Hello John Reece, and Help.

[rwatts]

Gidday John,

In this thread:-

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post328746

- it has been suggested that I contact you, although you might not exactly be in a position to respond. If so, I understand.

I am an atheist, and so may well be trespassing here. However, I need some input.

It seems that many folk don't exactly understand my point, perhaps in part because I'm not explaining it well enough.

So if you have anything you may be able to add, and am in a position to do so, please bear with me.

YECs insist that in Gen 1, "yom" really does mean a 24 hour day. Accordingly, I insist that the phrase "God said" or "God made" really do mean, that God physically spoke or that God physically made.

Likewise, I insist that the same phrases in the list of verses I supplied, which deal with the origin of rain, mean exactly the same thing as those phrases do in Genesis.

Many tell me "No. 'God said' simply means that God is in ultimate control, or it means that God created the laws of nature to cause things to happen."

Because I am led to believe that you have some expertise in the original languages of the Bible you may be able to sort this out. In the original Hebrew, for the OT, does the term "God said" have the same kind of literal meaning that "yom" does, and if "yom" means 24 hour day, so "God said" really does mean that God spoke, and it happened. If so, then does "God said" (as well as God made) in that list of verses I supplied in the context of the origin of rain, also have the same meaning? And that the ancient Hebrews were not thinking in terms of natural process, or the laws of nature, but rather they were thinking in terms of God's direct action.

I think creationists are picking and choosing here as to what they take literally, and what they take more liberally, but I could be wrong.

Can you help please?

[Sparko]

John is ill and won't be on for a while. Details here:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...uot&highlight=

[mossrose]

I knew he was ill, and suggested that the question be asked anyway.

For when John is able.

[Jedidiah]

. . . for the OT, does the term "God said" have the same kind of literal meaning that "yom" does, and if "yom" means 24 hour day, . . .

Not being John I can not help most of your question, but when YECs say "yom" literally means a 24 hour day they are only partly correct. The word "yom" has three different literal meanings. Yom can mean a 4 hour day, it can also mean the daylight portion of the 24 hour day, or it can mean a long but undefined period.

[rwatts]

John is ill and won't be on for a while. Details here:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...uot&highlight=

Thank you Sparko.

It does not look too good I guess. I hope for John's sake, he might be able to address the question at some time in the future.

[Sparko]

Not being John I can not help most of your question, but when YECs say "yom" literally means a 24 hour day they are only partly correct. The word "yom" has three different literal meanings. Yom can mean a 4 hour day, it can also mean the daylight portion of the 24 hour day, or it can mean a long but undefined period.

as far as I understand this is correct. It is used just like the english word "day" is. It's meaning depends on the context.

1. It will take two days to get to the destination.
2. In my father's day, they didn't have computers.
3. day is when the sun shines, night is when it is dark.

and so on.

[Sparko]

The word "said" in Genesis 1, is Strong's 559.
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/559.htm

amar: to utter, say
Original Word: אָמַר
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: amar
Phonetic Spelling: (aw-mar')
Short Definition: said
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
a prim. root
Definition
to utter, say
NASB Translation
address (1), advised (1), answer (2), answered (50), answers (1), ask (2), asked (4), asking (1), Asserting (1), assigned (1), call (2), called (4), command (1), commanded (14), commanded to say (1), commands (3), consider (1), continued (2), decided (2), declare* (1), declared (2), declared* (1), declares (1), demonstrates (1), designate (1), desired (1), follows (2), gave an order (2), gave the order (2), gave orders (2), indeed say (1), informed (1), intend (2), intended (1), intending (1), meditate (1), mentioned (1), name (1), namely (2), news (1), ordered (6), plainly says (1), promised (6), proposing (2), really thought (1), repeated* (1), replied* (1), requested (1), resolved (3), responded* (7), said (2766), said* (2), say (601), saying (862), saying* (1), says (594), sent word (1), speak (29), speak to you saying (1), speaking (2), speaks (2), specifically say (1), specified (1), spoke (77), spoken (15), still say (1), suppose (1), tell (23), telling (2), tells (1), think (1), thinking (2), thought (17), told (25), utters (1), vaunt (1).

(a lot more info at the link)

[Just Passing Through]

[Kbertsche]

As I posted in the other thread, here is the abridged BDB (Brown, Driver, Briggs; the standard lexicon for Biblical Hebrew) entry for "say" ('amar):

Source: BDB abridged

Qal 1. Say; the person addressed usu. introduced by אֶל, or לְ; rarer combinations are; where בְּlocal; in all cases usually sq. dir. obj. of words said. The obj. spoken of may be referred to by אֶל, or לְ, very rarely by a simple accus., except after אֲשֶׁר where the words used follow (cf. אֲשֶׁר 4 d).
2. Say in the heartdesire; sq. inf. = purpose.
3. Promise (sq. inf.); id. + ל of person); (sq. acc. of dir. obj. + ל of pers. + inf. of purpose).
4. Command (esp. late) sq. אֶל- of person addressed; inf. + ל of pers.; sq. acc. dir. obj.; sq. cl. with אשׁר = that; sq. cl. with כִּי.
Niph. be said, told (all abs., indef. subj., of current saying); so said in a book; be related, told, of vision; said, told to (sq. ל ind. obj.); either so, or told concerning; hence be called.
Hiph. avow, avouch.
Hithp. act proudly, boast.

