ECT We Don't Hear Much From Today's Prophecy Teachers, Why Do You Think That Is?

[JudgeRightly]

Over the next few days, let's look at correct interpretation of scripture.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

God has always been, so the beginning of something is what Gen 1 speaks. The correct translation is:

In a beginning God HAD CREATED the heavens and the earth.

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Correct translation:
And the earth had become waste and empty; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

From another source:

The perfect mood indicates a completed ACTION. Just “being” is not an action. “Becoming” is an action.

In light of all this, I submit that a better translation of Genesis 1:1 & 2 is:

Genesis 1:1 In a beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth became an empty waste; and darkness upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

And God said, Let there be a FIRMAMENT in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the FIRMAMENT, and divided the waters which were under the FIRMAMENT from the waters which were above the FIRMAMENT: and it was so. And God called the FIRMAMENT Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day
firmament means a support
"rakia" which is used in this verse has nothing to do with "support".

And God said, Let there be AN EXPANSE in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made THE EXPANSE, THE SKY, and divided the waters which were under the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse: and it was so. And God called the expanse Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

So far you're 0 for 3.

I'd say that's three witnesses that say you have no idea what your'e talking about, and should just not continue with your idea of "correcting the Bible."

 

[iamaberean]

So far you're 0 for 3.

I'd say that's three witnesses that say you have no idea what your'e talking about, and should just not continue with your idea of "correcting the Bible."

I do not correct the bible, I try to pass on proper translation of scripture. If a translation doesn't make sense, then it has been interpreted wrong.

As for Gen 1 and 2, they don't make sense the way that they have been translated.

1. Bones of humans and dinosaurs have been found that were 10's of thousand years old. God is not the author of confusion.

2. Because I was confused, I took a look at creation accounts and found that for sure there were two creations.

3. Now I am looking to find why the earth is millions of years old, according to science. So what makes sense is the earth was created millions of years ago and there were others on this earth before it was destroyed by whom ever.

4. So when I see a scripture that doesn't make sense as translated. I look at how others have also checked this out. "In a beginning, God created" is the correct translation. Why is that? Because it agrees with the fact that science has shown millions of years instead of thousands of years of life here on earth. So there had to be other creations, and there is at least one other.

Again, as I have pointed out before, these things are not salvation issues. They are for our understanding.

 

[iamaberean]

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters

Correct translation:
The Hebrew verb here is also in the "qal perfect" and should be correctly translated as "had become"

And the earth had become waste and empty; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, WHICH DECEIVETH THE WHOLE WORLD: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him

One must understand that translators of scripture to Greek, or English were not always Christians and may have translated to fit the serpents views.

While Gen 1:1-2 may seem insignificant there are many scriptures that effect our understanding of truth and may actually pull us away from God.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I do not correct the bible,

Someone is in denial.

I try to pass on proper translation of scripture.

Just because you say they are correct doesn't make them correct.

If a translation doesn't make sense, then it has been interpreted wrong.

You're forgetting the possibility that if a translation doesn't make sense, it's also possible that it's user error, and not a problem with the translation.

As for Gen 1 and 2, they don't make sense the way that they have been translated.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

1. Bones of humans and dinosaurs have been found that were 10's of thousand years old.

Because you say so?

Because some scientist somewhere says so?

Try not to bring your a priori beliefs when examining what the Bible actually says.

God is not the author of confusion.

No one has said otherwise.

2. Because I was confused,

You even admit you were confused. And because God is not the author of confusion, but He IS the Author of the Bible, your confusion is your own, and does not come from the Bible.

I took a look at creation accounts and found that for sure there were two creations.

Because you say so?

3. Now I am looking to find why the earth is millions of years old, according to science.

God says "I created in 6 days and rested on the seventh."

Scientists who reject God say "The earth is millions of years old."

What does SCRIPTURE say?

Let God be true, and every man a liar.

So what makes sense is the earth was created millions of years ago and there were others on this earth before it was destroyed by whom ever.

This is called bringing your a priori beliefs into a discussion of scripture.

It's a terrible idea.

4. So when I see a scripture that doesn't make sense as translated, I look at how others have also checked this out.

How about instead of thinking that scripture is the problem, you consider yourself to be the one in error?

"In a beginning, God created" is the correct translation.

Incorrect.

