What does "yom" really mean?

[Fascinated With God]

The Hebrew literally states "Light Be!" (that's all) The Hebrews did not think around the bush like English gentlemen. Very direct. To the point.

Still no beef, you totally side-stepped any mention of the word yom.

 

[GenemZ]

Because you claimed that I am dead wrong, along with most of the major Bible translations. So my question is, "Where's the beef?" You can't seem to produce. Instead you want me to mail order your evidence for you.

You need to backtrack I believe.... I never said you were dead wrong. The use of yom you picked, has a modified meaning via idiom. Yom mitzvah is not simply yom. Just like when I had my bar mitzvah. When we see the word 'bar' it does not hold the same connotation as when combined as bar mitzvah.

 

[GenemZ]

Still no beef, you totally side-stepped any mention of the word yom.

The Jews at the time of Jesus used yom as the unit of measurement for what constituted a day. Its what they used as their standard, what took from Genesis 1. Its how they determined that a day ends at sunset, and the new day begins right after. That is why the men rushed to wrap and bury Jesus after his death. It was because it was becoming evening. And, once the sunset came, it would have been the new Sabbath day. Thus, forbidding them to do any such work.

 

[GenemZ]

You are taking Galatians 3:28 out of context. That is only INSIDE Christianity that neither was considered better, Jews or gentiles. If Christianity had really interpreted this the way you do anti-Semitism would never have existed.

Paul said.. Not all Israel is Israel. You don't believe that?

You believe both sons of Isaac and Rebecca were both Jews?

Today, Esau could have possibly practiced Judaism, but would not be a Jew. The only Jew.. one who is a true Jew. Is one who has entered into regeneration.

The church age is unique for those born of Jewish stock. Today all Jews who believe in Jesus Christ become a *new creation* in Christ. There is neither Jew, nor Gentile, in Christ. For all believers, God counts as having physically died with Christ on the Cross!

Galatians 2:18b-20

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives
in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God,
who loved me and gave Himself for me.



​

For those of the Jewish race today? The genes of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, have been crucified on the Cross with Christ. The one who was born a Jew is now a new creation in Christ. God deems our flesh dead. The new body we will receive in the resurrection will not be a Jew, nor Gentile. It will be the new man. The second Adam.

2 Corinthians 5:17

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old
things have passed away, and look, new things have come.

The Greek means that we have become something new. As in,something that never existed before. Christians have become a new spiritual species.. Neither Jew, nor Gentile.

A black man who believes in Christ may refer to himself as a black man out of necessity for identification purposes, for that is how he appears in this world. But that body was crucified with Christ. Who he really is will be revealed at the resurrection, when he receives a body just like the Lord's. Just like all of us who believe in Christ will receive. There will be no Chinese, no German, no Italian, no Latino.. Only the Bride of Christ. No Jews... And, no Yankee fans.
​

 

[Fascinated With God]

Paul said.. Not all Israel is Israel. You don't believe that?

1st you claim there is no distinction between Jew and Christian, but upon my objection that this is only true inside Christianity, you then change directions 180 degrees and talk about a distinction between different kinds of people of Jewish descent. I suspect another communication break-down.

As to Romans 9:6, you are taking it out of context. Don't you believe that Romans 11:28-29 is true also? If so then that invalidates the interpretation you are trying to impose on Romans 9:6. Romans 11:28 refers to Jews who are "enemies of the Gospel", but who are never-the-less members of the "elect" because of devotion to "their patriarchs".

2 Corinthians 5:17​

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old
things have passed away, and look, new things have come.​

The Greek means that we have become something new. As in,something that never existed before. Christians have become a new spiritual species.. Neither Jew, nor Gentile.​

This is exactly what I was saying and what you are supposedly objecting to. I stated that there is only no distinction between Jew and gentile INSIDE Christianity. You objected to this, but then turn around and say exactly the same thing. I think you have listening issues.

 

[Fascinated With God]

The use of yom you picked, has a modified meaning via idiom. Yom mitzvah is not simply yom. Just like when I had my bar mitzvah. When we see the word 'bar' it does not hold the same connotation as when combined as bar mitzvah.

That accounts for the usage in the 3 verses in Deuteronomy, but not for the other 6 verses in Jeremiah and 1st Samuel.

And I was already aware of this fact, as I referenced in the original post of this thread:

In Deuteronomy the actual words are "mitzvah yom".

 

[Fascinated With God]

Its how they determined that a day ends at sunset, and the new day begins right after.

That can't possibly be relevant to the 1st 3 days of creation, before the creation of the sun, moon and stars.

 

[GenemZ]

1st you claim there is no distinction between Jew and Christian

There is no distinction between Jew and Christian?

You changed what it says...
There is no distinction between Jew and Gentile. That's what the Bible says.

Not all Gentiles are Christian. There is no distinction between Jew (race) and Gentile (race). Christianity is not a race.

 

[GenemZ]

That can't possibly be relevant to the 1st 3 days of creation, before the creation of the sun, moon and stars.

There was light and darkness. First day. Then, the sun took over and provided the light after God made it to bear light. The Hebrew does not say God created the sun at that time. It says he made it to bear light. What ever it was before God made such a move, it was not bearing light.

 

[GenemZ]

OK, all distractions aside, back to the real topic. I found this fantastic book called, "The Creation, according to the Midrash Rabbah". The Midrash are encyclopedic commentaries on the Bible written gradually between the 3rd and 12th centuries. This whole book is limited to just commentaries on Genesis 1. I randomly opened the book and this is what I found on page 123:

"And God called the light day..."

The word yom, day, is not to be understood here as being a name for a day. If that had been the intention, the text would have read, 'And God called har-or...' and not la-or. The use of the letter lamed - la - seems to indicate that God called out to the light and said, 'I want you to shine during the day'.​

Why do you always leave stuff out to make your points?

Genesis 1:5


God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.”

And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

God may have called the light day. But what constitutes a complete day, is containing a span of light, and a span of darkness.





And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.



And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.​

And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.


And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.


And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

 

[Fascinated With God]

There is no distinction between Jew and Christian?

You changed what it says...
There is no distinction between Jew and Gentile. That's what the Bible says.

Dyslexics of the world untie! Alright, you got me on that one, I did swap Christian for gentile in my last reply, but in my initial reply in post #54 I had it correct. I said that it was only INSIDE Christianity that there is no distinction between Jew and gentile. You were trying to use the no distinction clause to claim there is no distinction between Messianics and "real" Jews. In that context your shifting the subject to a distinction between real Jews and fake Jews doesn't exactly contradict my point. In fact it almost bolsters it.

Not all Gentiles are Christian. There is no distinction between Jew (race) and Gentile (race). Christianity is not a race.

Gentile isn't a race either. Why do you capitalize gentile as if it were a proper noun? Gentile is a glad-bag category of every race but one or every religion but one, so it seems to me like capitalizing the word human, heretic, infidel or pagan. Just curious.

 

[Fascinated With God]

Why do you always leave stuff out to make your points?

Because that is all that particular midrash quotes before launching off into it's exegesis. What I did cut out was the actual follow-up by the ancient rabbi because I thought most Christians wouldn't get the style and format. I just gave part of the modern rabbi's explanation of the midrash because it was straight to the point of this thread.

But you should be wary of using words like always and never to describe other people. In virtually all 101 management training classes in America today they teach that these kinds of words are huge red flags that you are about to screw-up as a manager. These broad generalization words are a clear sign of having an abusive attitude towards someone, and is almost always unnecessary hyperbole.

I remember in the early 90's when corporate America 1st started realizing that this had a big impact on efficiency and productiveness. They shut down everything and had all the managers watching John Cleese (from Monty Python) in hilarious video after video all on red flag words like the one you just used (always).

Genesis 1:5​

God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.”​

And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.​

God may have called the light day. But what constitutes a complete day, is containing a span of light, and a span of darkness.​

That is a fine conjecture, but what about what the rabbi said about the use of the letter lamed in the Hebrew instead of the of the letter het? He claims that only a "ha" prefix would indicate a literal day, whereas the lamed prefix dictates something else entirely.

(I think that het is probably the letter because the letter hei seems like a less likely choice to combine with vowel notation to produce the pronunciation "ha").







.

 

[Fascinated With God]

There was light and darkness. First day. Then, the sun took over and provided the light after God made it to bear light. The Hebrew does not say God created the sun at that time. It says he made it to bear light. What ever it was before God made such a move, it was not bearing light.

That is not how I see it. Initially the light flooded the universe in a perpetual day, and the darkness only existed at a vast distance away in perpetual night. And there is still a perpetual night that has never ended far out there in the vast distance.

 

[Fascinated With God]

There was light and darkness. First day.

