Peace be unto you,

Working Hypothesis:

The first chapter of Genesis sets the logical format for the remainder of the Bible, which is brought out beautifully in the King James translation. Woven in a tapestry of scripture from with an underlying discourse, telling of the mystery of God. The discourse may be found through virtually any logical examination of text, even, “one jot or one tittle.”

It is inconceivable to think that the translators of the King James Version, worked to form the underlying discourse pattern of text, prevalent throughout the books of the Bible. Beginning in Revelation 2:12~13, we see an assembly of passages, woven in ways common to the discourse. For example, things such as term definition may offer ways to connect and add meaning to the dialogue. The definition of Pergamos, "height or elevation," references “above the heights of the clouds” in Isaiah 14:12~15, identifying with the meaning of, "where Satan's seat is," and "where thou dwellest," that is brought together by the phrase, "I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation.” The meaning of the name Antipas, “like the father,” and the phrase, "hast not denied my faith" is offset in John 8:44 by, "the lust of your father" and "abode not in the truth.”

The “angel of the church in Pergamos” is third of seven churches, which may have numerological implications associated with Proverbs 8:22. The Spirit was speaking for the Word of God, having “the sharp sword with two edges,” setting the string context with Revelation 19. The "devil" is "a liar and the father of it;" and was "a murderer from the beginning," for what he "hast said in his heart" because "there is no truth in him." "In those days wherein Antipas was the faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth."

The words, “from the beginning” and “in those days,” indicate those days beginning in Genesis 1:1~5, which is threaded throughout the Old Testament and into the New Testament. Threads of string text run through Job 3:5, Ezekiel chapter twenty-eight, Revelation, Habakkuk chapter three with Revelation chapter six. Jeremiah chapter four is woven into Genesis 3:6 and Genesis 3:15, unto Revelation chapter seventeen and Revelation chapter twelve. Like Christ, this weave of revelation is without beginning, without ending but woven throughout, even as His “coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout” in John 19:23~24.



Thank You, Amen.
Ken

{#####(======================>

5/17/2011 5:01 PM

Ken, you can't have a "pattern beginning" in the last book of the Bible to be written (Revelation 2:12-13). In particular, you can't then go to the NEXT part of the pattern and find it in an EARLIER book.

The authors in Genesis 1 intended 24 hour days. This is obvious 2 ways:

1. The common Hebrew word for day is "yom". However, yom can have a secondary meaning of a period of time to complete a task or festival, which can be much longer than a normal day. So before there is the sun to mark the passage of time, you have the phrase "evening and morning" at the end of the description of creation for the first 3 days. That is to limit the time to 24 hours.

2. In Genesis 2:1-3 you have the 7th day. In order to keep that within a 24 hour day the authors use the Hebrew word "beyom" instead of "yom". Adding the prefix "be" limits "yom" to 24 hours. It is often translated as "in the day". Beyom is used precisely to keep the 7th day from going to "everlasting". It puts a definite limit on it.

In Exodus 20:11 (which you did not reference) you find that the 7 days of creation are used as justification for the 6 days of work and the 7th day of rest as the Sabbath. This verse would make no sense if the days of Genesis 1 go from "everlasting to everlasting". We would never know which day we were in in relation to the Sabbath.

What you have done is cut and pasted out of context from a number of different books and different chapters of Genesis to make up a story YOU like. But it is not what the authors of the Bible intended to write.

lucaspa, why do you say God is not using patterns of text to reference prophecy of old from the Revelation of Jesus Christ? Remember, I said I am not subject to “historical-grammatical hermeneutics.” Therefore, I do not consider Genesis, or any portion of God’s Word, to be authored by the will of man. The prophecy of the scripture came through holy men of God as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 2Peter 1:20~21. Whatever meaning you attribute to the will of man is of no concern in this study.

Okay maybe, “A pattern begins in Revelation 2:12~13,” was not the best way to introduce the subject at hand. I've revised the opening post of our thread. Thank you.

lucaspa, you said:

"1. The common Hebrew word for day is "yom". However, yom can have a secondary meaning of a period of time to complete a task or festival, which can be much longer than a normal day. So before there is the sun to mark the passage of time, you have the phrase "evening and morning" at the end of the description of creation for the first 3 days. That is to limit the time to 24 hours."

Ken:
Every day in Genesis 1 begins in the evening and ends in the morning. But your assumption is invalid because the evening of the first day was from everlasting and everlasting is incompatible with '24 hours.' And what about 2Peter 3:8 that tells us a day with the Lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day. Can you reconcile that verse with your 24 hour day? The length of each of the first 3 days in Genesis 1 is the amount of time it took to finish the day's work.

lucaspa:
"2. In Genesis 2:1-3 you have the 7th day. In order to keep that within a 24 hour day the authors use the Hebrew word 'beyom' instead of 'yom'. Adding the prefix 'be' limits "yom" to 24 hours. It is often translated as "in the day". Beyom is used precisely to keep the 7th day from going to 'everlasting'. It puts a definite limit on it."

Ken:
The seventh day is not included in the first chapter because it is different from the six days of work. Time began from everlasting with the evening of the first day. Time ends when all work is finished in the morning of the six day, unto the everlasting seventh day and God rests.

I said: Ken, you can't have a "pattern beginning" in the last book of the Bible to be written (Revelation 2:12-13). In particular, you can't then go to the NEXT part of the pattern and find it in an EARLIER book."

Patterns have to take place in temporal sequence. So the first part of a pattern has to come temporally BEFORE the second part. You have the FIRST part of the pattern in Revelation.

"I do not consider Genesis, or any portion of God’s Word, to be authored by the will of man. "

In that case, you are calling Jesus a liar. In Mark 10 and Matthew 14 Jesus clearly states that the Torah is written by a man -- Moses. And Moses got part of it wrong -- Deut. 24:1.

Of course, you are already in trouble when using "Word" to refer to the Bible. If you look in the Bible, "Word" is only used to refer to a person, not the Bible. Hint: try John 1 or Revelations 20.

All Christians believe scripture is inspired by God. However, it makes no sense for God to establish a pattern by telling humans the SECOND part of the pattern hundreds of years before telling us the FIRST. That you do so tells me that you are making a private interpretation of scripture and misusing the Bible to back a theory made by a human -- you.

"Every day in Genesis 1 begins in the evening and ends in the morning. "

Evening and morning are not stated after day 3. On day 4 we get no morning and evening because the sun was created to give a morning and evening.

Yes, day one says "And the evening and the morning were the first day. " because creation started on that day and light came first. So you have light (day) first, then evening, then the next morning.

" And what about 2Peter 3:8 that tells us a day with the Lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day."

What about it? The author of 2 Peter is addressing a problem the Church has at that time. Jesus told people the end would come before his generation had passed away. But all those living in Jesus' generation were dead and "scoffers" were saying:
"Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation."

Answer? "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. "

Notice we get BOTH. One "God" day can be a thousand years. But then again, a thousand "God" years can be one day. The author is saying tha time does not work with God as with humans, so we can fudge a bit on that "generation will pass away" thing by Jesus.

In scientific terms, it is an ad hoc hypothesis to avoid the falsification of Christianity. I personally don't think it's a very good explanation, but it's the one the author tried.

"The length of each of the first 3 days in Genesis 1 is the amount of time it took to finish the day's work. "

If that were the case, then the author would not have used "evening and morning" in the absence of a sun. The word "yom" would have given them the ambiguity you are stating.

Also, remember Exodus 20:11. If those 3 days are an indeterminant length of time, then that screws up the justification for the Sabbath.

"The seventh day is not included in the first chapter because it is different from the six day of work. "

The "chapters" were put in later. The original text did not have chapters and verses. It's just one long text in Hebrew. So thinking that being in Chapter 2 means something is a misunderstanding. Beyom also means that the 7th day is NOT "everlasting". It has a definite time limit -- a normal day.

"The King James Bible is a beautiful translation of the Word of the LORD; woven into a tapestry of scripture from an underlying discourse pattern of topical associations, vocabulary and scriptural connotations. "

This is where theologians and I disagree with you. There are rules of interpretation:
Eight Rules of Interpretation
"...the Eight Rules of Interpretation used by legal experts for more than 2500 years.


Rule of Definition.
Define the term or words being considered and then adhere to the defined meanings.
Rule of Usage.
Don't add meaning to established words and terms. What was the common usage in the cultural and time period when the passage was written?
Rule of Context.
Avoid using words out of context. Context must define terms and how words are used.
Rule of Historical background.
Don't separate interpretation and historical investigation.
Rule of Logic.
Be certain that words as interpreted agree with the overall premise.
Rule of Precedent.
Use the known and commonly accepted meanings of words, not obscure meanings for which their is no precedent.
Rule of Unity.
Even though many documents may be used there must be a general unity among them.
Rule of Inference.
Base conclusions on what is already known and proven or can be reasonably implied from all known facts. http://www.digistat.com/gcf/8rules.htm
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b02.html
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b11.html

Your statement violates several of them. Your "underlying discourse pattern of topical associations, vocabulary and scriptural connotations", for instance, violates Rule of Usage, Rule of Context, and Rule of Historical Background.

You are trying to use the Bible as a SINGLE book. It's not. It's a collection of books written over a span of 500-1,500 years. The general unity is only that they are about the experiences of people with God.

What you have done is set up your own Rule of Logic, made your own premise, and are cherry-picking the different books to back up that premise.

IOW, you are going into the Bible with a theory and then just looking for the verses to "prove" your theory. I submit that you should instead by LISTENING to what God has to say. And to do that you need the Rules of Context, etc. for EACH book SEPARATELY. God was speaking to the people of the time long before He was speaking to us. We need first to understand how THEY heard what was being said.

lucaspa, Genesis one is record of the 6 days of work that made the heaven and the earth after they were created from everlasting. However, Genesis 2:1 says that the heavens (plural) were finished.” Why was heavens written in the plural tense after there was one heaven throughout the first chapter?

I believe this is because the seven days of Creation are from everlasting to everlasting, Psalms 90:2. The creation is from the beginning heaven of everlasting in the first day, unto the last days and the heaven and the earth of the generation of Jesus Christ.

Today is the fourth day of the Creation. We know this because when Jesus was on the cross at Calvary, He said, ”Verily I say to thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise," Luke 23:43. Jesus died and was buried the day He was crucified and arose from the grave on the third day, Luke 24:46. Therefore, Jesus was not talking about the day He was crucified, rather the fourth day of Creation.

5/1/2011 9:24 AM

lucaspa:
"I said,: Ken, you can't have a "pattern beginning" in the last book of the Bible to be written (Revelation 2:12-13). In particular, you can't then go to the NEXT part of the pattern and find it in an EARLIER book."

Ken:
Then I guess we will have to find another word to use in place of, "pattern," because there can be no doubt that strings of text trace the six days of Genesis throughout the KJV Bible.

lucaspa:
"'I do not consider Genesis, or any portion of God’s Word, to be authored by the will of man.'"

"In that case, you are calling Jesus a liar. In Mark 10 and Matthew 14 Jesus clearly states that the Torah is written by a man -- Moses. And Moses got part of it wrong -- Deut. 24:1."

Ken:
Oh, I thought you would know that I was using 2Peter 1:20~21 as reference text.

lucaspa:
Of course, you are already in trouble when using "Word" to refer to the Bible. If you look in the Bible, "Word" is only used to refer to a person, not the Bible. Hint: try John 1 or Revelations 20.

Ken:
John 1:1 is in context with Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 3:13. Revelation 20 is historical record of the fifth day dawning, after Christ returns. The fifth day is prophecied in Revelation 6:9~11 and the record of Christ's return, beginning in Revelation 6:12, as prophecied in Matthew 24:29~33, Mark 13:24~29; Isaiah 34:4 & Jeremiah 49:36 and others.

lucaspa:
All Christians believe scripture is inspired by God. However, it makes no sense for God to establish a pattern by telling humans the SECOND part of the pattern hundreds of years before telling us the FIRST. That you do so tells me that you are making a private interpretation of scripture and misusing the Bible to back a theory made by a human -- you.

Ken:
lucaspa, you have yet to understand my interpretation and know nothing about how I am using the Bible. Whether it makes sense to you are not is a moot point. As you said yourself; you do not hear God in the scriptures, you are listening to men.

"The King James Bible is a beautiful translation of the Word of the LORD; woven into a tapestry of scripture from an underlying discourse pattern of topical associations, vocabulary and scriptural connotations."

lucaspa:
This is where theologians and I disagree with you. There are rules of interpretation:
Eight Rules of Interpretation
"...the Eight Rules of Interpretation used by legal experts for more than 2500 years.

Ken:
Well I guess that is why you, your theologians and legal experts are stuck in the 1st Century, unable to hear what Jesus is saying ever since He went to the Father.

Rule of Definition:
Define the term or words being considered and then adhere to the defined meanings.

Error number one, definitions of words may change as God may require.


Rule of Usage:
Don't add meaning to established words and terms. What was the common usage in the cultural and time period when the passage was written?

Error number two, do not use established meaning of words and terms according to common usage in the cultural and time period when the passage was written. Meaning of words and terms are determined according to spiritual implications of threaded passages.


Rule of Context:
Avoid using words out of context. Context must define terms and how words are used.

Half off, avoid using words out of context. Context must be established according to relevant issues and purpose.


Rule of Historical Background:
Don't separate interpretation and historical investigation.

Error number three, interpretation should consider historical investigation secondary to spiritual connotation.


Rule of Logic:
Be certain that words as interpreted agree with the overall premise.

Correct.


Rule of Precedent:
Use the known and commonly accepted meanings of words, not obscure meanings for which their is no precedent.

Error number four, do not use commonly accepted meanings of words, use meanings for which there is scriptural precedent.


Rule of Unity:
Even though many documents may be used there must be a general unity among them.

Correct.

Rule of Inference:
Base conclusions on what is already known and proven or can be reasonably implied from all known facts.

Correct.

lucaspa:
Your statement violates several of them. Your "underlying discourse pattern of topical associations, vocabulary and scriptural connotations", for instance, violates Rule of Usage, Rule of Context, and Rule of Historical Background.


You are trying to use the Bible as a SINGLE book. It's not. It's a collection of books written over a span of 500-1,500 years. The general unity is only that they are about the experiences of people with God.

Ken:
What are you saying? The Bible IS a single book!! And the King James translation is proof. It is full of ways to hear the Spirit; in a continuous dialogue of prophet interpretation, from Genesis to Revelation.

lucaspa:
What you have done is set up your own Rule of Logic, made your own premise, and are cherry-picking the different books to back up that premise.

Ken:
No, what you have done is relied on an interpretation that is out of date and in many cases, out of context in the 21st Century. You have locked God in antiquity, limiting His participation and your understanding.

lucaspa:
"Every day in Genesis 1 begins in the evening and ends in the morning. Evening and morning are not stated after day 3. On day 4 we get no morning and evening because the sun was created to give a morning and evening."

Ken:
Wait a minute, what Bible are you reading? My Authorized
King James Version states evening and morning on each of
the six days:

Gen 1:5 KJV - And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Gen 1:8 KJV - And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Gen 1:13 KJV - And the evening and the morning were the third day.

Gen 1:19 KJV - And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Gen 1:23 KJV - And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

Gen 1:31 KJV - And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

By the way, have you noticed that the seventh day is the only day that is not closed with the evening and the morning.

lucaspa, before we go any further, I need to determine what Bible you are using. If you are not using a KJV Bible, please get one; The KJV Bible is the only one relevant to this study. Thank you.

lucaspa said, "All Christians believe scripture is inspired by God. However, it makes no sense for God to establish a pattern by telling humans the SECOND part of the pattern hundreds of years before telling us the FIRST. That you do so tells me that you are making a private interpretation of scripture and misusing the Bible to back a theory made by a human -- you."

Ken retorted:
lucaspa, you have yet to understand my interpretation and know nothing about how I am using the Bible. Whether it makes sense to you are not is a moot point. As you said yourself; you do not hear God in the scriptures, you are listening to men.

Let's go back and look at the Hebrew. Yes, Genesis was originally written in Hebrew. I know you like KJV, but to settle these issues we need to go back to the original language.

In Genesis 1 the Hebrew word translated as "heaven" is hashamayim. In Genesis 2:4 the Hebrew word translated as "heavens" is hashamayim. Same word. A literal translation of Genesis 2:4 is "These are the chronicles of heaven and earth when they were created, on the day God completed earth and heaven." http://bible.ort.org/books/torahd5.asp?action=displaypage&book=1&chapter=2&verse=4&portion=1

You have made up a lot of theology on the mistranslation of a word.

As it happens, Genesis 1:1 to 2:3 is one creation story. Genesis 2 is a second, separate creation story. You asked why "heaven" is used in Genesis 1 but "heavens" is used in Genesis 2. Well, "elohim" is used for God in Genesis 1 but Yahweh is used for God in Genesis 2. There are other differences. For instance, the same "beyom" that is used in Genesis 2:1-3 to limit the 7th day to 24 hours is used in Genesis 2:4. What took 4 days in Genesis 1 is accomplished in ONE day in Genesis 2. There are other critical differences that show we have TWO creation stories.

"I believe this is because the seven days of Creation are from everlasting to everlasting"

The first part is contrary to both Genesis 1, Genesis 2, and Christian thinking. Creation had a beginning. It does not go infinitely far into the past.

Psalm 90:2 says "Before the mountains were created, before you made the earth and the world, you are God, without beginning or end. "

Look at that. God has no beginning or end. God, not Creation. What you are doing is equating God with Creation. That is contrary to standard Christian doctrine and the unity of scripture. God is separate from Creation.

What you are claiming is closest to panentheism. You can go there if you want, but no Christian can follow you and the Bible will not support you.

Your concept of 4th-6th day doesn't match Genesis 1. On the fourth day God made the sun, moon, and stars. On the 5th day God made sea creatures and birds. On the 6th day God made the land creatures and humans. Now, if we are living in the 4th day, WE HAVEN'T BEEN CREATED YET! But here we are. Therefore this can't be the 4th day.

What's more, if this is the 4th day, then Exodus 20:11 makes no sense, because it speaks of creation in the PAST tense. It's over. Your statements still have creation continuing. Therefore your theory -- which you base on the Bible -- is contradicted by the Bible.

"Then I guess we will have to find another word than pattern to name the phenomena, because there can be no doubt that string text traces the six days of Genesis throughout the prophecy of the scriptures."

Ken, are you claiming that ALL the scriptures are "prophecy"? 2 Peter 1:19-21 does not refer to all the scripture. It is referring specifically to the prophecies of the coming of Jesus! Go back to 1:16-18. I will quote only 16: "For we were not making up clever stories when we told you about the power of our Lord Jesus Christ and his coming again. We have seen his majestic splendor with our own eyes."

Then when we get to verse 19 we see "Because of that, we have even greater confidence in the message proclaimed by the prophets." Because of what? What is the "that"? It's their eyewitness experience of Jesus! The prophets proclaimed Jesus. But not all the Bible is prophecy.

"Oh, I thought you would know that I was using 2Peter 1:20~21 as reference text."

That doesn't matter, does it? Because Jesus is telling us that scripture was written by men. You are trying to claim that scripture was written by God. I believe Jesus over you.

"You obviously do not have a relationship with the KJV as I. "

That's partly what is leading you astray. You are supposed to have a relationship with GOD, not the KJV. Nor are you supposed to think that a single English translation of the Hebrew and Greek texts is infallible.

"But yes, John 1:1 is in context with Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 3:13."

Irrelevant to what I was saying. You are using "Word of God" to refer to scripture. "Word" refers ONLY to Jesus in scripture, NEVER to scripture. You are making the KJV equivalent to Jesus. That's a violation of the First Commandment.

"lucaspa, you have yet to understand my interpretation and know nothing about how I am using the Bible."

Ken, I do understand your interpretation and how you are using the Bible. I am DISAGREEING with your interpretation and how you are using the Bible.

"Whether it makes sense to you are not is a moot point. As you said yourself; you do not hear God in the scriptures, you are listening to men. "

I never said that. You have twisted my words around to the opposite of what I said. What's more, you have projected onto me what you are doing: YOU (a human) have a theory of what scripture should say. So you are listening to "men" (you), and not hearing God in the scriptures. You do not hear, for instance, Jesus telling you that scripture was written by men. Instead, you hear your own idea of what 2 Peter 1:19-21 is saying. 2 Peter 1:19-21 is not referring to scripture, but ONLY to "the prophets". "the prophets" refer to the books of the Nevi'im or Prophets. This inclused Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Remember, Peter was a Jew, and therefore the reference is going to be made in a Jewish context.

Genesis 1 - 3 is not prophecy. The Psalms are not prophecy. Most of the gospels are not prophecy. Numbers and Deuteronomy are not prophecy; they are Laws. As Jesus said, at least one of these is wrong.

"Wait a minute, what Bible are you reading? My Authorized
King James Version states evening and morning on each of
the six days: "

My apologies. My memory betrayed me. Yes, the formula is continued on all days. Which reinforces my point that Days 1-3 were meant to be 24 hours because it uses the same reference for "evening and morning" that applies when there is a sun to give the standard 24 hour day.

"By the way, have you noticed that the seventh day is the only day that is not closed with an evening and the morning."

That's why "beyom" is used instead of "yom". Beyom serves the purpose of limiting the 7th day to 24 hours.

"The KJV Bible is the only one relevant to this study. "

Sorry, but you can't do that. Not only is the KJV not necessarily the best translation to MODERN English, but it misses much of what happens in the original Hebrew. If you are going to base a "study" on scripture, then you must eventually go back to the original languages and not a translation. Particularly one done 500 years ago when the English language was different.

Lucaspa said:
Let's go back and look at the Hebrew. Yes, Genesis was originally written in Hebrew. I know you like KJV, but to settle these issues we need to go back to the original language.

In Genesis 1 the Hebrew word translated as "heaven" is hashamayim. In Genesis 2:4 the Hebrew word translated as "heavens" is hashamayim. Same word. A literal translation of Genesis 2:4 is "These are the chronicles of heaven and earth when they were created, on the day God completed earth and heaven." http://bible.ort.org/books/torahd5.asp?action=displaypage&book=1&chapter=2&verse=4&portion=1

Ken:
lucaspa, I agree. The original language is the foundation of interpretation. But you mis-qouted the verse. It says, "These [are] the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,"

"Generations" is a key word that cannot be omitted. This word is used with the passing of the days in Genesis. The first day ends and the second day begins with the generations of Noah. The third day begins with the generations of the sons of Noah.



The book of the generations of Adam (Genesis 5:1) was what replaced Adam's faith and enabled the LORD God to cloth them with coats of skin so they would not be naked (Genesis 3:7, Genesis 3:21 & 2Corinthians 5:1~3).



God promised to establish His covenant with the generations of Noah on the first day.

Gen 6:9 KJV - These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man [and] perfect in his generations, [and] Noah walked with God.
Gen 6:18 KJV - But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.

God established His covenant with the generations of the sons of Noah on the third day.

Gen 9:9 KJV - And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;
Gen 9:12 KJV - And God said, This [is] the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that [is] with you, for perpetual generations:
Gen 10:1 KJV - Now these [are] the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.

And to Abraham

Gen 17:9 KJV - And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.

Unto the generation of Jesus Christ.

Mat 1:1 KJV - The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.


“Heaven” comes from the Hebrew, שׁמים (shamayim). Shamayim appears to be a compound word comprised of שׁמ (sham, “there”) and מים (mayim, “waters”). Interestingly enough, mayim is comprised of the letter ’mem’ (מ), which in Hebrew, ‘ma,’ means water, and the “im” (ים) suffix that makes Hebrew words plural - “waters.” Shamayim, therefore, can loosely mean "the waters are there" or “there the waters are.”
http://www.mainemediaresources.com/mpl_shamayim.htm
Ref. Strong’s Hebrew words #8064, #8065

So heaven can be either singular or plural, depending on the context and the KJV is correct.

Ken:
lucaspa, thank you for your comments and for continuing your participation in this thread.

lucaspa:
You have made up a lot of theology on the mistranslation of a word.

As it happens, Genesis 1:1 to 2:3 is one creation story. Genesis 2 is a second, separate creation story. You asked why "heaven" is used in Genesis 1 but ‘heavens’ is used in Genesis 2. Well, ‘elohim’ is used for God in Genesis 1 but Yahweh is used for God in Genesis 2. There are other differences. For instance, the same "beyom" that is used in Genesis 2:1-3 to limit the 7th day to 24 hours is used in Genesis 2:4. What took 4 days in Genesis 1 is accomplished in ONE day in Genesis 2. There are other critical differences that show we have TWO creation stories.

Ken:
lucaspa, that reminds me of the story of the blind men and an elephant. Actually there is only one creation story in the Bible. It is outlined in Genesis chapter one by the Spirit of God, “Elohiym.” It is put forth in Genesis 2:4 by Elohiym in the Word of the LORD Jehovah; from everlasting unto the first day in Genesis 1:5 and John 1:5, according to Proverbs 8:22~29.

Lucaspa, you said. “The first part is contrary to both Genesis 1, Genesis 2, and Christian thinking. Creation had a beginning. It does not go infinitely far into the past."

"Psalm 90:2 says ‘Before the mountains were created, before you made the earth and the world, you are God, without beginning or end.’"

Ken:
Jesus Christ is the beginning of the creation of God (Revelation 3:14) and He is from everlasting (Isaiah 9:6) to everlasting (John 6:47). You cannot change words to fit your understanding.

Psalms 90:2 actually says, “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.”

5/1/2011 10:09 AM

Lucaspa said, "Ken, are you claiming that ALL the scriptures are "prophecy"? 2 Peter 1:19-21 does not refer to all the scripture. It is referring specifically to the prophecies of the coming of Jesus! Go back to 1:16-18. I will quote only 16: 'For we were not making up clever stories when we told you about the power of our Lord Jesus Christ and his coming again. We have seen his majestic splendor with our own eyes.'

Then when we get to verse 19 we see 'Because of that, we have even greater confidence in the message proclaimed by the prophets.' Because of what? What is the 'that'? It's their eyewitness experience of Jesus! The prophets proclaimed Jesus. But not all the Bible is prophecy.

Ken said,
I don’t know what "that" is. lucaspa, you are going to have to get yourself a Bible! 2Peter 1:16 “For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”

2Peter 1:19 "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:"

You cannot make your understanding work by changing scripture! It says what it says, like it or not. Do you know the meaning of the Greek, προφητικός (prophētikos,”prophecy”)? It means 1) proceeding from a prophet, or 2) prophetic.
Ref. Strong’s Greek word #4397

2Peter 1:20~21 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost."

Actually, 2Peter 1:20~21 says that no single prophet has a complete interpretation. Prophecy must be gathered in a collection of scriptures from holy men of God; who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. This is the basis for the method of interpretation in this work. I am not misusing the Bible to back up a personal theory. The fact is that I am using a process of interpretation recommended by scripture.

5/1/2011 12:41 PM

Lucaspa said, “Sorry, but you can't do that. Not only is the KJV not necessarily the best translation to MODERN English, but it misses much of what happens in the original Hebrew. If you are going to base a "study" on scripture, then you must eventually go back to the original languages and not a translation. Particularly one done 500 years ago when the English language was different.”

Ken:
Oh yes I can, lucaspa. Although there may be other good, spirit filled versions of the Bible; this is a comprehensive study of the uniform translation in the King James Bible.

Ken:
And what about 2Peter 3:8 that tells us a day with the Lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day.'

lucaspa:
What about it? The author of 2 Peter is addressing a problem the Church has at that time. Jesus told people the end would come before his generation had passed away. But all those living in Jesus' generation were dead and "scoffers" were saying:
'Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation.'

Answer? 'But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. '

Notice we get BOTH. One 'God' day can be a thousand years. But then again, a thousand 'God' years can be one day. The author is saying tha time does not work with God as with humans, so we can fudge a bit on that "generation will pass away" thing by Jesus.

In scientific terms, it is an ad hoc hypothesis to avoid the falsification of Christianity. I personally don't think it's a very good explanation, but it's the one the author tried."

Ken:
lucaspa, that makes no sense at all! You cannot rationalize the meaning of scripture. You can only interpret with the prophets, remember there is no private interpretation.

2Peter chapter three is a flavor of coding logic like we saw with "Pergamos," in the third and fourth paragraphs of the opening post. It is simular in purpose with Psalms 90, Psalms 93; Jeremiah 4, Habakkuk 3 and others also, it is testimony of days of Creation. Notice, if you will, the everlasting is referenced in verse four with “beginning of the creation.” The everlasting becomes the first day with the waters in verse five, “out of the water and in the water” and the first day becomes the second day with the flood in verse six. Thus three are referenced and the fourth day in verse seven with “the heaven and the earth, which are now;” in a third day context.

The eighth verse has one thing to say about the days to come. The fifth day will be a day as a thousand years and the sixth day will be a thousand years as a day. Revelation chapter twenty tells of the fifth day in verses one, two, three; and four, five, six. Satan will be bound in the bottomless pit for a thousand years and the souls of them slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held; live and reign with Christ for a thousand years. Revelation 20:7 begins the evening of the sixth day, when the thousand years are expired. And as in Genesis chapter one and in the book of Revelation, unto the seventh day without a word

Ken:
Now therefore, our God, we thank thee, and praise thy glorious name. Amen.

lucaspa:
"The "chapters" were put in later. The original text did not have chapters and verses. It's just one long text in Hebrew. So thinking that being in Chapter 2 means something is a misunderstanding. Beyom also means that the 7th day is NOT "everlasting". It has a definite time limit -- a normal day."

Ken:
That doesn’t matter, and changes nothing. The KJV translators put in “chapters” and “verses” the way they did for a reason. I think the reason for chapter two is to delineate the sixth day from the seventh day.

Ken: "Well I guess that is why you, your theologians and legal experts are stuck in the 1st Century"

You should have looked at the source! The Rules are used NOW. They have withstood the test of time. "The following eight rules are the center of all grammatical interpretation. They have been accepted and used by scholars from Socrates to the present."

"Define the term or words being considered and then adhere to the defined meanings.

Error number one, definitions of words may change as God may require. "

But God tells us when the definitions change! You can't change them and then try to tell us that God did.

"Rule of Context:
Avoid using words out of context. Context must define terms and how words are used.

Half off, avoid using words out of context. Context must be established according to relevant issues and purpose. "

But the "relevant issues and purpose" have to come from the TEXT. You can't make up a purpose and then try to impose your context on the text.

"Rule of Precedent:
Use the known and commonly accepted meanings of words, not obscure meanings for which their is no precedent.

Error number four, do not use commonly accepted meanings of words, use meanings for which there is scriptural precedent. "

That doesn't work. Let's start with Genesis 1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." THERE IS NO SCRIPTURAL PRECEDENT for "beginning", "created", "heavens", or "earth". You MUST use the commonly accepted meanings. What's more, the authors did not know they were writing scripture. Therefore, THEY had to use "commonly accepted meanings".

"Rule of Usage:
Don't add meaning to established words and terms. What was the common usage in the cultural and time period when the passage was written?

Error number two, do not use established meaning of words and terms according to common usage in the cultural and time period when the passage was written. Meaning of words and terms are determined according to spiritual implications of threaded passages. "

Completely wrong. Your idea leads you to imposing YOUR ideas onto scripture. The text was written first and foremost for the people of the time, not you and I in the 21st century. Who gets to decide "spiritual implications"? You are supposed to get your spiritual message FROM the text, not bring a spiritual message to it and then read the text to fit that spiritual message. You are doing things backwards. This is the clearest statement you have made yet that you are not LISTENING to scripture and God, but trying to impose your ideas ON scripture and God.

"What are you saying? The Bible IS a single book!! "

No, it's not. It's a COLLECTION of books written by different authors (in 2 different languages) over a period of 1500 years. What's more, different Christian denominations have DIFFERENT COLLECTIONS of books. The Catholic Bible is not the same as the Lutheran Bible is not the same as the Orthodox Catholic Bible.

"And the King James translation is proof. It is full of ways to hear the Spirit; in a continuous dialogue of prophet interpretation, from Genesis to Revelation. "

That's not "proof". King James appointed a group of scholars to translate the collection into English. Martin Luther translated the Bible into German. The "ways to hear the Spirit" were there in the original Hebrew and Greek. After all, if it were not there, then the early Christians could never have come up with Trinity.

Nor is it a "continuous dialogue of prophet interpretation". The prophets constitute only a few books in the Old Testament. What's more, Genesis was not written first! Exodus comes first in time.

"No, what you have done is relied on an interpretation that is out of date and in many cases, out of context in the 21st Century."

The Bible was written first and foremost for the people of the time! It had to be. If it wasn't, then the people would not have understood it and would not have preserved it.

The Bible does contain universal truths that transcend the times when the individual books were written. Just like the play Macbeth contains universal truths that speak to us today. But to really understand Macbeth and get to those truths, you must first understand it as the original audience back in Elizabethan England heard the play. THEN you can get the universals.

To do what you are doing is to warp scripture, get the wrong meaning, and hear the Spirit wrong. It is to make yourself god instead of listening to God.

lucaspa:
In Exodus 20:11 (which you did not reference) you find that the 7 days of creation are used as justification for the 6 days of work and the 7th day of rest as the Sabbath. This verse would make no sense if the days of Genesis 1 go from "everlasting to everlasting". We would never know which day we were in in relation to the Sabbath

Ken:
The LORD created the heaven and the earth in the beginning, from everlasting (Proverbs 8:22~29, Hebrews 7:3); they were made by HIS Word and were known by faith. The first man Adam lost his faith (Genesis 3:6), he knew that he was naked (2Corinthians 5:1~4). The earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep. The second man, the last Adam is the Lord from heaven (1Corinthians 15:45~49): in Him was life; and the life was the light of men (John 1:1~5); on the first day. The heavens were made from the second day with the earth on the third day, and were finished on the sixth day. Everlasting returned and God rested for the beginning of another six days of another heaven above the earth.

Now these are the last days (Hebrews 1:2). Today is the fourth day and on the sixth day, all the heavens and the earth were finished and all the host of them; unto everlasting and God rests forevermore.

Ken: "Well I guess that is why you, your theologians and legal experts are stuck in the 1st Century"

lucaspa:
You should have looked at the source! The Rules are used NOW. They have withstood the test of time. "The following eight rules are the center of all grammatical interpretation. They have been accepted and used by scholars from Socrates to the present."

Ken:
How have they withstood the test of time? There seems to be more confusion over the meaning of scripture, now than ever before. Do you remember when I said that your method of interpretation reminded me of the blind men and the elephant? This is because your rules divide the scriptures into many incomplete parts, so that your grammatical interpretation ends where it begins, and you just fill in the gaps. It's no wonder why there is such confusion over the meaning of scripture.

Please explain:
1. Why Genesis 1:5 and Genesis 2:17 use the same word, "day" from the Hebrew יוֹם (yowm), with different meanings?
"Day" Ref. Strong’s Hebrew word #3117

2. How could the earth bring forth plants on the third day, Genesis 1:12; when the sun was not made until the forth day, Genesis 1:17?

3. How could Eve be the mother of all living? Genesis 3:20.



lucaspa:
That doesn't work. Let's start with Genesis 1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." THERE IS NO SCRIPTURAL PRECEDENT for "beginning", "created", "heavens", or "earth". You MUST use the commonly accepted meanings. What's more, the authors did not know they were writing scripture. Therefore, THEY had to use "commonly accepted meanings".

Ken:
That doesn’t matter. God is not limited by time. He can describe the Creation with one prophet and set the precedent with another. There is precedent for Creation in Psalms 93, Proverbs 8:22~32 and John 1:1~5.


lucaspa:
Completely wrong. Your idea leads you to imposing YOUR ideas onto scripture. The text was written first and foremost for the people of the time, not you and I in the 21st century. Who gets to decide "spiritual implications"? You are supposed to get your spiritual message FROM the text, not bring a spiritual message to it and then read the text to fit that spiritual message. You are doing things backwards. This is the clearest statement you have made yet that you are not LISTENING to scripture and God, but trying to impose your ideas ON scripture and God.

Ken:
You’re not listening. They are not my ideas, they are God's ideas.

NO! God has not deserted me simply because I live in a later time, nor has He ignored issues of concern for this generation. He speaks directly to us, telling us everything we need to know.

Revelation 3:20 - Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

5/4/2011 5:15 AM

lucaspa:
But God tells us when the definitions change! You can't change them and then try to tell us that God did.

But the "relevant issues and purpose" have to come from the TEXT. You can't make up a purpose and then try to impose your context on the text.

Ken:
Please explain and give examples of how God tells us when the definitions change.

Please explain and give examples of how “relevant issues and purpose” come from the text.

lucaspa said:
Yes, day one says "And the evening and the morning were the first day. " because creation started on that day and light came first. So you have light (day) first, then evening, then the next morning.

Ken said:
You cannot say that. Creation started in the beginning of Genesis 1:1; from the darkness of everlasting, Genesis 1:2. There wasn’t light until Genesis 1:3, and the evening and the morning did not become the first day until Genesis 1:5.

lucaspa said:
"Completely wrong. Your idea leads you to imposing YOUR ideas onto scripture. The text was written first and foremost for the people of the time, not you and I in the 21st century. Who gets to decide "spiritual implications"? You are supposed to get your spiritual message FROM the text, not bring a spiritual message to it and then read the text to fit that spiritual message. You are doing things backwards. This is the clearest statement you have made yet that you are not LISTENING to scripture and God, but trying to impose your ideas ON scripture and God."

Ken said:
You cannot put God in a box. You cannot dictate to whom He may speak.

He came in due time:

Rom 5:6 KJV - For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

1Ti 2:6 KJV - Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

1Pe 5:6 KJV - Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:


His Word is for all generations:

Exd 3:15 KJV - And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this [is] my name for ever, and this [is] my memorial unto all generations.

Psa 33:11 KJV - The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations.

Psa 45:17 KJV - I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations: therefore shall the people praise thee for ever and ever.

Psa 100:5 KJV - For the LORD [is] good; his mercy [is] everlasting; and his truth [endureth] to all generations.

Psa 102:12 KJV - But thou, O LORD, shalt endure for ever; and thy remembrance unto all generations.

Psa 106:31 KJV - And that was counted unto him for righteousness unto all generations for evermore.

Psa 119:90 KJV - Thy faithfulness [is] unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.

Psa 135:13 KJV - Thy name, O LORD, [endureth] for ever; [and] thy memorial, O LORD, throughout all generations.

Luk 1:48 KJV - For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Eph 3:21 KJV - Unto him [be] glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

lucaspa:
“No, it's not. It's a COLLECTION of books written by different authors (in 2 different languages) over a period of 1500 years. What's more, different Christian denominations have DIFFERENT COLLECTIONS of books. The Catholic Bible is not the same as the Lutheran Bible is not the same as the Orthodox Catholic Bible.”

“That's not "proof". King James appointed a group of scholars to translate the collection into English. Martin Luther translated the Bible into German. The "ways to hear the Spirit" were there in the original Hebrew and Greek. After all, if it were not there, then the early Christians could never have come up with Trinity.”

Ken:
The King James Bible is a single book with a compilation of scriptures in a uniform translation. I have no comment regarding other translations. I agree that the Spirit can be heard in the original Hebrew and Greek.


lucaspa:
Nor is it a "continuous dialogue of prophet interpretation". The prophets constitute only a few books in the Old Testament. What's more, Genesis was not written first! Exodus comes first in time.

Ken:
How do you know if it is a coninuous dialogue or not? You don’t even have a KJV Bible. Genesis and Exodus were written in due time.


lucaspa:
“The Bible was written first and foremost for the people of the time! It had to be. If it wasn't, then the people would not have understood it and would not have preserved it.”

Ken:
Agreed.

lucaspa:
"To do what you are doing is to warp scripture, get the wrong meaning, and hear the Spirit wrong. It is to make yourself god instead of listening to God."

Ken:
Faith in God under scriptural direction is the only requirement for the “spiritual interpretation” that I am doing. However, the rules of your “grammatical interpretation” are governed by faithless rationalization of external resources. I listen to God by faith in Jesus Christ; anybody can do that!

Ken:
There are problems with the eight rules of grammatical interpretation. There is excessive leeway from a lack of criteria for word comprehension that ultimately is left to the imagination. Spiritual issues are given worldly definition, without purpose or reason. There is a mixing of words and a shuffling of meanings to write God out of the Bible and affix human beings instead.

lucaspa said, “The common Hebrew word for day is "yom". However, yom can have a secondary meaning of a period of time to complete a task or festival, which can be much longer than a normal day. So before there is the sun to mark the passage of time, you have the phrase "evening and morning" at the end of the description of creation for the first 3 days. That is to limit the time to 24 hours.”

