[geocentrism] Re: Moon phases
- From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:09:54 -0500
Cheryl,
Quite right. My eye was on verse 5 instead of 6. Mea culpa.
Pax Christi,
Robert
> -----Original Message-----
> From: geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Cheryl B.
> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 1:19 PM
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon phases
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
> To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 12:27 PM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Moon phases
>
>
> > G & P,
> >
> > > I personally have always had a problem with
> > > "hasteth". Does it mean that the sun slows down during our day
> > > and then speeds up during our night? Wouldn't that mean China,
> > > or India, or Africa would have a different length of day than us?
> > > So I think the use of "returneth" might just make more sense to me
> here.
> >
> > In Hebrew shuwb {shoob} means
> > to return, turn back
> > come or go back
> > to bring back, .....
> >
> > No hasten or hasteth is listed in the lexicon
>
> The word used for hasteth here is not shuwb. It is shaaph -- and Strong's
> says: also to hasten, desire earnestly, devour, haste, pant, snuff up,
> swallow up. That would pretty well describe travelling at 25 million mph.
> >
> > > The second thing I would bring up are the differences in the
> > > translations of verse 6 just following. The KJV talks of the
> > > wind, what does the DR ascribes the action of the verse to? I've
> > > heard quite different takes on this verse. What do the other
> > > versions you have say?
> >
> > In Hebrew ruwach {roo'-akh} means:
> >
> > breath, wind, spirit (as that which breathes quickly in animation or
> > agitation), spirit (of the living, breathing being in man and animals),
> > spirit (as seat of emotion), spirit, Spirit of God
> >
> > Obviously many meanings, but usually not the impersonal and
> physical wind.
>
> Strong's concordance says: Quote: 7307- ruwach from 7306; wind; by
> resemblance breath, i.e. a sensible or even violent exhalation; fig. life,
> anger, unsusbstantiality; by extension a region of hte sky; by resemblance
> spirit, but only of a rational being (inclu. its expression and
> functions): -- air, anger, blast, breath, cool, courage, mind, x
> quarter, x
> side, spirit, tempest, x vain, whirl, windy.
>
> The KJV translators were IMHO the most brilliant linguists the world has
> ever seen. They weren't dummies. They chose the words they did for a
> reason -- and that reason was made up of their great knowledge
> and abilities
> as linguists and, secondly because of their annointing and
> enabling by God
> Almighty -- who had appointed them, just like He did Queen
> Esther, "for such
> a time as this."
>
> When there were shades of meaning, the KJV translators knew which shade to
> apply. I think anybody who says they could have made a better choice than
> these amazing men brought together by God for "such a time as this", that
> person iis being presumptuous and, also, not to be rude, but I think also
> disrespectful of the Word of God.
>
> At the very least, it points to the likelihood that you do not believe KJV
> actually IS the Word of God else you would not be needing to
> change and fix
> it. If this is the case, would you like to advance your case for what you
> think IS the Word of God ?
>
> Sincerely, Cheryl
>
>
> > Pax Christi,
> >
> > Robert
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Other related posts:
