Creationism Falsified!

[Girlee]

AnswersinHovind wrote:




Wow, what a cogent and convincing evidence based point!

It's almost as detailed as Girlee's




Why do creationist points so quickly degrade to simply plugging one's ears and saying "la la la la, I can't hear you! la la la la"?

I guess "Nope." is easier to type.

Oh, and on a side note, are most readers familar with the convicted criminal and creationist, Kent Hovind? The facts speak for themselves. His bio is here: Kent Hovind - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Papias

Uh--yes, I did say "i disagree there is anything contrary"
Because I had ALREADY in EARLIER POSTS explained my reasonings!!!

Yet, you ignore all that, and choose to write only that one sentence as trying to say i'm ignoring and plugging my ears?
Interesting...

 

[Papias]

yes, but I pointed out in my previous post that your response didn't match the text it was about. However, yes, you are right, you did have a more detailed response earlier.

And maybe I should be nicer anyway. Sorry.

Papias

 

[juvenissun]

Please read threads before posting in them. Discussion has already addressed your issue.

No. it did not.
You do not understand, and you do not ask question. So, forget it.

 

[Siyha]

No. it did not.
You do not understand, and you do not ask question. So, forget it.

Were you referring to canopy theory?

 

[shernren]

Were you referring to canopy theory?

Not to be confused with canape theory, I suppose.

(Hey, I needed something creative to say while I posted to subscribe.)

 

[rcorlew]

I have been taking a good look at this apparent contradiction for some time, I am not a YEC but have noticed something profound about Genesis 2, let me explain before everybody gets all worked up though.

Upon reading many different translations on Genesis 2 I noticed that some include order modifiers and some do not. What I mean by order modifier are words like "now", "then", "first" and so on. Let me try to explain the importance in a way that will show the importance of the use of those words.

In my scenario I will give a simple recipe, salsa to be exact, and give it using two differing methods to illustrate my point. (I like my salsa hot, so my recipe will be for hot, ultra hot, salsa)

First - dice 6 ripe tomatoes (approximately 1 cup)
Second - dice 1/2 yellow or white onion (approximately 1/3 cup)
Third - dice 6 jalapenos (less if you cannot stand the heat)
Fourth - combine all diced ingredients into a bowl
Fifth - add to the diced ingredients the following spices:
1/4 tsp garlic
1/4 tsp salt
1/4 tsp ground black pepper
1 tbsp cilantro

Now mix all ingredients well and place in refrigerator

Now for another rendition of the same recipe:

I took 1/4 tsp garlic, 1/4 tsp salt, 1/4 tsp ground black pepper, 1 tbsp cilantro and put that in a bowl

I diced 1/2 yellow or white onion and I also diced 6 ripe tomatoes as well as 6 jalapenos

Before I put the salsa into the refrigerator I mixed everything well

The two recipes are identical, will yield the same salsa in the end, yet appear to be different, not in the ingredients, but in how they are processed. However, the second recipe is delivered in a different manner than the first because its rendition has a different purpose than the first.

Now I ask those who read this thread to go do some investigation and read the account of Creation (Genesis 1 and 2) in a variety of translations of the Bible and make note of the order modifiers, or lack thereof, in each translation.

Some of the biggest problems with Biblical interpretation is that we either try to impart into the scriptures our own desires or knowledge, or we have a poor translation. I have been working on a method of Biblical interpretation that is an absolute literal interpretation, but this is definitely not the thread for talking about that, I will however say this, when you read ONLY what is written, not what you think is inferred by what is written, you will, at least I hope, gain a greater understanding and appreciation for the scriptures.

 

[shernren]

Hot salsa! Now there's something we can agree on!

Genesis 1 is still past tense reported though; it's more like this:

First, I said, "dice 6 ripe tomatoes."
Second, I said, "dice 1/2 yellow or white onion."
Third, I said, "dice 6 jalapenos."

True, "dice" is in the present tense, but it's only present relative to the verb "said" which is in the past tense.

 

[rcorlew]

Hot salsa! Now there's something we can agree on!

Genesis 1 is still past tense reported though; it's more like this:
True, "dice" is in the present tense, but it's only present relative to the verb "said" which is in the past tense.

You are correct, Genesis 1 is in past tense so I should have made my example to be that way also, so your rearrangement makes it mesh better. Did you notice though that there is no specific order mentioned in Genesis 2 in some translations but there is in others, my question is why? I found that most translations tend to say basically the same thing, but there are parts where they diverge especially in some OT writings. I do know that the OT scriptures were amended following the second Babylonian exile, and I am pretty sure that is where Genesis 1 came from which is a whole other story.

This is one of those cases where the @1.2% (If I remember correctly) significant differences comes into play.

 

[Siyha]

You are correct, Genesis 1 is in past tense so I should have made my example to be that way also, so your rearrangement makes it mesh better. Did you notice though that there is no specific order mentioned in Genesis 2 in some translations but there is in others, my question is why? I found that most translations tend to say basically the same thing, but there are parts where they diverge especially in some OT writings. I do know that the OT scriptures were amended following the second Babylonian exile, and I am pretty sure that is where Genesis 1 came from which is a whole other story.

