7 day creation story doesnt seem possible

[Indeependent]

Maybe someone that knows some original hebrew text can explain? Perhaps it got "lost" in translation? Indeependent Ropey

Because the English is completely incorrect.
The Hebrew words are Boker (clarity, capable of being examined, NOT morning) and Erev (mixture, confusion, not capable of being examined), NOT evening.

My thanks to the Catholic dunces who translated the Hebrew into other languages.

 

[TNHarley]

Maybe someone that knows some original hebrew text can explain? Perhaps it got "lost" in translation? Indeependent Ropey

Because the English is completely incorrect.
The Hebrew words are Boker (clarity, capable of being examined, NOT morning) and Erev (mixture, confusion, not capable of being examined), NOT evening.

My thanks to the Catholic dunces who translated the Hebrew into other languages.

thats a hek of a difference lol
What about plants and trees being before the sun?
Does it say before the earth was formed, it was oceans(water)?

 

[flacaltenn]

I didn't say anything was crap. It just can't be taken literally, as in 7 days of magic. There has been a lot of interesting interpretation based on translations like HaShev's and comparing it to Big Bang theory. I'm not laughing at anyone.

I did. I meant along with the questions in my OP. Not you.
If the answer is "it cant be taken literally" then why was it taken literally? Sounds like a new (new-er lol) talking point.. We accepted the earth was flat for millennia... Remember people freaking out because ol christopher was going to fall off our planet?

It was taken literally until we knew better. What is so hard about that?
Are you hanging around with people freaking out because most of America doesn't believe God created the planet and us in 7 days?

Thats my point, though. Inconsistencies lead me to lose credibility in something. Why is it fact until it is proven wrong and then you get the "well, maybe every christian ever shouldnt have took it so literally"... doesnt bode well with me.

IMO, that is taking "consistency" too far. Like the flat earth, we figured it out. Do you mean to tell me you don't want to believe the earth is round(ish) because once we believed it was flat because we didn't know any better?
The other thing is, maybe people DIDN'T necessarily take the creation story literally, but who would speak up about it back in those days? Nasty things happened. So maybe they said "Yeah, right" in their heads.

But they wouldnt have known these answers back then. So why would they question it?
"we figured it out" I thought Gods revelation was so that we could get to know him and cherish him? Isnt the bible HIS word? Pretty sure it says it in the bible that is a couple/few times.

It's largely human interpretation that it is "God's word". It's a submission thing. Much like the Muslim phrase that's included in every conversation. Insha'Allah. The fact this "story" fairly accurately tracks the "modern scientific" order of Creation is something to ponder.

It may be that the ancients spent more time than we do pondering the "order of things".. Today we just wrestle with each other and poke people a lot...

AND MAYBE -- the order of creation is just obvious and doesn't require advanced Physics/Biology/Geology if you have a lot of time on your hands and your face not buried in "social media".

 

[fncceo]

OK TN.. I found a dude had snapped a pic of the solar system getting created 4.6 BIll years ago. It must have been an old-timey camera. But this is the LEGAL SCIENTIFIC view of "Day one and two of creation.

No clear "dome" of light from our POV. LOTS of light. Maybe not clearly day and night ---- yet.

Here's your "oceans" without water..

You got better science than this?

No lol Science is the reason i started this..
Our(english) translations say water. Again, thats why i was asking for hebrew. I have no doubt in my mind a lot of what christians(or anyone really) know about the bible could be incorrect. All it takes is one word..

The original Hebrew version of Beresheit and the creation story differs in description and even the order of creation, but the essential concept of a divine creation remains the same.

 

[TNHarley]

I did. I meant along with the questions in my OP. Not you.
If the answer is "it cant be taken literally" then why was it taken literally? Sounds like a new (new-er lol) talking point.. We accepted the earth was flat for millennia... Remember people freaking out because ol christopher was going to fall off our planet?

It was taken literally until we knew better. What is so hard about that?
Are you hanging around with people freaking out because most of America doesn't believe God created the planet and us in 7 days?

Thats my point, though. Inconsistencies lead me to lose credibility in something. Why is it fact until it is proven wrong and then you get the "well, maybe every christian ever shouldnt have took it so literally"... doesnt bode well with me.

IMO, that is taking "consistency" too far. Like the flat earth, we figured it out. Do you mean to tell me you don't want to believe the earth is round(ish) because once we believed it was flat because we didn't know any better?
The other thing is, maybe people DIDN'T necessarily take the creation story literally, but who would speak up about it back in those days? Nasty things happened. So maybe they said "Yeah, right" in their heads.

But they wouldnt have known these answers back then. So why would they question it?
"we figured it out" I thought Gods revelation was so that we could get to know him and cherish him? Isnt the bible HIS word? Pretty sure it says it in the bible that is a couple/few times.

It's largely human interpretation that it is "God's word". It's a submission thing. Much like the Muslim phrase that's included in every conversation. Insha'Allah. The fact this "story" fairly accurately tracks the "modern scientific" order of Creation is something to ponder.

It may be that the ancients spent more time than we do pondering the "order of things".. Today we just wrestle with each other and poke people a lot...

AND MAYBE -- the order of creation is just obvious and doesn't require advanced Physics/Biology/Geology if you have a lot of time on your hands and your face not buried in "social media".

I love pondering. I love to read.
Wise men wonder Strong men die

 

[OldLady]

Maybe someone that knows some original hebrew text can explain? Perhaps it got "lost" in translation? Indeependent Ropey

Because the English is completely incorrect.
The Hebrew words are Boker (clarity, capable of being examined, NOT morning) and Erev (mixture, confusion, not capable of being examined), NOT evening.

My thanks to the Catholic dunces who translated the Hebrew into other languages.

Has there ever been a translation using the words as they were used then?

 

[OldLady]

It was taken literally until we knew better. What is so hard about that?
Are you hanging around with people freaking out because most of America doesn't believe God created the planet and us in 7 days?

Thats my point, though. Inconsistencies lead me to lose credibility in something. Why is it fact until it is proven wrong and then you get the "well, maybe every christian ever shouldnt have took it so literally"... doesnt bode well with me.

IMO, that is taking "consistency" too far. Like the flat earth, we figured it out. Do you mean to tell me you don't want to believe the earth is round(ish) because once we believed it was flat because we didn't know any better?
The other thing is, maybe people DIDN'T necessarily take the creation story literally, but who would speak up about it back in those days? Nasty things happened. So maybe they said "Yeah, right" in their heads.

But they wouldnt have known these answers back then. So why would they question it?
"we figured it out" I thought Gods revelation was so that we could get to know him and cherish him? Isnt the bible HIS word? Pretty sure it says it in the bible that is a couple/few times.

This is where I bow out. I don't believe in God quite the way religious Christians do.

Where did you get your beliefs from then?

Same as you--questioning, reading, meditating, and thinking long and hard about it. I was scared to death when I gave up God. It makes you so alone. But there is certainly an awesome beauty to the universe and to creation that deserves a nod, in whatever way you wish to do that.

 

[TNHarley]

Thats my point, though. Inconsistencies lead me to lose credibility in something. Why is it fact until it is proven wrong and then you get the "well, maybe every christian ever shouldnt have took it so literally"... doesnt bode well with me.

IMO, that is taking "consistency" too far. Like the flat earth, we figured it out. Do you mean to tell me you don't want to believe the earth is round(ish) because once we believed it was flat because we didn't know any better?
The other thing is, maybe people DIDN'T necessarily take the creation story literally, but who would speak up about it back in those days? Nasty things happened. So maybe they said "Yeah, right" in their heads.

But they wouldnt have known these answers back then. So why would they question it?
"we figured it out" I thought Gods revelation was so that we could get to know him and cherish him? Isnt the bible HIS word? Pretty sure it says it in the bible that is a couple/few times.

This is where I bow out. I don't believe in God quite the way religious Christians do.

Where did you get your beliefs from then?

Same as you--questioning, reading, meditating, and thinking long and hard about it. I was scared to death when I gave up God. It makes you so alone. But there is certainly an awesome beauty to the universe and to creation that deserves a nod, in whatever way you wish to do that.

I didnt feel alone but i can understand how someone would.
There absolutely is. I dont doubt a creator. At all. Whoever or whatever it was did an awesome job.

 

[Indeependent]

Maybe someone that knows some original hebrew text can explain? Perhaps it got "lost" in translation? Indeependent Ropey

Because the English is completely incorrect.
The Hebrew words are Boker (clarity, capable of being examined, NOT morning) and Erev (mixture, confusion, not capable of being examined), NOT evening.

My thanks to the Catholic dunces who translated the Hebrew into other languages.

thats a hek of a difference lol
What about plants and trees being before the sun?
Does it say before the earth was formed, it was oceans(water)?

Think about it, what is the true source of energy and light for any form of life?
Light was created in the first day and it was a purer form of light and energy than any we experience.

 

[Indeependent]

Maybe someone that knows some original hebrew text can explain? Perhaps it got "lost" in translation? Indeependent Ropey

Because the English is completely incorrect.
The Hebrew words are Boker (clarity, capable of being examined, NOT morning) and Erev (mixture, confusion, not capable of being examined), NOT evening.

My thanks to the Catholic dunces who translated the Hebrew into other languages.

Has there ever been a translation using the words as they were used then?

What a great question (and I'm not being sarcastic at all)!
In short, you can't translate the Torah because each phrase and word can be interpreted in countless ways.
The best way to find out what a word means is to go to the first time it's used, but you have to have an honest translation and know enough Hebrew to recognize the truth.

ArtScroll is the most famous and prolific publisher but I want to wring their necks because the word and grammer "translation" caters to the masses.
The main goal of ArtScroll and perhaps Feldheim is not to offend anyone, especially Christians.
For instance, the explanation I provided, which is WELL known in the Observant Jewish world, is a tad difficult to find without reading what could be referred to as somewhat less popular publishers or listening to lectures.

Someone posted that the Torah episode of the Tower of Bavel states that all of mankind spoke "one language", but there are two words for Language and Hebrew has no synonyms.
One word, La-shone, means literally "language".
One word, Saw-fore, means "intent" according to someone I discussed it with last week.

Sorry to bore you but no one ever accused the Torah of being a pleasant afternoon read.

 

[The Professor]

Maybe someone that knows some original hebrew text can explain? Perhaps it got "lost" in translation? Indeependent Ropey

It did, the use of words like slang have to be understood in meaning from the era it originated.
The Sheva (7) Day(age) Creation is the progression of ages.
The Dead Sea Scrolls allowed us to see how words were utilized in their age (days) not ours. "Day" sometimes refered to periods of time as in an era or "age of".



source:The Ages of The World 4Q180-181



creation days-the world has gone through 6 ages in creating order from it's chaos not 6000 years with
The 7th(Sheva) Day(Age) rest.

I've heard that argument (and others like it) before, but I disagree.

After each Creation event, the Bible says, “And the evening and the morning was the first day or the second day or the third day, etc.” There is no way that an era or age can be defined as a single evening and a single morning. The Biblical account clearly refers to a traditional day of 24 hours, a period of one morning and one evening

 

[Indeependent]

Maybe someone that knows some original hebrew text can explain? Perhaps it got "lost" in translation? Indeependent Ropey

It did, the use of words like slang have to be understood in meaning from the era it originated.
The Sheva (7) Day(age) Creation is the progression of ages.
The Dead Sea Scrolls allowed us to see how words were utilized in their age (days) not ours. "Day" sometimes refered to periods of time as in an era or "age of".



source:The Ages of The World 4Q180-181



creation days-the world has gone through 6 ages in creating order from it's chaos not 6000 years with
The 7th(Sheva) Day(Age) rest.

I've heard that argument (and others like it) before, but I disagree.

