User avatar
Posts: 8435
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 6:37 am

PostSun Oct 11, 2009 6:49 am » by Lucidlemondrop

domains wrote:
lucidlemondrop wrote:
domains wrote:You got this far... when does the bowing start.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KpYZCI2 ... xt_from=PL

Not only wasn't that funny but it gave me a headache.

As mod will you bann headaches?

Only my own..........
What a long strange trip it's been..............

Posts: 849
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:40 pm

PostSun Oct 11, 2009 6:50 am » by Sheeple

God is not the Creator, claims academic
The notion of God as the Creator is wrong, claims a top academic, who believes the Bible has been wrongly translated for thousands of years.

By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent
Published: 5:45PM BST 08 Oct 2009

Professor Ellen van Wolde, a respected Old Testament scholar and author, claims the first sentence of Genesis "in the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" is not a true translation of the Hebrew.

She claims she has carried out fresh textual analysis that suggests the writers of the great book never intended to suggest that God created the world -- and in fact the Earth was already there when he created humans and animals.

Prof Van Wolde, 54, who will present a thesis on the subject at Radboud University in The Netherlands where she studies, said she had re-analysed the original Hebrew text and placed it in the context of the Bible as a whole, and in the context of other creation stories from ancient Mesopotamia.

She said she eventually concluded the Hebrew verb "bara", which is used in the first sentence of the book of Genesis, does not mean "to create" but to "spatially separate".

The first sentence should now read "in the beginning God separated the Heaven and the Earth"

According to Judeo-Christian tradition, God created the Earth out of nothing.

Prof Van Wolde, who once worked with the Italian academic and novelist Umberto Eco, said her new analysis showed that the beginning of the Bible was not the beginning of time, but the beginning of a narration.

She said: "It meant to say that God did create humans and animals, but not the Earth itself."

She writes in her thesis that the new translation fits in with ancient texts.

According to them there used to be an enormous body of water in which monsters were living, covered in darkness, she said.

She said technically "bara" does mean "create" but added: "Something was wrong with the verb.

"God was the subject (God created), followed by two or more objects. Why did God not create just one thing or animal, but always more?"

She concluded that God did not create, he separated: the Earth from the Heaven, the land from the sea, the sea monsters from the birds and the swarming at the ground.

"There was already water," she said.

"There were sea monsters. God did create some things, but not the Heaven and Earth. The usual idea of creating-out-of-nothing, creatio ex nihilo, is a big misunderstanding."

God came later and made the earth livable, separating the water from the land and brought light into the darkness.

She said she hoped that her conclusions would spark "a robust debate", since her finds are not only new, but would also touch the hearts of many religious people.

She said: "Maybe I am even hurting myself. I consider myself to be religious and the Creator used to be very special, as a notion of trust. I want to keep that trust."

A spokesman for the Radboud University said: "The new interpretation is a complete shake up of the story of the Creation as we know it."

Prof Van Wolde added: "The traditional view of God the Creator is untenable now."

Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:13 am

PostSun Oct 11, 2009 10:17 am » by Liberal

spock wrote: because it's not up to us to change anybody, that is the job of the holy spirit.

Of all the things that my spiritual mentor drove into my head, those words that you wrote are the most important. People do not save people, God saves people. All I can hope to do as a good Christian is to show the light of God through my good deeds, and be knowledgeable in the word so as to be able to answer questions from the Bible, and not from man.

It is always very, very, encouraging to see that others share this universal truth, your words that I quoted, are as true as any ever spoken.

As for us agreeing...politics are made for division. Without conflict there would be no politics. That is what is so frustrating, we as people, and a nation, are so much closer than what we may imagine. Our views and beliefs are, in reality, very close.

It is only politics that divides us, not the fundamentals of humanity.

Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 5:01 pm

PostSun Oct 11, 2009 10:47 am » by Johnsmith

In Hebrew, it could also be: bara-koba-mah?

Posts: 849
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:40 pm

PostSun Oct 11, 2009 7:02 pm » by Sheeple

johnsmith wrote:In Hebrew, it could also be: bara-koba-mah?

You probably mean:
bara = create, or separate;
koba = metal helmet worn by a solider for military conflict;
ma = or mah {mah}; or ma {maw}; or ma {mah}; also meh {meh}; a primitive particle; properly, interrogative what? (including how? why? when?); but also exclamation, what! (including how!), or indefinitely what (including whatever, and even relatively, that which); often used with prefixes in various adverbial or conjunctive senses:--how (long, oft, (- soever)), (no-)thing, what (end, good, purpose, thing), whereby(-fore, -in, -to, -with), (for) why.

Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 5:01 pm

PostTue Oct 13, 2009 7:55 pm » by Johnsmith

sheeple wrote:You probably mean:...
Indeed, this could give the same combination of letters two opposite meanings in Hebrew: as initially interpreted in the thread video, or as a peace maker.


  • Related topics
    Last post