Ken:
No it does not! You have chosen a meaning that best fits your preconception. May I quote the following:

Quote:
“Time, as such, was not an abstract entity having its independent existence with the ancient Hebrew. Time is bound up with its content and is actually identified with that content. Let me explain and illustrate this to clarify what this means.”1

“Actions in the Hebrew verb are determined by the content-aspect of being completed, not by the time categories of past, present, and future. The Hebrew verb really has no tenses. The past is understood as that which is already here, ‘before’ man, whereas the future is understood as something coming after him and not yet experienced. These two dimensions of time do not exist per se. These dimensions are subjectively experienced in relation to the real man in space. The light as only ‘called’ day and the darkness is only ‘called’ night. God marks the time, and the luminaries are created later to hold the same function (Gen. 1:4, 14). This has nothing to do with how long it took. These are not necessarily our perception of literally 24 hour days. When the event of separating the light from the darkness took place (no matter how long it took, whether 3 seconds or 455,888,345 years), then the completed event, the experience, as the Hebrew understood it, was called ‘day.’"2

“When we examine Genesis and the creation story, it is after an event is completed that it is called the first day, second day, third day, etc. This is not described the earth spinning on its axis every 24 hours at all. It is describing when an event is completed in heaven and on earth. It is the event that defines the day, not the earth spinning that does so. To say this means our 24 hour day is to misconstrue what the Bible says. It is not until verse 14 that God puts the lights in the sky to set them as markers of the seasons, days and years. All the time before, the creating of the ground, the sky, water, vegetation, plants, trees, had already taken place in a time that was not associated with the lights marking the seasons, days and years in our normal sense of 24 hour periods. By the time these markers were set, it was the fourth day. So something is happening here of which we cannot account for. It is not necessary to the ancient Hebrew anyway, to give an exact scientifically correct account of everything going on. As Speiser has clearly noted, ‘This is not whether the statement[s] is true or false, but what it means. The point here is not whether this account of creation conforms to the scientific data of today, but what it meant to, and how it was arrived at by, the writer concerned.’"3
1. http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/archaic.htm
2. Doukhan, p. 200. Cf. Von Rad, Vol. 2, p. 100-101.
3. E. A. Speiser, Genesis, Doubleday & Co., Anchor Bible, 1964: 9.

5/1/2011 11:11 PM

lucaspa:
In Exodus 20:11 (which you did not reference) you find that the 7 days of creation are used as justification for the 6 days of work and the 7th day of rest as the Sabbath. This verse would make no sense if the days of Genesis 1 go from "everlasting to everlasting". We would never know which day we were in in relation to the Sabbath.

Ken:
The LORD created the heaven and the earth in the beginning, from everlasting. The firmament of the heaven was made on the second day, was above the earth on the third day, and were finished on the sixth day. Time ends and the seventh day is without “time,” wherein God rested in the beginning and the first day of another week until all the heavens were made above the earth.

Exodus 20:11 makes sense because the days of Genesis 1 are days as with the LORD. He knows exactly which day we are in, in relation to the Sabbath. I think it may be better said like this, the Sabbath was outside of the six day time continuum and that “from everlasting to everlasting” means from before the first day of the first week to after the last day of the last week.

5/1/2011 5:53 PM

lucaspa:
Your concept of 4th-6th day doesn't match Genesis 1. On the fourth day God made the sun, moon, and stars. On the 5th day God made sea creatures and birds. On the 6th day God made the land creatures and humans. Now, if we are living in the 4th day, WE HAVEN'T BEEN CREATED YET! But here we are. Therefore this can't be the 4th day.


Ken:
lucaspa, have you forgotten what Jesus said?

Mat 19:4 KJV - And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made [them] at the beginning made them male and female,

Mar 10:6 KJV - But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

According to Jesus, God did not create man on the sixth day; He created and made them male and female from the beginning of the Creation. This is evident by the way God created and made “every living creature that moveth.” According to Revelation 17:15, Genesis 1 uses, “the waters,” to mean “peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.” in Genesis 1:20, the fifth day. “And God said, ‘let the waters {man} bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl [that] may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.’” It should be noted that, “the waters” bring forth both life which will be created “after their {our} kind,” as well as fowl that are created “after His {Christ} kind” in verse twenty-one; according to the record of the fifth day, written in Revelation 20:4.

The sixth day, God let the earth bring forth the living after His kind in Genesis 1:24. In verse twenty-five He made the beast of the earth after His kind, and cattle after our kind, and everything that creepeth upon the earth after His kind.

So man was created from the beginning of the Creation and God made him in the earth on the sixth day. However, please be aware that the heaven and the earth of the sixth day is actually the new heaven and the new earth that was promised in Isaiah 65:17, described in Isaiah 66:22; looked for in 2Peter 3:13 and seen in Revelation 21:1.

5/1/2011 9:09 AM

"Mar 10:6 KJV - But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

So according to Jesus, God did not create man on the sixth day; He created them before He made them male and female from the beginning of the Creation."

Jesus meant from the beginning of the creation of humans. The relevant verses are Genesis 1:26-27

"Then God said, "Let us make human beings [fn] in our image, to be like us. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, all the wild animals on the earth, and the small animals that scurry along the ground." So God created human beings [fn] in his own image. In the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. "

This all takes place, according to Genesis 1:31:
"Then God looked over all he had made, and he saw that it was very good! And evening passed and morning came, marking the sixth day. "

I'm sorry, but it's clear that you are just going to make up whatever you want about scripture. You aren't going to listen to me or God or anyone else to deter you from this path. I think I've laid out enough refutations of what you are doing to keep others from following your false path, and that is all I really care about.

Good luck to you. I am afraid you are going to need it.

" Remember, I said I am not subject to “historical-grammatical hermeneutics.” Therefore, I do not consider Genesis, or any portion of God’s Word, to be authored by the will of man."

Then you are ignoring the rest of Mark 10 and Matthew 19 that you quoted. For in that Jesus affirms that mens write scripture and, in Deut 24:1, Moses got it wrong.

Your study, once again, goes against everything we know of how to interpret text and even what Jesus tells us about the Bible. It's clear you aren't going to change and I have reluctantly concluded I'm not going to be able to bring this lost sheep back into the fold. Hopefully God will have better luck with you.

Ok lucaspa, maybe you didn’t break the Rule of Usage, in the broadest sense of the term. However, your rule cannot consider the context and know that by changing the tense, you change the meaning. So even though you did not break the letter of the law, you have violated the purpose for which it was written. This is a good example of why you cannot use secular resource to understand spiritual verbiage.

This thread is an examination of things discovered in a study of the uniform translation of the whole King James Bible. lucaspa, because your comments do not concern things up for review, we often have different answers for the same question. While you may be right from your perspective, I may be right from mine with nothing accomplished. Please try to forgive my frustration; I have learned through your participation. Thank you, lucaspa.


5/6/2011 8:52 PM

According to Jesus, God did not create man on the sixth day; He created and made them male and female from the beginning of the Creation, from everlasting. This is related in Micah 5:2 and by the fact that Melchisedec was a man who was from everlasting (Genesis 14:18). He is king of Salem: priest of the most high God; is without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God (Hebrews 7:3). Therefore; clearly, man was not created on the sixth day, man was created from everlasting!

The meaning of “the beginning of creation” in the New Testament is determined by Old Testament prophecy. “In the beginning” in Genesis 1:1, was from everlasting with Proverbs 8:22, and “the heavens and the earth when they were created,” in Genesis 2:4~6; unto the first day, “in the day the LORD God made the heaven and the earth” in Genesis 2:4 & 6~*.

