Post a Law and State if it should be followed today

[DamianWarS]

One must believe that God is a creator of chaos or did it just happen and he had to fix it?

That's not the goal of the text to answer (or a problem I might add) You say we should stop superimposing Greek thinking. So then stop superimposing Greek thinking. To an ancient Hebrew the idea that something is created from nothing or "ex nihilo" is too abstract of a concept (too much Greek thinking). This is why creation starts with the primordial waters, and is described as "formless and empty, [and] darkness was over the surface of the deep". It doesn't matter where it came from, that's not what the text is trying to answer. Instead it's answer is the who, speaking light into the waters, forming it, filling it and finally ushing in rest which is the anthesis of these waters (that's the point). The creation account follows a very clear chiastic structure of

a- b- c- d- e- -c -d -e -a -b

I'll give you a hint, the opening c-, d-, e- are days 1-3 and the closing -c, -d, -e are days 4-6 (they parallel each other). Day 7 is "-b" and it is paralleled with these primordial waters (b-) or generally unrest/rest. a-/-a are the bookends to the account parallelling each other. "In the begining God created the heavens and the earth" with "thus the heavens and the earth were created". The account screams to be interpreted beyond the literal.

Western abstract thinking will say "who created the darkness" the text doesn't say, but to the ancient concrete mind that's not even a question. The word "create" in Hebrew has more of a concept of forming or shaping, to it's most concrete end it means "fattening". It's like filling up a pillow case. The Hebrew concept is not ex nihilo, it's forming that which is already there, making it "fat". We see this in Gen 2 as God just doesn't zap man into existence, he formed him from the earth then breaths life into him. Which are concrete concepts not abstract.

 

[Lulav]

That's not the goal of the text to answer (or a problem I might add)

So you understand all levels of PaRDeS for Genesis 1:2?

You say we should stop superimposing Greek thinking. So then stop superimposing Greek thinking.

Sorry, but you've got me confused with someone else I never brought Greek into it, why would I? Genesis was not written in Greek, it was translated into Greek at the request of Ptolemy centuries later.

To an ancient Hebrew the idea that something is created from nothing or "ex nihilo" is too abstract of a concept (too much Greek thinking).

So you are saying that Moses would have had no concept of

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth?
Where does he write that they were created from nothing?

This is why creation starts with the primordial waters, and is described as "formless and empty, [and] darkness was over the surface of the deep".

Primordial waters or flood waters?

It doesn't matter where it came from, that's not what the text is trying to answer. Instead it's answer is the who, speaking light into the waters, forming it, filling it and finally ushing in rest which is the anthesis of these waters (that's the point).

What is "ushing in rest"

The creation account follows a very clear chiastic structure of

a- b- c- d- e- -c -d -e -a -b

I'll give you a hint, the opening c-, d-, e- are days 1-3 and the closing -c, -d, -e are days 4-6 (they parallel each other). Day 7 is "-b" and it is paralleled with these primordial waters (b-) or generally unrest/rest. a-/-a are the bookends to the account parallelling each other. "In the begining God created the heavens and the earth" with "thus the heavens and the earth were created". The account screams to be interpreted beyond the literal.

I'm not sure why you are going on about this based on a general comment I made. Also can't understand since you mentioned Greek thinking you are including just such a thing and applying it to a Hebrew text.

Western abstract thinking will say "who created the darkness" the text doesn't say, but to the ancient concrete mind that's not even a question. The word "create" in Hebrew has more of a concept of forming or shaping, to it's most concrete end it means "fattening". It's like filling up a pillow case.

Well Isaiah 45 tells us who.
5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me.......7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

The Hebrew concept is not ex nihilo, it's forming that which is already there, making it "fat". We see this in Gen 2 as God just doesn't zap man into existence, he formed him from the earth then breaths life into him. Which are concrete concepts not abstract.

Yet in Genesis 1 it says nothing about him coming from the earth.

 

[Lulav]

Getting back to the OP

Post a Law and State if it should be followed today

Let's try this one:

Pay wages on the day they were earned

Lev :19 You must not defraud your neighbor or rob him. You must not withhold until morning the wages due a hired hand.

Deut 24: 14 “You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether one of your brethren or one of the aliens who is in your land within your gates.
15 Each day you shall give him his wages, and not let the sun go down on it, for he is poor and has set his heart on it; lest he cry out against you to the Lord, and it be sin to you.

This is definitely loving your neighbor.

I also believe it should be done today but many 'laws' have seen their ways around it.