This is one of those cases where the @1.2% (If I remember correctly) significant differences comes into play.

I would not put too much emphasis on the differing opinions of translations. The problem with translations is that Hebrew and English are so different, that you have to interpret some things and take a couple liberties just for the text to make sense. And in some cases, the translators add words or alter verb tenses to try and make it readable. Here is an example from Genesis 2:8

NIV "Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east"
NASB "The LORD God planted a garden toward the east"

"Now" and "had" have been entirely added to the text in the NIV to try and reconcile the order difference of creation from Genesis 1. In the NASB translation, which has a more acurate rendering of the verb tense, the story seems to imply that the garden was planted after man was made (the same is true where God forms the beasts later in the chapter), so the NIV adds those words to make it seem as though it was a past event, and not happening at that moment in the story, to help the reader reconcile the two stories.

 

[rcorlew]

I would not put too much emphasis on the differing opinions of translations. The problem with translations is that Hebrew and English are so different, that you have to interpret some things and take a couple liberties just for the text to make sense. And in some cases, the translators add words or alter verb tenses to try and make it readable. Here is an example from Genesis 2:8

NIV "Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east"
NASB "The LORD God planted a garden toward the east"

"Now" and "had" have been entirely added to the text in the NIV to try and reconcile the order difference of creation from Genesis 1. In the NASB translation, which has a more acurate rendering of the verb tense, the story seems to imply that the garden was planted after man was made (the same is true where God forms the beasts later in the chapter), so the NIV adds those words to make it seem as though it was a past event, and not happening at that moment in the story, to help the reader reconcile the two stories.

That seems to reinforce my point though, the NASB seems to have far fewer order specifiers in the account, here is an example

Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.

In that verse, is there a specific order mentioned in regards to creation, and is there a specific time in regards to how long before they were named? That verse serves two functions; it states that God formed the creatures (from the dust) and that God gave Adam authority to name each creature.

 

[Assyrian]

Upon reading many different translations on Genesis 2 I noticed that some include order

modifiers and some do not. What I mean by order modifier are words like "now", "then", "first" and so on. Let me

try to explain the importance in a way that will show the importance of the use of those words.

You are on to something there, what you have noticed is our English translations trying to express a Hebrew construction called the waw consecutive, used in Hebrew to express a sequence of events. It uses the Hebrew letter waw וַ which means 'and' and attaches it to the start (right hand side) of a verb in the perfect or imperfect tense. These usually turn up in translations as 'and..' 'then..' 'so...' However this is not a foolproof way of identifying the construction. Translations are not always consistent in translating the waw consecutive, and you can also get 'and' when the waw is attached to a noun.

That seems to reinforce my point though, the NASB seems to have far fewer order specifiers in the account, here is an example

Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.

In that verse, is there a specific order mentioned in regards to creation, and is there a specific time in regards to how long before they were named? That verse serves two functions; it states that God formed the creatures (from the dust) and that God gave Adam authority to name each creature.

In Gen 2:19 the NASB actually omits the first waw consecutive, which you can see in the
NLT So the LORD God formed...
RSV So out of the ground the LORD God formed...
KJV And out of the ground the LORD God formed...

I had a quick look in the passage and I have highlighted the waw consecutives I have found.

Gen 2:18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him."
19 So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
20 And the man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him.

As you can see, the english translation often separates the waw from the verb. I also ran into the problem of waw consecutives not being translated, the ESV I used missed out on the one I highlighted in verse 20, but you will see it if you check other translations.

 

[AnswersInHovind]

You are on to something there, what you have noticed is our English translations trying to express a Hebrew construction called the waw consecutive, used in Hebrew to express a sequence of events. It uses the Hebrew letter waw וַ which means 'and' and attaches it to the start (right hand side) of a verb in the perfect or imperfect tense. These usually turn up in translations as 'and..' 'then..' 'so...' However this is not a foolproof way of identifying the construction. Translations are not always consistent in translating the waw consecutive, and you can also get 'and' when the waw is attached to a noun.



In Gen 2:19 the NASB actually omits the first waw consecutive, which you can see in the
NLT So the LORD God formed...
RSV So out of the ground the LORD God formed...
KJV And out of the ground the LORD God formed...

I had a quick look in the passage and I have highlighted the waw consecutives I have found.

Gen 2:18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him."
19 So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
20 And the man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him.

As you can see, the english translation often separates the waw from the verb. I also ran into the problem of waw consecutives not being translated, the ESV I used missed out on the one I highlighted in verse 20, but you will see it if you check other translations.

Your point is a little unclear to me. Are you saying because of the waw consecutive the verbs are sequential?

 

[Assyrian]

Basically. I only dabble in Hebrew, but the waw consecutive is a really cool construction and well worth reading up on