The beginning of the creation in the testimonies of the LORD can be found written in 1Chronicles 17:9, Psalms 119:160 and Proverbs 8:22~23; Isaiah 1:26, Isaiah 40:21 and Isaiah 41:4 with 41:26 and Isaiah 46:10. Isaiah 48:3 & 5 & 7 & 16, Isaiah 64:4 and Jeremiah 17:12, and others also.

5/5/2011 3:43 PM

Ken:
Please explain your rationale for saying: “Then you are ignoring the rest of Mark 10 and Matthew 19 that you quoted. For in that Jesus affirms that mens write scripture and, in Deut 24:1, Moses got it wrong.” Also, please show me where I quoted Mark 10 and Matthew 19; I don’t see that I have.

lucaspa:
Your study, once again, goes against everything we know of how to interpret text and even what Jesus tells us about the Bible. It's clear you aren't going to change and I have reluctantly concluded I'm not going to be able to bring this lost sheep back into the fold. Hopefully God will have better luck with you.

Ken:
Just because the study is different from everything 'YOU' know, does not mean that it is incorrect. All it means is that you have no grounds on which to criticize this study unless you understand the principles, know the purpose and follow the process to the end result and form a basis for evaluation. But I am here to help, if you are willing to work. The study is built upon the foundation laid by the apostle Paul. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Please know that our purpose is not to find fault with how others understand the Bible or with their belief in God. This understanding may not be suitable for everyone at this time; however, that is not the issue. The issue is that the belief handed down from antiquity does not meet the needs of this generation, and that it is time to 'graduate' from the old and work for a new understanding. For the living God is living among us; His Word is alive for us today, just as it is written in the Holy Bible.

An interesting way to interpret the Bible has been found coded into the text of the King James translation. There is an underlying discourse written in the logical pattern of grammatical features and textual elements. It is flavored by purpose, meaning and reference with a taste of numerological implication. I would consider it an honour and a privilege to be able to discuss issues in the study with whomever has interest or criticism, all are welcome.

You might ask why the second day was not called good in Genesis 1; or, how could Adam have died on the very day he ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and still live hundreds of years thereafter. You could even ask how Eve was the mother of all living. It is all very simple and straight forward. As a matter of fact, the Bible is validated by a world made in thruth. Therefore, there can be absolutely no conflict between the truth in the Bible and whatever truth has been found by scientific research. Thank you.

5/5/11 4:24 PM

You base your understanding of Mark 10:6 by what is said in Genesis 1:26-27, however, there is a problem with your logic. Your guess has been contrived from the plural tense of the word “man.” You give nothing to substantiate your rationale; maybe to avoid having to argue your point, because you have no point. Your theory is nothing but a figment of your imagination, and I will prove this to you now.

The word used for “man” in Genesis 1:26~27 is the same word used for “man” in Genesis 2:7, and for the name, “Adam,” in Genesis 2:19. Once we consider the interrelation of context with meaning of these and other passages, we can see how Jesus made His meaning clear in Mark 10:6. Where from everlasting comes a simple and straight forward method of logic to reference and cross reference scripture, and bring forth the story of the creation of man.

When Jesus said, “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female,” He associated the creation in Genesis 1 and the work in Genesis 2 with, "everlasting," and "beginning" in Proverbs 8:23. It was referenced by, “when they were created” in Genesis 2:4 regarding the evening darkness in Genesis 1:2. It was the place, “When he prepared the heavens,” and “when he strengthened the fountains of the deep.”as testified in Proverbs 8:26 and 8:27. It was when the Spirit moved upon the face of the waters and "man was created in the image of God; ” and “the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground” (Genesis 2:7). And Revelation 11:8 that tells of the Lamb was crucified in the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt; and there was light; evening became morning; the first day.

The first day was the reference in Genesis 2:4 saying, “in the day that the LORD God made,” and in Micah 5:2, it was said to be, "from of old, from everlasting.” The man was "one flesh" in the beginning, as it is written in Genesis 2:24 and acknowledged in Mark 10:8 with, “but one flesh.” So the Bible gives us good reason to believe that 1Corinthians 15:45~47 is the literal truth and that Jesus actually was, "the second man," "the last Adam." And it is clear that "man" was "one" “from the beginning of the creation” and God is correct in Mark 10:8. Melchisedec, is a man and he was from everlasting (Genesis 14:18). He is king of Salem: priest of the most high God; is without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God (Hebrews 7:3~4).

In this way, the Bible gives us good reason to believe that 1Corinthians 15:45~47 is the literal truth and that Jesus actually was, "the second man," "the last Adam." So it is clear that "man" was "one" “from the beginning of the creation.” We can dismiss what you have added and close the evaluation.


1Cr 15:45 KJV - And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit.
1Cr 15:46 KJV - Howbeit that [was] not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Cr 15:47 KJV - The first man [is] of the earth, earthy: the second man [is] the Lord from heaven.


Ref. Strong’s Hebrew word #120, אָדָם, ('adam); man
Ref. Strong’s Hebrew word #121, אָדָם, ('Adam); Adam
Ref. Strong’s Greek word #76, Ἀδάμ (Adam); Adam
Ref. Strong’s Greek word #444, ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos); man

5/8/2011 1:07 AM

And finally, the documentary hypothesis (aka, higher criticism to distinguish it from lower criticism) 2 has the evidence that validates the “spiritual criticism” of my study, “the working hypothesis.” And the beautiful thing about it is that all discrepancy, inconsistency and apparent error have been washed from the Bible in the days of the heavens. The following quote should give you a quick overview of that study:

"The documentary hypothesis (DH) (sometimes called the Wellhausen hypothesis[1]), holds that the Pentateuch (the Torah, or the Five Books of Moses) was derived from originally independent, parallel and complete narratives, which were subsequently combined into the current form by a series of redactors (editors). The number of these is usually set at four, but this is not an essential part of the hypothesis."

"The documentary hypothesis assumes that the text of the Torah as preserved can be divided into identifiable sources that predate its compilations by centuries, the Jahwist (J) source being the oldest, dating to as early as the 10th century BCE, along with the Elohist (E), the Deuteronomist (D), and the Priestly source (P), dating to the 8th to 6th centuries. The final compilation of the extant text is dated to either the 6th or 5th century BC."

"In an attempt to reconcile inconsistencies in the biblical text, and refusing to accept traditional explanations to harmonize them, 18th and 19th century biblical scholars using source criticism eventually arrived at the theory that the Torah was composed of selections woven together from several, at times inconsistent, sources, each originally a complete and independent document. The hypothesis developed slowly over the course of the 19th century, by the end of which it was generally agreed that there were four main sources, combined into their final form by a series of redactors, R. These four sources came to be known as the Yahwist, or Jahwist, J (J being the German equivalent of the English letter Y); the Elohist, E; the Deuteronomist, D, (the name comes from the Book of Deuteronomy, D's contribution to the Torah); and the Priestly Writer, P."
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis
2. Richard Elliot Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible?, Summit Books, 1987: 60.

5/4/11 1:54 PM