. These are not miracles--these are things that man can do. God is described as having asahed things in the biblical record with everything from verse 2 through verse 19 being included in this process. Yatsar is used in Genesis 2:7,8, and 19 meaning to mold or squeeze into shape as a potter would work with clay. Denominational creationists have refused to take the Bible this literally. They attempt to suggest that bara and asah mean the same thing.
One of the texts that is used to argue against what has been said here is the discussion of the formation of man. In Genesis 1:27, we are told that God created (bara) man in God's image; and yet in Genesis 2:7, the Bible says God formed (asah) man of the dust of the ground. Are these two verses referring to the same thing? The answer is emphatically NO! Genesis 1:27 is referring to that which is in God's image--man's spiritual make up. Genesis 2:7 is referring to man's body--that which is made of the dust of the earth and will return to the dust. The two words are describing completely different subjects. A further challenge might come from Genesis 1:26 where God says, "Let us make (asah) man in our image...." But the statement is made to the Godhead, not to the physical world. The us in the passage is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit so the process is not miraculous. From their perspective, this is a making_ not a miraculous creating. From our perspective as three dimensional beings who are not divine and cannot really create anything, what God does is miraculous. To make sure we do not misunderstand this vital point, the Bible ends the creation story by saying that God "rested from all his work which God created (bara) and made (asah)." According to God, both processes were used.