Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

While I partially agree with David's analysis, I think it misses the point and context. Let's start with some fundamentals. First, lets consider the Jewish theory that while in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve could not die. Second, let's also consider that while in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve did not have complete free will in the sense that they ...


1

Even if this "surely" in Genesis 2:16 were meant to imply predestination (which does not seem likely), it does not refer to eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but to eating from all the other allowed trees. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, So this verse is not about the ...


7

I do not pretend to know the minds of the ESV revisers. But there is some justification for their rendering of Genesis 2:16, although exploring the (possible) reasoning cannot be done briefly. Here we go... Genesis 2:16-17 We need the text, and in this case it is imperative to work from the Hebrew, with the immediate context also in view (I'll stick with ...


0

New to this thread, but just a thought-looking at some commentary in a study Bible I purchased, and it translates it as, "in the world of human experience." The Biblical scholar (Dr. Scott Hahn) that provides the commentary and notes understands original Biblical languages, and has untangled many an odd verse for me.


-1

Is there any potential reference to the seed and the sower here? That is the first passage I thought of, which is a bit different than the other two mentioned. Meaning, Samuel did not any of the Lord's words fall to the ground, that is to say they all were in the good soil of Samuel's heart, and not fallen by the wayside as the seed that falls along the ...


1

Copied from my answer to this question (as suggested by @Jack Douglas). Actually, most modern translations are done from the original languages (or are revisions of previous translations that were translated from the original languages), and it usually states so in the first pages of that edition of the Bible. The problem with asking for something that ...


2

Context virtually demands the future Obviously if Isa 7:14 is taken primarily as a prophetic statement referring to Jesus Christ's birth (so Mt 1:23, being a prophetic message to "the house of David," v.13, not Ahaz himself, who did not want a sign, v.12), it would be future.1 However, even if taken as referring to the only other possible referent in the ...


2

There was lots of writing going on in the second millennium BC; The Egyptians were writing in Egyptian on papyrus and stone; the Babylonians were writing in Akkadian on clay tablets and on stone; the people of Ugarit were writing in Ugaritic; the Hittites in Hittite; the Greeks in Mycenean Greek, and so on. The dating of Moses to around 1400 BC goes back ...


2

Lester L. Grabbe says in Ancient Israel, page 117 that there were no pre-eighth century alphabetic writings in the area of Israel and Judah, except for the Gezer calendar which was probably Canaanite, early Hebrew and Canaanite writings being very difficult to distinguish. The spread of alphabetic writing did not antedate the mid-eighth century and not a ...


4

Gesenius lexicon for Strong's 3050 has a slightly expanded explanation. There either יַהֲַוֹה or יַהְַוֶה is allowed to be an earlier pronounciation of YHWH, and the form Yah is explained by apocope to יָהוּ and then by omission of the unaccented וּ to the final יָהּ. As a further evidence, Gesenius points that "these forms are used promiscuously" (sic) at ...


-3

I'm willing to bet this was shortened in the same way and for the same reason that we shorten "Kimberly" to "Kim" and other similar names. Remember, the Psalms were songs. This was probably shortened to "Yah" from "Yahweh" so that a rhyme could be preserved or in order to accommodate the musical structure that went with this verse. I'll bet you don't see ...


2

Short Answer: Based on the textual evidence, it may not be a third usage, but in fact the same as the second usage. In other words, the land (as opposed to the waters or heavens) was formless and void. There are two key pieces of evidence from the text that support this conclusion: Gen. 1:2 does not merely say the earth was formless and void, but also ...


9

According to Genesis, Noah's ark was box shaped. At 300 cubits long (450 feet), 50 cubits wide (75 feet), and 30 cubits high (45 feet), the shape is not round. Genesis 6:15-16 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A ...


6

Since our goal is to understand what the author of the text meant by what he wrote, it is more helpful to look at how the event is described by the author, in the text than to get hung up on semantic possibilities, ANE discoveries, or personal beliefs. The author clearly meant it to be understood as a global event. In addition to the evidence you already ...


0

The Nephilim were simply the children of the Bene Ha'elohim and the daughters of men. The first part of this term simply means sons of. Therefore, the question revolves around what "elohim" refers to here. There are a couple of things that elohim can refer to. In the Bible, it is typically used to refer to Yahewh (god,) however it can also refer to gods; ...


-1

It is doubtful that you will find any wording which would be indicative of a local flood or hints thereof. This however does not mean that local flooding is not what occurred. What you need to remember is that the ancient middle-eastern view of "the whole world" was very limited. It is not as if these people visited, knew about, or even had legends of north ...


2

Because in English, it is considered poor grammar not to have subject-verb agreement. From the text of the Pentateuch and Torah as a whole, it is clear that all occurrences of Elohim (plural) and Yahweh (singular) are discussing the same deity. In verses like Deuteronomy 6:4, Literally, this would translate as "Hear and Obey O Israel, the LORD your Gods ...


0

You might be interested to know that this same question has been discussed here: http://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/7048/why-is-edenics-not-recognized-as-a-serious-linguistic-theory/


1

Pauls conversion revelation & vision of the risen Christ 14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. Some have inferred from this that Hebrew might be the native language of Heaven. Acts 26:13 At ...


2

As modern day Westerners, we forget that middle-easterners from 2 to 5 thousand years ago had a very different picture of the universe. Reading the Enûma Eliš and Eridu Genesis are very revealing in this regard. Here is a pictographic representation of what these people from long ago would have envisioned the universe: When reading Genesis one, is is most ...


-3

This book is also called Song of Solomon, isn't it?? Perhaps Solomon wrote it about one of his 900 wives or 400ish concubines. So, it is possible that this passage does refer to a beautiful woman who is dark in skin color who wasn't a Jew. It is also possible that this passage IS refering to a beautiful Jewish woman who has dark skin. In every race ...


5

The context (see verse 6) justifies translating the v' as "but." Furthermore, it clearly demonstrates that she is not actually black but simply very darkly tanned. Do not stare at me because I am swarthy [i.e. dark], For the sun has burned me. My mother’s sons were angry with me; They made me caretaker of the vineyards, But I have not taken care ...



Top 50 recent answers are included