Sci_Fidelity

Hello? Anybody home? Magus sidesteps again :boohoo:

Jeremy Pallant

Just to nit-pick, but the Earth isn't round. Nor is it a sphere. It is an oblate spheroid.

YHWHtruth

I was answering objections ffrom atheists regarding the Bible's use
of the word DAY at Gen. 2:17, as they make God out to be a liar
because Adam did NOT die on that specific day.

I think part of the problem is that our English translations have
not served us well in translating the meanings of certain texts.
The ancients had no problem with the Hebrew word for DAY, they saw
no contradiction, as they understood the word in a different way
that is not really carried over too well in most translations that
only opt for the word-for-word literal rendering. A better
translation might be one that provides a meaning for meaning/thought
for thought rendering from the Hebrew is Ferrar Fenton's The Holy
Bible in Modern English, which translates the day/yowm at Genesis 1
and 2:4 as "period" and "age."

Consider other ways this word was used:
At Numbers 7:84 it refers to 12 days.
At Lev. 13:14 it is "at any time." Fenton
1 Kings 2:37 "ever" TEV
Ps 18:18 "in my day" Fenton "when" TEV
Isaiah 11:16 it refers to the entire Exodus.
In Jer. 11:4, 7 it refers to the Exodus plus the institution of the
Mosaic Law.
There are of course many more examples (see Brown-Driver-Briggs
Lexicon and Gesenius Hebrew Lexicon).

Now, take the above and apply it to Gen. 2:17:
(NET Bible) "but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil, for when you eat from it you will surely die."
(New Jerusalem Bible) But of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil you are not to eat; for, the day you eat of that, you are
doomed to die.'

This is then another sense we could take it, that Adam fell from
immortality to mortality in one day, and simultaneously lived to
less than one day in God's eyes. No one in the Bible ever lived to
more than 1000 years, and as time went on, the life expectancy
dropped. When Adam ate the fruit, it was like unplugging a fan. It
does not stop immediately, but does eventually.

"The word "day" is also used of an indefinite period, e.g "the day"
or "day that" means in general "that time" (see Gen_2:4;
Lev_14:2); "day of trouble" (Psa_20:1); "day of his wrath"
(Job_20:28); "day of Yahweh" (Isa_2:12); "day of the Lord" (1Co_5:5;
1Th_5:2; 2Pe_3:10); "day of salvation" (2Co_6:2);. "day of Jesus
Christ" (Phi_1:6).
(4) It is used figuratively also in Joh_9:4, where "while it is day"
means "while I have opportunity to work, as daytime is the time for
work." In 1Th_5:5, 1Th_5:8, "sons of the day" means spiritually
enlightened ones.
(5) We must also bear in mind that with God time is not reckoned as
with us (see Psa_90:4; 2Pe_3:8).
(6) The apocalyptic use of the word "day" in Dan_12:11; Rev_2:10,
etc., is difficult to define. It evidently does not mean a natural
day.
(7) On the meaning of "day" in the story of Creation we note (a) The
word "day" is used of the whole period of creation (Gen_2:4); (b)
These days are days of God, with whom one day is as a thousand
years; the whole age or period of salvation is called "the day of
salvation"; see above. So we believe that in harmony with Bible
usage we may understand the creative days as creative periods."
International Standard Bible Encyc.

A Religious Encyclopaedia (vol. I, p. 613) observes: "The days of
creation were creative days, stages in the process, but not days of
twenty-four hours each."-Edited by P. Schaff, 1894

It is the erroneous understanding of the creative days that led to
the embarrassment of religion at the Scopes Trial and thus plummeted
the respect for God and the Bible. For more on this, read the Battle
For God by K. Armstrong.

YHWHtruth

The problem lies in that we are holding a very ancient text to the same standard that we would a 20th century document. You cannot do that. The ancients from another culture completely had a very different way of communicating than we do.

Spaz

then what was the tree of life? For what reason would god have put the tree of life into the garden if they were immortal from the start?

YHWHtruth

If Adam and Eve had been permitted to eat of that tree of life, what would that have meant for them? Why, the privilege of living forever in Paradise! One Bible scholar speculated: "The tree of life must have had some virtue by which the human frame was to be kept free from the decrepitude of age, or the decay that terminates in death." He even claimed that "there was an herbal virtue in paradise capable of counteracting the effects" of aging. However, the Bible does not say that the tree of life in itself had life-giving qualities. Rather, that tree simply represented God's guarantee of everlasting life to the one who would be allowed to eat its fruit.-Revelation 2:7.

Felstorm

You argue that we cannot hold the the bible to a literalist viewpoint, and we must somehow "divine" the meaning of the unnamed writers words, I cannot argue with this. In fact it that very statement you made undermines the credibility of the bible and actually supports biblical skepticism. It's interpretation is entirely subjective. And THAT is why there are so many factions of Christanity and Judaism and Islam. Because everyone reads it a little different. Which brings into question omnipotent YHVH's choice of secretaries. Why would a being that can do anything have to use a third party, known to fuck everything up, when he could have just as well done it himself and came though loud and clear.?

But! In case one were so inclined to hold a biblical literalist's standpoint...

Up is down and black is white?

So at Genesis 2:17 where it says;

"But as for the tree of knowledge of good and bad you may not eat of it, for in the day you eat from it you will surely die."

So "day" is not actually a "day" as we know it, but any arbitrary amount of time a biblical apologist wishes to apply to it? Because the biblical apologists variable period of time for a "day" is how long a "day" is to god right? In less confusing words, god has a "day" and man has a "day". But a humans "day" is limited to the earth's rotaional axis, and god's day is, however the hell long you wanna make it. A year, a thousand years, 144 months...etc. Just so long as it supports the argument right? Because Adam lived for some 900 years, and the Psalms describe something to the affect that a year to man is as a day to YHVH. So that makes no sense.

And that person knows just exactly how long this day is to god because he personally asked him and got a direct response? Please, these items are so weak they don't even constitute an argument.

Notice that before this, not one thing was mentioned about mankind being immortal or possessing of eternal life. For all we know humans were mortal to begin with. And that there are two trees. One of Eternal life, and one of Knowledge. Why would god put a tree of Life in the garden, if mankind were already possessing of eternal life!

In fact,

Genesis 3:22;

"And YHVH Elohim (Elohim- hebrew plural. literally: Those who from the sky to earth came.) went on to say 'Here is the man that has become like one of us, knowing both good and bad, and now in order that he man not put out his hand and also take from the tree of everlasing life and eat and live to time indefinate.'

Blah blah blah, YHVH throws Adam out on his ear, firey swords and magical beings, blah blah blah.

Long and the short of it is, now that mankind exercised his god given freewill , ate the fruit and can make moral decisions himself, god punishes Adam for for the actions that Adam took! YHVH is ultimately responsible for Adam's actions. God made man. God made Freewill. God made good and evil. God made the trees. God made Satan. God made the snake. God made Eve. God made the universe. Who is ultimately at fault here? YHVH God has only himself to blame. Ultimately he is at fault. By all of god's own rules he should go to hell and burn himself for eternity.

It's kinda like the principle of threatening a child that has never been spanked before with a spanking for taking a cookie. Of course the kid is going to take the cookie because the kid has no idea what the consequense is. Adam had no idea what death was because as the first supposed human, he had never witnessed death before, or experienced that grief. He hadn't the capacity because he didn't obviously have the capability of freethought until after he ate the fruit which would have, supposedly, killed him on that day.

But seeing as god is omniscient and all he knew this was going to happen ahead of time and as such it's all part of god's providencial "plan" to make humans suffer.

Also of note, YHVH Elohim is talking to unnamed associates. "man has become like US". Us. Very interesting word. Is there more than one YHVH? Perhaps YHVH isn't the only deity observing the proceedings taking place within this garden?

YHWHtruth

Can we say NON SEQUITUR, all TOGETHER now NON SEQUITUR

When one mixes garbage with something to begin with, regardless of what they add to it later, it will still be garbage, at least in part. Thus the saying, "Garbage in, garbage out," or GIGO.

YHWHtruth

FEL WROTE:

But seeing as god is omniscient and all he knew this was going to happen ahead of time and as such it's all part of god's providencial "plan" to make humans suffer.

'Many people have said that. But if I were to do something that you wanted me to do, would you condemn me for it? . . . Then, if Adam's sin was God's will, why was Adam driven out of Eden as a sinner? (Gen. 3:17-19, 23, 24)'

When God created Adam, did he know that Adam would sin?

Here is what God set before Adam and Eve: "Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth." "And Jehovah God also laid this command upon the man: 'From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die.'" (Gen. 1:28; 2:16, 17) Would you encourage your children to undertake a project with a marvelous future, knowing from the start that it was doomed to failure? Would you warn them of harm, while knowing that you had planned everything so that they were sure to come to grief? Is it reasonable, then, to attribute such to God?

Matt. 7:11: "If you, although being wicked [or, "bad as you are," NE], know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those asking him?"

If God foreordained and foreknew Adam's sin and all that would result from this, it would mean that by creating Adam, God deliberately set in motion all the wickedness committed in human history. He would be the Source of all the wars, the crime, the immorality, the oppression, the lying, the hypocrisy, the disease. But the Bible clearly says: "You are not a God taking delight in wickedness." (Ps. 5:4) "Anyone loving violence His soul certainly hates." (Ps. 11:5) "God . . . cannot lie." (Titus 1:2) "From oppression and from violence he [the One designated by God as Messianic King] will redeem their soul, and their blood will be precious in his eyes." (Ps. 72:14) "God is love." (1 John 4:8) "He is a lover of righteousness and justice."-Ps. 33:5.

Max

YHWHtruth

Many apparent contradictions can be explained simply by reading the context. Some are copyists errors and many others can be explained if only we knew how to read the original languages. It helps often to use more than one translation because Hebrew and Greek have their peculiarities that make them difficult to render in English or other languages.

"The peculiarities of the Oriental idiom are another prolife source of discrepancies. The people of the East are fervid and impassioned in their modes of thought and expression. They think and speak in poetry. Bold metaphors and startling hyperboles abound in their writings and conversation. The shepherd," says Eichhorn, "only speaks in the soul of the shepherd, and the primitive Oriental only speaks in the soul of another Oriental. Without an intimate acquaintance with the customs of pastoral life, without an accurate knowledge of the East and it's manners, without a close intimacy with the manner of thinking and speaking in the uncivilized world,.....you easily become a traitor to the book, when you would be it's deliverer and interpreter."

Professor Stuart: "I do not, and would not, summon them [the books of scripture] before the tribunal of Occidental criticism. Asia is one world; Europe and America, another. Let an Asiatic be tried before his own tribunal. To pass just sentence upon him, we must enter into his feelings, views, methods of reasoning and thinking, and place ourselves in the midst of the circumstances which surrounded him."

Lowth, on Metaphors: "The Orientals are attached to this style of composition; and many flights which our ears-too fastidious, perhaps, in these respects-will scarcely bear, must be allowed to the general freedom and boldness of these writers."
Again, he speaks of the difficulties which arise in reading authors "where everything is depicted and illustrated with the greatest variety and abundance of imagery; they must be still more numerous in such of the poets as are foreign and ancient-in the Orientals above all foreigners; they being the farthest removed from our customs and manners, and, of all the Orientals, more especially in the Hebrews." pp. 14, 15, Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible by John W. Haley