Gretzky

1. Comparing the passages on Gen 1:23 and Gen 2:7 and the order of creation.
To avoid further arguments, let me just say the Hebrew word (the original language of the Old  Testament) for ‘day’ has a two-fold meaning. It could mean a 24 hr day (just like ours) or simply a period of time.

The order of the creation is as such:
“Day” 1 in Genesis 1:-3-5 (appearance of light, division of light from darkness and naming of day and night)
“Day” 2 in Gen. 1:6-8 (makinf of expanse, division of lower waters from upper and naming of heaven)
“Day” 3 in Gen 1:9-13 (division of lower waters from dry land, naming of earth and seas, command to produce vegetation, resultant production of vegetation)
“Day” 4 in Gen. 1:14-19 (command that lights appear, stated their purposes, making the sun and moon)
“Day” 5 in Gen. 1:20-23 (command to produce fish and birds, resultant creation and blessing of the same)
“Day” 6 in Gen. 1:24-31(command to produce land animals and the decision to make human being; finally the provision of vegetation as food)
“Day” 7 is the ‘day’ God rested.

I don’t believe the bible is a chronological book in which the events unfolds like a history book. This book is not intended to be read as a novel because there are a lot of repetitions.  The account in Genesis 2:7 is not the exact duplication of the Genesis 1. ]You are right. Man simply means human beings that include male and female (Gen. 1:23). And Gen. 2:7 shows Adam was the first to be made….from 2:8-17 we have the creation of the Garden of Eden…and then Eve was created in 2:21ff. We never have any sayings in Genesis 1 that says God did all the creations in the 6 days in Gen. 1. Even old school scholars from Harvard Divinity school would believe creation is an on going process till today

[ Last edited by Gretzky on 2005-6-30 at 06:55 AM ]

Gretzky

Question #2 Regarding the serpent eating dust in Genesis 3: 14-15

The Hebrew word ‘dust’ (abaq, apar in transliteration) is used literally and in similes to express: poverty, smallness and abasement. The culture of the Jewish people in the Old Testament would put ash/dust on the head as a sign of sorrow and sadness. As a matter of fact, Jewish still practice this today in their culture. This word ‘dust’ is not to be taken as real dust.

Question#3 Regarding the bat as a bird in Leviticus 11:13 and Deutornomy 14:11

Here the identification of the species listed may present a problem, but here ‘birds’ means birds of prey or eaters of carrion. In the classification of the Arabs, the bat is classed as a bird. We have to remember the Arabs and Israelites were in the same family originally.

Question#4 Regarding the rabbit chews the cud (反芻) in Leviticus 11:6

Do the rabbit really chew the cud in the scientific sense of having gastronomical system wherein several stomachs are used for processing food? It is believed cows, sheep and goats ‘regurgitated’ their food. That’s the normal meaning of ‘chew the cud’. The Hebrew expression for ‘chew the cud’ is literally ‘raising up what has been swallowed.’ But what does that mean? Surely there is the appearance of a cud-chewing process in the rabbit. In fact, so convincing was this appearance that Carolus Linnaeus, who invented the modern system of biological classification, first classified the coney and the rabbit as ruminants. I believe the claims of the rabbit chewing the cud is based on observation, not on the scientific refinements of classification. It is true that the camel, coney and rabbit go through similar motions as the cows, sheep and goats.

Leviticus is a book of instructions for the Israelites to do sacrifices to God in the Old Testament times. The meaning of the sacrifice is for the people to remember who God is to them (God doesn’t eat the food, nor does he need the food to feed his hunger!). Christians (Protestant and Catholics) don’t have to obey the sacrificial laws because they believe the death and resurrection of Jesus have already substitute the sacrifices.

[ Last edited by Gretzky on 2005-6-30 at 07:19 AM ]

Gretzky

Question #5 Regarding ‘all winged insects that walk on all fours’ in Lev. 11:20

The English translation of the Hebrew word ‘sherets’ (transliteration) is insects. The English word ‘insects’ means ‘swarming things’. They are small creatures that often occur in swarms and move to and form in haphazard fashion. “Sherets’ is a boarder term than the English translation. In Hebrew, “walking on all fours” is the opposite of walking uprightly: the number of legs is irrelevant.

Question #6 Regarding ‘one pair or seven pairs’ in Noah’s luggage in Gen 7:1-9

God’s command: seven pairs of every clean animal (v.2), two of (a pair) every kind of unclean animal (v.2), and seven of every kind of bird (v.3).

In v. 5 we see Noah ‘did all that God commanded him.”

Gen 7:8 says ‘Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures’. This simply means the animals are in pairs, not in singles. Even the often mistaken Chinese (Union Version) and English (New international Version) translations get this right. So I don’t understand what the fuzz about 1 pair and 7 pairs.

[ Last edited by Gretzky on 2005-6-30 at 07:19 AM ]

Gretzky

Question #7 & 8 Regarding Pillars of the sky and Flat Earth in Job 26:11, Job 38:4 and Matthew 4:8

Figure of speech is used here in all instances. The bible is composed of different genres (history, prophecies, narrative, laws, poetry, etc.). In both Job and Matthew the author used figurative speech of illustrate his point and did not mean literally the pillars of the sky and all kingdoms of the earth. I suppose we would not read 娛樂news with the same mindset of the editorials, right?

Question #9 on God as Satan in 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1

2 Sam. 24:1 says “Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, ‘Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.’ “

1 Chronicles 21:1 says “ Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel.”

Both passages are indeed, recording the same incident. What does the word Satan mean?

Literally, the name Satan means ‘the accuser”. This ‘accuser’ is the Satan we know in our modern day portrayal of the ‘devil’ in the book of Job. The Hebrew word of ‘Satan’ in the book of Job is always preceded by the definite article. The meaning of ‘Satan’ is the ‘accuser’ in the book of Job. However, the Hebrew word ‘Satan’ in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles is not the same one as in the book of Job. The ‘definite article’ is not used there. I know that sounds confusing but if you can read the Hebrew translation you would know the difference. Our misunderstanding is like a foreigner trying the learn the difference between calling someone 大佬 and calling someone 呀哥 in Cantonese.

Let me just say a few words on the fundamentalist (原教旨主義者). It is true that they hold on to an extreme literal position of the bible. They believe the bible means literally everything (word for word). I want to point out most denominations of the Christian church don’t hold this strict point of view on the bible. In fact the fundamentalist point of view is dying as we speak today.

Gretzky

Question #10 Regarding ‘seeing’ God

According to the bible, God is holy and great so sinful people (like the Israelites) would die if they meet God face to face. But why would God allow people to see him and spare their lives (like Moses)?

The references on not being able to see God are there to illustrate God’s glory, pureness and holiness. This is done to show God is a holy God and he requires his creatures to be holy as well.

On the other hand, the bible also gives us the idea that God loves his people so much that he revealed himself to people directly (Moses, Samuel, David, etc.) and indirectly through nature and experiences (to all mankind throughout time). God’s purpose, according to the bible, is to love us (like how our parents are supposed to love us) , not to keep a distance from us. God has a standard (holiness) but he would shield that from his people (who will die according to God’s standard) so people can come direct to him and thus complete his promise to mankind.

Gretzky

To Bright, hallo_chan and changes,

Pls be kind to people asking questions or have doubts....most of the points above are simply careless reading of the passage and lack of understanding of the Hebrew language and culture. THIS MISTAKE IS ALSO COMMITTED BY MANY CHURCH GOERS TOO. I would strongly recommend the personal attacks TO BE STOPPED here.

To Geese,

Is this your  article? Are they your questions? Any responses?

Gretz.

[ Last edited by Gretzky on 2005-6-30 at 08:18 AM ]

Gretzky

Originally posted by cymok3782 at 2005-7-1 12:28 AM:
what i will say is... mistranslation do happen, 由其是translation過n次的聖經...
if you re interested, go read the orginal

The most accurate version we now have is a 5th Century copy by the scribes in St. Petersberg, Russia.

hey Geese, is the article yours or you cut & paste from somewhere?

Gretzky

Don't necessary agree with the 'mistranslation' of the original canon....there are different interpretations of individual words (like the 'days' in Genesis 1..I mentioned in the response to Question 1)...but the translation from the Latin Vulgate(vulgate means 'common'), a translation done by Jerome around 400 AD, is highly accurate. If you ask someone in linguistics (語言學), the bible we have today has the highest accuracy rate of any ancient text. The Old Testament is about 95.7% and the New Testament is about 99.5%.

So the question rises: Where are the 'mistakes'? Are they important?

The above percentage is done by linguists who looks at every single word and puncuation of the text. They compare the original meaning of the word in the written period and the meaning to us in our language (in this case, English). Most of the 'mistakes' and 'unidentifible' words are single/plurals and puncuations. And these variations make up the percentage.

Gretzky

Originally posted by shawnliau13 at 2005-7-1 11:35 AM:
你們以爲是教科書嗎?要改倒最新版本。。。
那還能信嗎？不喜歡的就改，那你喜歡咯。。。

Ever done any translation work from another language to Chinese? How accurate can you go from the original to the translated version?

The reason of the updating is due to new discovery of the Hebrew and Greek languages as well as the cultures. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the 1940s gives us more Hebrew words than we originally thought and so the translation can be done in a better way for modern day English readers (and subsequently Chinese) to understand the scripture.

Ever heard of the Rosetta Stone? The language on the stone helped us understand the ancient Egyptian language/culture much better. The indirect result of the reading of the ancient Egyptian writing actually gives us verification of the person Joesph and Moses (both biblical characters who held high  offices in Egypt).

I just don't understand why you say不喜歡的就改，那你喜歡咯...there are actually so many passages in the bible we have problem explaining...and why didn't anyone took them out?

Any evidence? Pls kindly respond.

Gretzky

JEDP theory has always been a hyothesis...not a theory for the canonization of the Pentateuch. Personally I don't agree with the JEDP theory.

Regarding the name of God...the article has a pretty good explaination already...good point mememe.

On the creation account in Genesis...I have already stated my understanding of the Hebrew word 'day'(see response to Q1). Mememe, pls read it and let me know what you think.

I don't believe the bible is the handbook for everything ever happened anyways....

Geese, Karenmoe and Shawn....any response to my answers?