© Copyright Original Source

In Gen 1:3 ff, the word "said" is in the Qal stem. The things that God says are in the jussive mood (essentially a third-person command). This context may suggest that "said" in Gen 1 has the sense of "command" which is definition 4 above. However, the complete (unabridged) version of BDB lists Gen 1:3 under definition 1.

[rwatts]

break" and "sunrise", when the most straightforward concept is that "said" in those verses means the same as it does in Gen 1. That is God spoke, or God thought, and something happened. With out that direct action, it would not have happened. And there is no mention of natural process being involved in either case.



That's my problem - understanding the justification for these different interpretations placed on that one word "said". The justification always looks to me like an issue of convenience, as opposed to what the original authors actually, or likely meant.

If you can accommodate 21st century science with that list I supplied, then a theistic evolutionist has every reason for doing so with respect to Gen 1.

[Kbertsche]

Thanks for your work here JPT.
...
It looks to me that, allowing for the variations of meaning in the context of "said", there was still some kind of action by God, then something appeared. That is, Gen 1 is not talking about natural process or laws of nature, any more than "yom" is talking about a thousand years (being a day to God).
...
...That is God spoke, or God thought, and something happened. With out that direct action, it would not have happened. And there is no mention of natural process being involved in either case.
...
If you can accommodate 21st century science with that list I supplied, then a theistic evolutionist has every reason for doing so with respect to Gen 1.

Roland, your problem does not seem to be with biblical languages, but with a false dichotomy between divine action and natural law. You seem to think that if God acts, natural law cannot be involved. Conversely, if natural law acts, God cannot be involved. Your view is inconsistent with both Christian theology and the origins of modern science. Both of these see God as the "actor" behind natural law. "Natural law" is our description of God's normal actions with His creation.

[Just Passing Through]

[rwatts]

Roland, your problem does not seem to be with biblical languages, but with a false dichotomy between divine action and natural law. You seem to think that if God acts, natural law cannot be involved. Conversely, if natural law acts, God cannot be involved. Your view is inconsistent with both Christian theology and the origins of modern science. Both of these see God as the "actor" behind natural law. "Natural law" is our description of God's normal actions with His creation.

Not exactly, because I have a great deal of sympathy with theistic evolutionists here.

I ask the question in the context of young earth creationism and the need to take the straightforward meaning of verses in the Bible.

It seems to me that they demand this, when it suits, and then are quite prepared to accommodate and compromise (to use their terms) with it does not suit.

Thus when it suits, "day" and "said" really do mean "24 hours" and "spoke" because that is the straightforward meaning of the words in the Bible. That is the meaning of the original words.

But in other contexts, words like "said" don't mean "spoke". But rather they can mean metaphor for "nature", "natural process", or "laws of nature".

However, I wonder if the ancients really viewed it this way. More likely they viewed "said" consistently across the Bible and if in one case "said" means "spoke" or "thought", so it does in other cases.


Even taking words in context, folk in a prescientific culture had no concept of our laws of nature and natural processes, so why should we assume any idea they had about the origins of anything - rain, babies, planets, frost, snow, drought, ..., matches our ideas?

As with my post back in the Nat Sci forum, this is really aimed at believers like Jorge.

I'm here because it was suggested that I come here to find out what words like "said" and "made" really meant, as far as the ancients thought of them, in those differing circumstances.

[rwatts]

God sends rain normally by the ordinary laws of nature. They are his laws, it is still God who does it.

JPT, is that how the ancients thought of the meaning of those words? Or is that a theological interpretation placed on the meaning by later translators and theologians? Do you apply the same interpretation of "said" when it comes to Gen 1. That is, when God "said" and the moon came into existence, it was due to the laws of nature, as opposed to a miracle?

How do you determine exactly what the ancients thought?

Most of the book of Job is poetry, and much of the discourse in Job is very poetic, metaphorical and not intended as a scientific discourse on how nature works, ...

However, poetry is not necessarily all metaphor, just as history is not necessarily all fact let alone all truth. A poem can describe fact, using words that are plain description, with no metaphor.

Rightly or wrongly, I cannot help but think that you are placing onto the words, what you think they might mean, without much reference to what the ancients probably thought they meant, particularly when it comes to claiming things like "natural process" or "laws of nature".

[Just Passing Through]