Yes, but where was the dark and the light? "Dividing" them does not have to mean they alternate. It says nothing about daylight shining on the Earth until verse 16:

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
​

Then, the sun took over and provided the light

Precisely my point, there was clearly another mechanism at work before that, which I think has much more to do with John 1:5.

15 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
​

This is speaking of a spiritual Light vs the "dark side", not about visible photons.

...after God made it to bear light. The Hebrew does not say God created the sun at that time. It says he made it to bear light. What ever it was before God made such a move, it was not bearing light.

Whether the sun did not exist or did exist as a dormant invisible object is all the same. Either way there was no daylight as we know it in those earlier verses.

 

[GenemZ]

Yes, but where was the dark and the light? "Dividing" them does not have to mean they alternate. It says nothing about daylight shining on the Earth until verse 16:

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
​

Precisely my point, there was clearly another mechanism at work before that, which I think has much more to do with John 1:5.

15 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
​

This is speaking of a spiritual Light vs the "dark side", not about visible photons.

Whether the sun did not exist or did exist as a dormant invisible object is all the same. Either way there was no daylight as we know it in those earlier verses.

I guess you are not a proponent of the truth, that what we see in this current creation, was not the first world to exist on the surface of this earth. Correct?

There was a prior creation. Actually, prior creations. One where angels called "morning stars" who used to perform as stars do today. They used to direct prehistoric life and guide in the seasons. Satan as "Lucifer" was stated (in the Hebrew) to be the one who brought in the morning light. It was God who then took over and gave the light of day. That is why we see the first three days in the creation to be sans the sun. It was to reveal something that we should know about God.

God is light. God created certain angels with this attribute as to share in his image. Before the fall of Satan, certain angels had the ability to shine with great brilliance. They were given dominion over all life on the planet. Just as Adam was given dominion over all life of this creation. A creation that replaced the prehistoric worlds that was taken away from the angels.

Jesus stated that he saw Satan thrown down to earth as *lightening.* Most likely, it was that incident that scientist later discovered hints of to make them believe extinction of dinosaurs were the result of a great asteroid hitting the earth. It was the throwing down of Satan after God became angry with him. Satan had the power to "bring in the morning." He therefore contained within himself the power to destroy the creation at that time when it was exploded and destroyed by God.

Just look at the lightning bug. Look at the electric eel? Who is to say what God can create if he so desires.

 

[GenemZ]

Dyslexics of the world untie! Alright, you got me on that one, I did swap Christian for gentile in my last reply, but in my initial reply in post #54 I had it correct. I said that it was only INSIDE Christianity that there is no distinction between Jew and gentile. You were trying to use the no distinction clause to claim there is no distinction between Messianics and "real" Jews. In that context your shifting the subject to a distinction between real Jews and fake Jews doesn't exactly contradict my point. In fact it almost bolsters it.

I spoke of no distinction between conservative views.. shared by Messianic Jews and OT Jews, who had believed in the Lord. That was my intent. I was speaking in terms of believers when I also said there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile. I showed why. So now you have it in a nut shell.

Here is one thing I said...

Actually, a real Jew would be just like the Messianics. But, they would have had to lived in the age of Israel to be a real Jew in that manner.

Note what I said:

Actually, a real Jew would be just like the Messianics. But, they would have had to lived in the age of Israel to be a real Jew in that manner.

 

[Fascinated With God]

Says you (without giving any valid reason for what you say)

Says the Bible, not me. You even went into a long rather odd description of angel's providing light instead of the sun before yom 4. That is a new one on me, but either way the sun did not exist before yom 4.

 

[Criada]

Mod Hat On

​

This thread has been cleaned.
Please avoid personal comments and flames.
Thanks

Mod Hat Off​

 

[GenemZ]

Says the Bible, not me. You even went into a long rather odd description of angel's providing light instead of the sun before yom 4. That is a new one on me, but either way the sun did not exist before yom 4.

I did not say that the angels produced the first three days of light. I did mention they used to produce light, but I said nothing about the first three days of *this* creation.

 

[Calminian]

I did not say that the angels produced the first three days of light. I did mention they used to produce light, but I said nothing about the first three days of *this* creation.

No one knows what the nature of the lights source the first 3 days. It could have been an angel as they likely were created on day one. They are beings of light, and it would make sense if they were the source. But it could have been anything. We just know light existed before the sun. The author is explicit about that. I don't know why people fight it.