Donnmathan

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression from Strong's that the word usually translated in christian bibles as "god" in the first chapter of Genesis is actually a plural, literally "gods", denoting a group. That changes in chapter 2 to a singular, "god", reinforcing the idea that there are two seperate stories mashed in there.

Chili

Hi Jadea and welcome to the boards.

In response to your question would I say that sin is a religious concept that convicts only those who belong to a religion that calls nudity a sin. So for those who do not belong to such a religion nudity is not a sin while for others it may just be their way to seek eternal salvation as sinner (but not likely).

The concept shame exists only as a result of social conditioning. This makes the 'fig leave' a metaphor that points at our dual nature wherein only shame can be conceived to exist. I should add here that our conscience is retained in our soul, against which we must stand convicted as sinner and thus also against which we must bare our nudity without guilt. Hence your "today" in respect to our civilization.

To regain from our fallen nature might make us free from desire but not asocial. Non-social, maybe, but I think we would still play by the same rules with others.

Chris Weimer

Elohim is only plural when it takes a plural verb, no?

Peter Kirby

I recently discovered that Adam wasn't the first man.

It was another man by the same name.

LeeBuhrul

so adam is man... and man is adam
fig leaf means shame and shame is from fallen nature
fallen nature is sin... or not...
spades are sinners... (or was that sinners are spades)
elohim is plural when pluralized...

:banghead: about my OP... :banghead:

NEVER MIND

LeeBuhrul

Still it seems no more logical then my conclusion in the OP... and the narrative seems consistent with my conclusion...

Chris Weimer

About pluralisation: see here and here

spin

Language is funny.

Is "sheep" singular or plural? Is "you" singular or plural"? ("Sheep" is easier to pick. Sheep, deer, fish, etc.)

If "team" is singular, how come I can say "the team are all here"?

What does "man" mean in "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"?

Anyway, Gen 2:4 is a small passage called a "toledoth" (from the verb YLD, to give birth), meaning "those that are born", which we translate "generations". It is used to start several passages in Genesis,and one can separate the book into meaningful units based on the introductory toledoths. Strangely enough there isn't one at Gen 1:1 and many apologists therefore divide 2:4, claiming that the first part with the toledoth belongs with the preceding creation account. Naturally, it doesn't. The toledoth at 2:4 without one at 1:1 shows that Gen 1-2:3 is an addition to the text. What this means for the discussion here is that of course the first chapter is a different creation account from that in chapter two (and we have a precursor to Gen 1 in the Babylonian creation account "Enuma Elish"). There are many important differences which show different contexts which produced them. A single example, the first creation is from chaotic waters (the Tigris and Euphrates did a lot of damage when they flooded), while the second creation was from a desert.


spin

Chris Weimer

Spin, what did you think of the oddity I pointed out in Genesis 2:4. When Yahweh Elohim was created? I'm still working through this, bear with me.

spin

Gen 2:4 BYWM ($WT YHWH )LHYM )RC W$MYM

on the day of YHWH Elohim's making of (the) earth and heavens

Gen 5:1 BYWM BR) )LHYM )DM

on the day of Elohim's creating man

Num 30:8 BYWM $M(

on the day of (his) hearing...

(I've used a gerund while in Hebrew it's an infinitive in order to convey the construct form.)

The verb (or the whole verb clause) in each case is in a construct with YWM, ie these are all subordinate clauses, using the infinitive in construct to qualify which day, as it appears to my ungrammared eyes.

Note that )DM in 5:1 is without the object marker.


spin