After each Creation event, the Bible says, “And the evening and the morning was the first day or the second day or the third day, etc.” There is no way that an era or age can be defined as a single evening and a single morning. The Biblical account clearly refers to a traditional day of 24 hours, a period of one morning and one evening

The only day that would be more than a normal period of 24 hours is the very first day. The period of darkness (evening) that preceded the creation of light was of an unknown duration.

The Biblical account clearly refers to a traditional day of 24 hours, a period of one morning and one evening...
Enlighten me.

 

[hjmick]

How do you create earth after day and night? Day and night depends on rotation of the sphere. At that point, the Earth was still unformed.
How were plants created before the sun? Plants require the sun
How do you have lamps (sun and moon) giving their own light? The moon reflects light from the sun

Any explanations other than How much better and more satisfying it is to accept Scripture as it stands. It doesn't need to be fully understood and explained by modern scientific thought; it just needs to be believed and obeyed like found on ICR.com?

@4:45...

 

[G.T.]

I heard an ex rabbi say that the only goal in justifying nonsensical portions of the text was to muddy it with as much abstraction as possible

 

[Pete7469]

It's God, He can do anything he wants

/thread

That has always been my perspective.

God transcends the 3rd and 4th dimensions. Time to Him is irrelevant. I don't think he came down and explained all that, even as the OT says He talked to Moses.

I wasn't there.

I have faith He does make things happen, and that He has opposition which is less powerful.

Not sure how it all plays out but I just do my best to do good.

If I'm wrong in the end, no foul. If I was a democrook sociopath in the end....


well ****...

 

[Indeependent]

I heard an ex rabbi say that the only goal in justifying nonsensical portions of the text was to muddy it with as much abstraction as possible

Challenge me and let's see if your bullshit statement stands.
Would you like to start off with a multi-thousand page discussion of Genesis 1:1?

 

[Indeependent]

It's God, He can do anything he wants

/thread

That has always been my perspective.

God transcends the 3rd and 4th dimensions. Time to Him is irrelevant. I don't think he came down and explained all that, even as the OT says He talked to Moses.

I wasn't there.

I have faith He does make things happen, and that He has opposition which is less powerful.

Not sure how it all plays out but I just do my best to do good.

If I'm wrong in the end, no foul. If I was a democrook sociopath in the end....


well ****...

They why create a physical world?
The physical world is the exercise portal to the non-physical world.

 

[G.T.]

I heard an ex rabbi say that the only goal in justifying nonsensical portions of the text was to muddy it with as much abstraction as possible

Challenge me and let's see if your bullshit statement stands.
Would you like to start off with a multi-thousand page discussion of Genesis 1:1?

I dont spend time to discuss man made religion anymore......without any proof, first, that it isnt man made. I simply mock it and point to its inadequacy.

I remain agnostic as to the question of a creator, which is honesty.

 

[Indeependent]

I heard an ex rabbi say that the only goal in justifying nonsensical portions of the text was to muddy it with as much abstraction as possible

Challenge me and let's see if your bullshit statement stands.
Would you like to start off with a multi-thousand page discussion of Genesis 1:1?

I dont spend time to discuss man made religion anymore......without any proof, first, that it isnt man made. I simply mock it and point to its inadequacy.

I remain agnostic as to the question of a creator, which is honesty.

I see inadequacy in transient entertainment.
It took 5 decades to get here but fiction is boring as can be.
I take much more pleasure in addressing reality.

 

[G.T.]

I heard an ex rabbi say that the only goal in justifying nonsensical portions of the text was to muddy it with as much abstraction as possible

Challenge me and let's see if your bullshit statement stands.
Would you like to start off with a multi-thousand page discussion of Genesis 1:1?

I dont spend time to discuss man made religion anymore......without any proof, first, that it isnt man made. I simply mock it and point to its inadequacy.

I remain agnostic as to the question of a creator, which is honesty.

I see inadequacy in transient entertainment.
It took 5 decades to get here but fiction is boring as can be.
I take much more pleasure in addressing reality.

I consider all man made religions works of fiction, and not only that - but also disturbingly evil.

Entertainment is fine by me. Art is intriguing. Even the evil sort, like Religion, has some intriguing attributes.