FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-18-2006, 11:53 AM   #21
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: 7th Heaven
Posts: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mirage
I was thinking more in terms of a plurality of Gods in earlier oral traditions leaving a trace in the terminology than the more radical idea of a very recently monotheistic Judaism.
I can see where this thought comes from, but the Hebrews knew their own language.... If they thought that it represented a plural, and they were monotheistic, why didn't they change it? I'm just not sure that the word necessarily carries the kind of pluralistic baggage some would like to foist upon it.
Phlox Pyros is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 12:26 PM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 8,524
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phlox Pyros
I can see where this thought comes from, but the Hebrews knew their own language.... If they thought that it represented a plural, and they were monotheistic, why didn't they change it? I'm just not sure that the word necessarily carries the kind of pluralistic baggage some would like to foist upon it.
Well according to you it doesn't mean a plural, and I bow to your knowledge on the subject. But my line of thinking was that there was a degree of ambiguity about its singularity, in the way that heavens and waters exemplify, and that this might show that the interpretation of the meaning of the word gradually changed, obviating the need to change the text.

(It's not like they produced a perfectly harmonised coherent work after all, so there must have been some tolerance for odd bits and bobs.)
mirage is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 01:06 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili
But to confuse mankind with humankind is the height of ignorance that no bible translator should ever make. Our humanity is our shadow existence that became ours in Gen.3 when our eyes were opened as the serpent said they would be.
I disagree. Consider a situation where a bible translator injects CrazyGlue™ into his left ear, and WD-40® into his right ear. Imo, that would be a higher level of ignorance.

It would be even more ignorant for that same bible translator to sing “I’m Gonna Wash That Man Right Out of My Hair” (from the Broadway Musical “South Pacific”) as he did this.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 01:09 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default Bali Ha'i

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili
But to confuse mankind with humankind is the height of ignorance that no bible translator should ever make.
Go tell that to the guys over at NetBible™.
Quote:
48tn The Hebrew word is אָדָם (’adam), which can sometimes refer to man, as opposed to woman. The term refers here to humankind, comprised of male and female. The singular is clearly collective (see the plural verb, “[that] they may rule” in v. 26b) and the referent is defined specifically as “male and female” in v. 27. Usage elsewhere in Gen 1 11 supports this as well. In 5:2 we read: “Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and called their name ‘humankind’ (אָדָם).” The noun also refers to humankind in 6:1, 5-7 and in 9:5-6.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 01:15 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default Re: More poster children for MonoYahwhisim

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

"You were shown these things so that you might know that YHWH is The Elohim, there is no other besides Him." Deut. 4:35
That’s another great verse. It appears to be some sort of polemic against – or a correction for, sections like Psalm 82 where "The Elohim" lives among other gods and is not identified as Yahweh.

Do this:

Back up four verses for a better reading experience – where we can find even more entertainment value for our dollar.

Deut 4:31

Yahweh your elohim is El the merciful.


This is great! I love it! Go ask Asherah or Baal who ‘El the merciful’ was. :rolling:
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 01:42 PM   #26
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: 7th Heaven
Posts: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loomis
Deut 4:31

Yahweh your elohim is El the merciful.

As you may know, the ancient Septuagint and Aramaic Targums both read with a singular God and use "EL" as God, just as most English Translations...

Would you care to show, from the Hebrew, how you arrive at your translation?
Phlox Pyros is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 02:02 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffevnz

I was recently shocked to learn that the opening line of Genesis literally translates as "In the beginning the gods created the heaven and the earth..."
...
Later on, Genesis has another line that I find just as mysterious: "And God said, 'Let us make man in our image and likeness.'"
...
I get the uncanny feeling that Genesis is really a polytheistic story.

Does anyone else agree with me about that?
Yes. :wave:

The author of Isaiah 45 agreed with you.

Genesis 1:1~2

In the beginning The Elohim created the heavens and the earth.

Now the earth was a waste and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the watery deep …


Compare ...

Isaiah 45:18

This is what Yahweh says,

the one who created the sky –

he is the real “Elohim,”

the one who formed the earth and made it;

he established it,

he did not create it “a waste,”

he formed it to be inhabited –

“I am Yahweh, I have no peer.”


Do you understand what is going on here?

The authors of the bible disagree with each other. The author of Isaiah 45 is ‘badmouthing’ the author of Genesis 1.

The author of Genesis 1 wrote about a group of nameless gods – but the author of Isaiah 45 wrote about a single god named Yahweh.

It’s ironic that their stories would eventually wind up in the same book.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 02:12 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phlox Pyros
Would you care to show, from the Hebrew, how you arrive at your translation?
No.

I’ve got a better idea.

Bow down to your G_d and ask him to force me to do it.

Apparently he used to do shit like this all the time.

Right?

Have him turn me into a pillar of salt.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 02:16 PM   #29
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: 7th Heaven
Posts: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loomis
No.
I must admit that I find your posts rather hostile. Why not learn and present with integrity and truth?

I feel that such an angry denial speaks volumes about what you know of Hebrew and translation.
Phlox Pyros is offline  
Old 03-18-2006, 03:05 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffevnz

I get the uncanny feeling that Genesis is really a polytheistic story.

Does anyone else agree with me about that?
Yes. :wave:

The author of Isaiah 40 agreed with you.

Genesis 2:2

On the seventh day God finished the work that he did, and he rested on the seventh day ...


Compare …

Isaiah 40:28

Do you not know?

Have you not heard?

Yahweh is an everlasting god,

the creator of the whole earth.

He does not get tired or weary;
Loomis is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:11 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.