Timeline for Isn't the verb make singular, making Elohim also singular?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 10, 2023 at 4:51 | comment | added | Nihil Sine Deo | And Jesus and the epistle writers quote the LXX not the Hebrew text. So you answered your own question when you said God does not perform miracles merely for show, nor without necessity. Either way it’s the LXX that translates Nephilim as giants in the Greek and AGAIN that’s why Nephilim is translated giants in English. Your question as asked was answered | |
| Jul 10, 2023 at 4:44 | comment | added | Biblasia | @NihilSineDeo That legend of the 70 translators is based on the Letter of Aristeas, a letter many deem to be a fraud. If one stops to think about it for a minute, the story is actually quite preposterous. Even if God had inspired 70 men to translate with the exact same wording, what would have been the reason? God does not perform miracles merely for show, nor without necessity. And what necessity would exist when God had adamantly forbidden those Jews to go to Egypt in the first place! It is astonishing to realize how many people have bought into the Septuagint and given it credence. | |
| Jul 10, 2023 at 4:32 | comment | added | Nihil Sine Deo | Elohim doesn’t mean human judges in the OT, in fact Elohim is NEVER used of humans in the OT, that’s a translators opinion and it has no backing, furthermore the LXX (also translators) don’t agree either that it’s human judges, elohim is translated theos/God not judges. One would be better served to accept 70 translators that were closer to the original Hebrew text in time and use and in AGREEMENT, than much later non native ancient Hebrew speakers claiming it means judges. | |
| Jul 9, 2023 at 1:29 | comment | added | Biblasia | @RevelationLad You err, not knowing Hebrew. "Elohim" in Hebrew never did mean "God." Its meaning in Hebrew is much broader than its translation in Genesis 1 to English would indicate. It is used for any supernatural being, or any being of elevated status as compared with common people. You are trying to put your own construction on an ancient Hebrew word, and force it to mean what you think it should mean. You are free to do that, but it won't change the word's actual meaning and usage within Hebrew, which likely borrowed this word from Aramaic. How many Hebrew courses have you taken? | |
| Jul 9, 2023 at 0:12 | comment | added | Revelation Lad | I’m not saying they are incorrect. I’m saying your analysis demands an anachronistic understanding of Genesis 1 for the original audience. It is farfetched to assert people needed to wait until David composed his Psalm before making sense of the plural verbs in the creation narrative. That option is available to those who came after but it means many generations died in ignorance waiting for David to compose a Psalm which told them the plain reading was not the correct one! I suppose we are all waiting to figure out how David’s חָסֵר really means עָשָׂה. | |
| Jul 8, 2023 at 20:34 | comment | added | Biblasia | @RevelationLad You have the freedom to choose how you take elohim in the Psalms. You have the right to be wrong, if that's what you choose. Jesus understood David's use of elohim to apply to people (see John 10:34), and Paul understood David's use of the word to apply to angels (see Hebrews 2:7, 9). If you wish to say those applications cannot be correct, you would be contradicting Jesus and/or Paul, one of the Bible's inspired authors. But you could certainly do so--you have free choice. | |
| Jul 8, 2023 at 20:30 | comment | added | Revelation Lad | I am simply pointing out the inconsistencies in your claim. You want to retroactively understand Genesis 1 based on what is conveyed later, including what David wrote. Do you really think someone reading the creation account is going to ignore what it says and think “I’ll defer understanding the plural elohim with the plural verbs until I can figure it out later?” And on their way to figuring it out, they will ignore el and eloah as if they had no bearing on understanding the plural noun? | |
| Jul 8, 2023 at 20:16 | comment | added | Biblasia | @RevelationLad You are exaggerating just a little, as you likely know. Moses, the very same author who wrote the book of Genesis, also used the word "elohim" to mean other things, including judges in Exodus. In Genesis 23:6, the word is even applied to Abraham. But of course, you knew that, right? | |
| Jul 8, 2023 at 19:38 | comment | added | Revelation Lad | You state: "The word elohim cannot reasonably be limited to God alone without violating other Hebrew passages." So after initially reading the passage one must go back and retroactively reinterpret (based on later writings) what was clear and unambiguous when first read. Then one must add angels based on a Psalm of David (hundreds of years later) based on the assumption angels were created before man. Finally one must assume when David says חָסֵר he really means עָשָׂה. Not to mention when reading the Psalm one cannot take elohim to mean God or gods, which also makes sense. | |
| Jul 8, 2023 at 5:00 | history | answered | Biblasia | CC BY-SA 4.0 |