[geocentrism] Re: Evening and morning were the first day?
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
Have a good trip.... the simpelist?.....I'm not sure :)
Carl Felland <cfelland@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Allen,
Glad to hear you had a good vacation. My family is gearing up to start on a
two day canoe trip on the Buffalo River tomorrow.
I argue that the darkness before the creative work on the first day corresponds
to a new moon day. This is an assumption, but it is based on Scriptural
evidence of a special, unique day at the beginning of each month. In contrast,
immediately before each of the subsequent days in the creation week is BOQER
("morning," dawn, or the transition of darkness to light).
Carl
P.S. Who wins for having the simplest charts ;<)?
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 1:40 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Evening and morning were the first day?
Hi Carl,
Yes it was good, but I think i am more tired now than I was before I left but i
will be back to speed in a couple of days i guess. I am glad I was able to take
off for a little while I have not had a vacation in many Years...... My point
was that one there is nothing in scripture to suggest that the work was done in
the daylight in fact it specificaly outlines just the opposite. There was
darkness over the face of the deep then God SAID(ACTION or WORK) let there be
light the scriptures plainly show that God worked starting with the darkness
then there was light. Further this order or arrangement of the creation is
identical in all source texts for every day mentioned. This holds true for
Daniel?s remarks as well.?? I would argue that when you say that work was
accomplished in the daylight portion of the day followed by an evening you
cannot support this from scripture without assuming that what God "really
meant" was somthing other than the text a t face value. It is an adho
c
reasoning necessary to explain away the obvious in support of the sunrise to
sunrise model.?..Evening and morning or evening to evening depending on how you
say it, is the is the ONLY pattern found specifically in scripture. The Pattern
of Gods work in Genesis then later in Dan is contextually driven by that
pattern. The only other patterns possible are by deduction of the OT law and
Jesus narratives which could be a sunrise to sunrise if you ignore this
pattern. However, since evening and morning or evening to evening is the only
specific pattern mentioned and it fits together with everything else, I only
see the inconstancy of the sunrise to sunrise model. I mean both our models can
account for everything albeit with the exception of Gen, Lev and Dan, at face
value, by deduction only the Evening and morning fits the specifically
mentioned pattern of days in All cases without resorting to additional
assumptions. I can dedu ce evening and morning from all scripture just at f
ace
value. I therefore Consider the Evening and morning pattern to be the most
consistent with all scripture and the narratives??.. but I accept the
probability that I will not convince you....... in any case, we did get three
days and three nights....I think if I could just convince you about NT
scripture and accepting it for face value as the only authority : )....it is
good to talk to everyone again. I doubt if we will ever completely resolve all
of these issues, one seems to cascade into another like a chain reaction. I may
not agree with everything in your chart but I like it and continue to study it
and I am very glad Dr Jones was able to make it so we could post our charts.
Really Really Helpful!!!
Allen
Carl Felland <cfelland@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen,
Did you have a good vacation?
Are you thinking that I am saying that the text should say "and there was
morning and there was evening"?
I am not! I am saying that work was accomplished in the daylight portion of
the day, followed by evening (the period of transition from light to dark) and
then morning (the period of transition from dark to light). Then began the
next day.
Carl
----- Original Message -----
From: Allen Daves
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 11:22 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Evening and morning were the first day?
Carl,
The KJV as well as the NIV and ASV are all mesoretic text based.... you find
this same order Evening and morning in the Sepuagint text as well, which can be
shown strictly from the NT quotes from the OT that the Mesoretic text was not
used... in any case your argument is mute as this is the order found in both
Mesoretic, Samaritan Pentateuch and LXX Septuagint versions of the OT which are
the only three source text used in all of Chistodom. The Lxx septuagint can be
traced to the first century, the messoretic text only has traceable documents
to about 900 AD.. I am afraid you are listening to people that do not know
anything about Biblical text, and or using that to confuse and deceive you
about things that are identical in all three. Namely Evening and morning days.
Carl Felland <cfelland@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Forms of the verb Hayah (Strongs 1961) are found 28 times in Genesis chapter 1.
Of these 21 are YHY (Kal fut. 3 pers. s. m., Davidson) with the conjunction
Waw (Vav). These are Genesis 1:3 "and there was1961 light", Genesis 1:6 "and
let it1961," and Genesis 1:7, 9, 11, 15, 24, 27 and 30 "and it was1961 so."
The phrase "and the evening and the morning were" in the King James Version
(KJV) shows only one verb, while the Hebrew has this verb twice (12
occurrences). This is one instance of the KJV translators subtracting from the
Scriptures. Based on the first reference,
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was1961 light,
the simplist consistent translation would have been "and there was evening and
there was morning." This is exactly what was used in the American Standard
Version and the Literal Version of the Holy Scriptures for Genesis 1:5, etc.
(ASV, 1901 American Standard Version) And God called the light Day, and the
darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
(LITV, Literal Version of the Holy Bible) And God called the light, Day. And He
called the darkness, Night. And there was evening, and there was morning the
first day.
The other non KJV translations used in e-sword carry a similar thought in
Genesis 1:5, while most (CEV, GNB, and GW)emphasize the progressive timing of
these two events.
(CEV, Contemporary English Version) and named the light "Day" and the darkness
"Night." Evening came and then morning--that was the first day.
(GNB, Good News Bible) and he named the light "Day" and the darkness "Night."
Evening passed and morning came---that was the first day.
(GW, God's Word) God named the light day, and the darkness he named night.
There was evening, then morning-the first day.
(MSG, The Message) God named the light Day, he named the dark Night. It was
evening, it was morning-- Day One.
Please notice in Genesis 1:5 the correct order of the day and night periods in
a 24 hour day!
I would also argue that the KJV adds to the Scriptures using "the" with evening
and with morning.
Now I would guess that the KJV translators would have some justification for
what they did. I surely do not see it! When this blatantly false translation
is used as the basis to "understand" the rest of Scripture, one is in danger of
building on the sand.
Carl
Other related posts:
