Was Genesis mistranslated?

evince said:
All religion is myth.

There are thousands of those myths that are now dead and no one remembers them.

When they were "alive" the people that believed them believed them as strongly and devoutly as any Christian, jew, Muslim or whatever does today. Were they wrong in what they believed? Was their religion better or worse than any religion today? Did they have more or less proof they were correct than any religion today? If you lived at the time it was the religion would you have gone to hell for not believing in a religion you did not know exsisted?
Click to expand...

Yeah. it's really scary when all these alleged men of physics go on the noahide dole and start all this, "reality is consistent with intelligent design". That shit is not science. Sorry dix.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Yeah. it's really scary when all these alleged men of physics go on the noahide dole and start all this, "reality is consistent with intelligent design". That shit is not science. Sorry dix.
Click to expand...

Who's talking "science" here? You guys want to base your conclusions on nothing but faith. There is no evidence to support anything you claim. You refuse to examine the information available, because your faith has caused you to draw a conclusion! You're really not much different from those who think the world is 6000 years old.

If you wish to believe The Bible is just a bunch of hogwash and myth, that's fine, but you haven't proven this to be a fact, that is nothing more than an opinion. It's a pretty bizarre opinion at that, because hogwash and myth generally doesn't survive generations of brutal persecution. It's a book that has been around for 2000 years, providing spiritual guidance for everyone who has ever put their faith in it. Countless testimonies from millions of people, swearing by the strength and power of the word of God. Whether it is "true" or "myth", it certainly has seemed to help a great many people over the years, but this fact appears to be flying over the top of your empty heads.
 
I'd actually like to see his thesis on this. Fascinating stuff.

There are other passages even more interesting, IMO.

Stuff that talk about the Elohim (gods, as in plural) and agreements to separate the world between them and see who wins out in the end...
 
lets just compromise and say it was the aliens on an ego trip. If we mastered intergalactic travel we'd probably play god with a bunch of inferior life forms as well
 
Damocles said:
I'd actually like to see his thesis on this. Fascinating stuff.

There are other passages even more interesting, IMO.

Stuff that talk about the Elohim (gods, as in plural) and agreements to separate the world between them and see who wins out in the end...
Click to expand...

The Elohim is the Trinity.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
well, it's referred to in the plural when the verse says Elohim....unless you reject Elohim as referring to the Trinity......kind of a self serving argument I expect......
Click to expand...
Not really, the Old Testament doesn't really reference the Trilogy, and this particular part speaks of him as "Lord of lords"... The Elohim being referenced, he was supposedly the leader of, not just a piece. It doesn't logically follow that it was referencing the Trinity, especially since every place that the Trinity is referenced in the Bible it is singular.

I think it is convenient to your argument to suggest that at this one place it means the Trinity, but in every other time it is mentioned in the singular.
 
Damocles said:
The Trinity is always referred to in the Singular, not Plural.
Click to expand...

Wrong in the first chapter of Genesis 1:26 God says :Let US make man in Our image". The Elohim is historically, theologically, and contextually understood as the Trinity. God speaks of himself in the plural because he is a plurality; three in one.
 
Damocles said:
Not really, the Old Testament doesn't really reference the Trilogy, and this particular part speaks of him as "Lord of lords"... The Elohim being referenced, he was supposedly the leader of, not just a piece. It doesn't logically follow that it was referencing the Trinity, especially since every place that the Trinity is referenced in the Bible it is singular.

I think it is convenient to your argument to suggest that at this one place it means the Trinity, but in every other time it is mentioned in the singular.
Click to expand...

The term Trinity isn't referenced in any part of the bible. The fact that the bible in its entirety reveals a trinitarian God underscores the meaning of who Elohim is; a triune God. When the term Lord of lords is used it is speaking of God the Son, the Christ.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Wrong in the first chapter of Genesis 1:26 God says :Let US make man in Our image". The Elohim is historically, theologically, and contextually understood as the Trinity. God speaks of himself in the plural because he is a plurality; three in one.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. In that instance he uses the singular verb following the word Elohim. It is in the singular sense of the word. You can follow the different usage by the verb following, in the instance of which I am speaking the plural is used, when god refers to "we" He always uses the singular verb.
 