Strong's h7225 - Lexical: רֵאשִׁית - Transliteration: reshith - Part of Speech: Noun Feminine - Phonetic Spelling: ray-sheeth' - Definition: beginning, chief. - Origin: From the same as ro'sh; the first, in place, time, order or rank (specifically, a firstfruit). - Usage: beginning, chief(-est), first(-fruits, part, time), principal thing. - Translated as (count): The first (8), the beginning (6), The firstfruits (6), In the beginning (4), and the first (2), at the beginning (2), from the beginning (2), of the firstfruits (2), and the beginning (1), And the best (1), and the prominent (1), and with the best (1), and with the firstfruits (1), chief (1), first among (1), in its first season (1), more than his beginning (1), Of the first (1), some of the first (1), than its beginning (1), the best (1), the foremost (1), The principal thing (1), their firstfruits (1), this best (1), with the best (1), your beginning (1).[/QUOTE] "In the beginning" is correct. Not "in 'a' beginning." There are not multiple beginnings for creation. Why is that? It's not. Because it agrees with the fact that science has shown No, scientists have said (and you have believed them) in contradiction to God's word that the earth is millions of years old, whereas the evidence says the earth is only thousands of years old. millions of years instead of thousands of years of life here on earth. Saying it doesn't make it so. So there had to be other creations, and there is at least one other. Saying it doesn't make it so. Again, as I have pointed out before, these things are not salvation issues. They are for our understanding. No one has brought up the issue of salvation here but you. However, rejecting the literal meaning of Genesis removes any reason for Christ to have died on the cross. Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters Correct translation: There you go again, contradicting yourself. You said above that you don't correct the Bible. Yet here you are doing just that. The Hebrew verb here is also in the "qal perfect" and should be correctly translated as "had become" Sorry, but no. The qal perfect form of the verb is translated as "was," not "had become." Using the evidence that shows you to be wrong isn't good for your position. And the earth had become waste and empty; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters Except that's not what it says. Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, WHICH DECEIVETH THE WHOLE WORLD: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him And your point is... what, exactly? Satan fell by tempting Eve, and was cast out as a result of it. That was AFTER Day 6 of the creation week. There was no death prior to that. One must understand that translators of scripture to Greek, or English were not always Christians So what? and may have translated to fit the serpents views. This is an appeal to the supernatural, and cannot be verified. In other words, saying it doesn't make it so, and you can't show evidence of it to prove it, and I can't show evidence to disprove it. Which makes it an unfalsifiable belief. Which excludes it from any sort of rational discussion. While Gen 1:1-2 may seem insignificant there are many scriptures that effect our understanding of truth and may actually pull us away from God. The only one pulled away from God here in this discussion has been you, iamaberean, simply because you reject the literal meaning of those two verses, and because you try to reconcile man's lies with God's truth. Again, "Let God be true, and every man a liar." God said, "6 days" and "at the beginning of creation I made man male and female." Do you deny those two facts?

 

[JudgeRightly]

The Hebrew verb here is also in the "qal perfect" and should be correctly translated as "had become"

And the earth had become waste and empty; . . .

One more thing:

You claim (incorrectly) that verse 2 should read "had become" rather than "was," yet you fail to consider that the next instances of qal perfect verbs on either side of verse two, in verse 1 with "bara," and in verse 10 with "qara," are both translated as "created" and "called" respectively.

Yet you made no mention (at least with verse 1, which is the only other verse you've tried to "correct" so far) of "created" being incorrect, that instead it should read "had created," and I assume that you wouldn't bother changing "qara" to "had called" either.

Context is key when examining what the scriptures say.

You have ignored the context, and so you erroneously try to fix what isn't broken.

Verse 1 "He created."
Verse 2 "was."
Verse 10 "called."
Verse 27 "He created" 2x

You also seem to be forgetting that even if adding "had" to the English translation was correct, it wouldn't be "had become."

It would be "had been."

 

[iamaberean]

When paleontologist Mary Schweitzer found soft tissue in a Tyrannosaurus rex fossil, her discovery raised an obvious question -- how the tissue could have survived so long? The bone was 68 million years old.


Using the basic ideas of bracketing and radiometric dating, researchers have determined the age of rock layers all over the world. This information has also helped determine the age of the Earth itself. While the oldest known rocks on Earth are about 3.5 billion years old, researchers have found zircon crystals that are 4.3 billion years old [source: USGS]. Based on the analysis of these samples, scientists estimate that the Earth itself is about 4.5 billion years old. In addition, the oldest known moon rocks are 4.5 billion years old. Since the moon and the Earth probably formed at the same time, this supports the current idea of the Earth's age.

 

[JudgeRightly]

When paleontologist Mary Schweitzer found soft tissue in a Tyrannosaurus rex fossil, her discovery raised an obvious question -- how the tissue could have survived so long?

It didn't last that long, because the tissue is only thousands of years old.

The bone was 68 million years old.

You've been lied to.

The age of the bone is actually about 5200 years old.

Because that's about the time when the Global flood happened. Or do you deny that as well?

Using the basic ideas of bracketing and radiometric dating, researchers have determined the age of rock layers all over the world.

You've been deceived.

They say they have, but that assertion is based on three unverifiable assumptions, which means their results are untrustworthy at best, and completely wrong at worst.

This information has also helped determine the age of the Earth itself. While the oldest known rocks on Earth are about 3.5 billion years old, researchers have found zircon crystals that are 4.3 billion years old [source: USGS]. Based on the analysis of these samples, scientists estimate that the Earth itself is about 4.5 billion years old. In addition, the oldest known moon rocks are 4.5 billion years old. Since the moon and the Earth probably formed at the same time, this supports the current idea of the Earth's age.

Because some scientist somewhere said so in direct contradiction to Genesis 1?

God created the earth on day 1. He created the moon on day 4.

So no, they weren't formed at the same time.

Or do you deny that the lesser light to rule the night is talking about the moon?

You should stop now, because now you're starting to contradict even yourself, let alone what the Bible says.

Let God be true, and EVERY man a liar.

 

[Aimiel]

"But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" (Matthew 24:36)

I know the hour: ...such an hour as ye think not!

 

[Bradley D]

I know the hour: ...such an hour as ye think not!

That is not what scripture tells me. I have known people/groups who have predicted the last days and have failed. Cauising a lot of pain and suffering for others.

 

[7djengo7]

Using the basic ideas of bracketing and radiometric dating, researchers have determined the age of rock layers all over the world.

When you say, "researchers have determined [this or that]", what (if anything) do you mean, other than simply, "researchers have said that [this or that] is true"?

 

[Aimiel]

That is not what scripture tells me. I have known people/groups who have predicted the last days and have failed. Cauising a lot of pain and suffering for others.

Matthew 24:44

Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.