Ice Dancer said:
The term Trinity isn't referenced in any part of the bible. The fact that the bible in its entirety reveals a trinitarian God underscores the meaning of who Elohim is; a triune God. When the term Lord of lords is used it is speaking of God the Son, the Christ.
Click to expand...
*Sigh*

Again. Each time the word Elohim is used when God references Himself he follows with the singular form of the verb, indicating the singular usage of Elohim.

Elohim can mean both plural and singular, you must follow the usage of Elohim with the verb to know which it is referencing. In every case but the one that I speak of Elohim is singular.
 
Damocles said:
Incorrect. In that instance he uses the singular verb following the word Elohim. It is in the singular sense of the word. You can follow the different usage by the verb following, in the instance of which I am speaking the plural is used, when god refers to "we" He always uses the singular verb.
Click to expand...

No, not incorrect. In the begining God (Elohim) created the heavens. God goes onto say We and Us. He understands himself in the plural because He is a plurality. You can misunderstand the Hebrew all you want. He is three in ONE so having a singular verb following is not a mystery. It is unique and a grammatically difficuly construct for all other languages...but not wrong usage within the context of a Trintarian God. God is singularly One in three Persons plural.
 
Ice Dancer said:
No, not incorrect. In the begining God (Elohim) created the heavens. God goes onto say We and Us. He understands himself in the plural because He is a plurality. You can misunderstand the Hebrew all you want. He is three in ONE so having a singular verb following is not a mystery. It is unique and a grammatically difficuly construct for all other languages...but not wrong usage within the context of a Trintarian God. God is singularly One in three Persons plural.
Click to expand...
I am not misunderstanding the Hebrew, the word Eloah (singular version) is solely found in poetry, Elohim in regular usage is both singular and plural, god is followed with the singular verb placing the context firmly in the singular. I even gave you a link from a scholar of the language in the hopes it would be clear.

Except in certain passages, one where he sits in judgment with other Elohim (he mentions them, using the plural form of the verb when he mentions others) as the Lord of lords. Another where it is mentioned you are to have no other gods before him (again, by context a plurality.)

Anyway, "... let us make" is preceded by "And God said" (the word is Elohim singular, the verb said that follows is male singular..) later it says "So God Created" again, the verb is singular masculine denoting that the word Elohim is singular.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
not familiar with that portion of scripture....do you have a cite?......
Click to expand...
As for your question.

I believe that it began with a reference to Peleg, in Genesis 10:25, but extended backing itself up with other verses of the Old Testament. The problem was that a ton of the paper was in Hebrew. I'm still seeking it online, and will try to remember the title as soon as I can. It was a fascinating paper, but IMO, was an exaggeration of meaning.
 
Damocles said:
Here, this can explain it better. Probably you may believe it more...

http://www.sitchiniswrong.com/Elohim.pdf

The point I was speaking of is even referenced, first he refers to himself in the singular, then sits in judgment with the Elohim (plural form).
Click to expand...

I do not know who the scholar is, but can say he is already mispeaking in his understanding of God's judgements of "other gods". There are no other gods. God's declaration of his ability to judge is rhetorical. He judges them false because they do not actually exist. God, Elohim cannot be seperated in action from the Son or the Holy Spirit; they act together always.

If it is true that you wish to know and understand the historical Hebrew translation and covenantal relevance this will serve. If however you wish to ponder your new found mystery and only accept that which will fit into your own personal construct of what your mystery MUST somehow imply...have at it.
 
Ice Dancer said:
I do not know who the scholar is, but can say he is already mispeaking in his understanding of God's judgements of "other gods". There are no other gods. God's declaration of his ability to judge is rhetorical. He judges them false because they do not actually exist. God, Elohim cannot be seperated in action from the Son or the Holy Spirit; they act together always.

If it is true that you wish to know and understand the historical Hebrew translation and covenantal relevance this will serve. If however you wish to ponder your new found mystery and only accept that which will fit into your own personal construct of what your mystery MUST somehow imply...have at it.
Click to expand...
I propose that I study as a history and as a linguist, as I have since I was about fourteen when I openly admitted I didn't believe the religion and it was an insult to those who did to continue to pretend it for another. I respect people of religion and don't mention these things to create animosity.

I'm not being "insulting" or even judging. I am just telling you why and how the words are used in certain passages.

The verse where he sits in judgment as Lord of lords is in Psalms, written by David.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top