 

[Leaf473]

I was just asking for clarification of the posters understanding of the word 'wrong' so I could answer appropriately.
Not really, but few participating are keeping to the topic in the OP even though I stated the rules of this thread.

I'll check out the thread maybe we can get it revived.

Edit to add:

I've taken a look at the post you linked to and it really should have it's own thread. It doesn't suit the OP but it could be made into it's own thread with a title something like 'What makes God Good?'

That's all cool. You probably saw that in that other thread, I was answering a question from the OP.

 

[Leaf473]

You mean like when Jesus said:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.'​

You mean these Jews who lived with him and witnessed his ministry, crucifixion and resurrection?

Acts1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?​

Do you have any specifics in mind?

When Jesus expanded on the Commandment about adultery, he wasn't adding anything new. So the thinking goes. Otherwise, he would have been adding to the law, which is against the law.

Some of the contemporary Jewish people at Jesus time accepted him as Messiah. But the vast majority did not, and have not. In speaking with them, one thing often brought up is that Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecies about restoring the kingdom.

One specific place where Deuteronomy may be expanding on Leviticus is the mixed fabric laws that we're talking about. Another example I can think of relates to the subject you want specifically excluded from the thread.

 

[Leaf473]

Getting back to the OP

Post a Law and State if it should be followed today

Let's try this one:

Pay wages on the day they were earned

Lev :19 You must not defraud your neighbor or rob him. You must not withhold until morning the wages due a hired hand.

Deut 24: 14 “You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether one of your brethren or one of the aliens who is in your land within your gates.
15 Each day you shall give him his wages, and not let the sun go down on it, for he is poor and has set his heart on it; lest he cry out against you to the Lord, and it be sin to you.

This is definitely loving your neighbor.

I also believe it should be done today but many 'laws' have seen their ways around it.

I discussed this with someone generally in favor of strict law keeping, and they said it only applied to day laborers. The idea being that if you make an agreement with someone to pay them at the end of the day, then you should definitely do it.

I'm not entirely convinced. To me, it fits well with Jesus saying give no thought for tomorrow.

Also, it seems like it would go a long ways towards limiting classes in society, in the same way that the Year of Jubilee does.

 

[DamianWarS]

So you understand all levels of PaRDeS for Genesis 1:2?

That's a leading question. It would bet better just to say what you want to say.

Sorry, but you've got me confused with someone else I never brought Greek into it, why would I? Genesis was not written in Greek, it was translated into Greek at the request of Ptolemy centuries later.

I must have, but the concept still applies. Hebrew thinking is different than geek.

So you are saying that Moses would have had no concept of

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth?
Where does he write that they were created from nothing?

Moses doesn't write ex nihilo or from nothing. He understood based on what was revealed to him as an ancient Hebrew. 1:1 is like a bookend mirrored with 2:1. It's a summary of what is about to happen as 2:1 is a summary of what did happen.

Primordial waters or flood waters?

Existing since the beginning. The text doesn't all it flood waters.

What is "ushing in rest

usher in rest

I'm not sure why you are going on about this based on a general comment I made. Also can't understand since you mentioned Greek thinking you are including just such a thing and applying it to a Hebrew text.

We have further revelation into the text than what Moses had.

Well Isaiah 45 tells us who.
5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me.......7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Sure, but that's not a problem/answer of genesis 1. The account is goal driven and a goal of the account is not to answer where darkness came from. It is more focus on who did it through a salvation metaphor. How did creation actually happen? I have no idea and I don't think the account is set to answer that either. since the literal has little to no bearing/consequence with the exception of showing there is one God, then what's the value of the litteral? the core values of "one God" may still be held through a salvation metaphor too except now the words are imbued with far more meaning than the litteral can ever carry.

Yet in Genesis 1 it says nothing about him coming from the earth.

Him as in Adam? you're right, but in Gen 2 it does give us a glimpse of the perception of what creating looks like and it's a it's through forming that which is already there, a very concrete concept. But the account does really answer where the darkness or the premordial waters came from nor does it seem to be a waning interest. That's more of a western problem than ancient eastern thinking.

 

[Lulav]

I discussed this with someone generally in favor of strict law keeping, and they said it only applied to day laborers. The idea being that if you make an agreement with someone to pay them at the end of the day, then you should definitely do it.

I'm not entirely convinced. To me, it fits well with Jesus saying give no thought for tomorrow.

Also, it seems like it would go a long ways towards limiting classes in society, in the same way that the Year of Jubilee does.

Not sure about that last part but Jesus himself used this law for a parable in Matthew 20.

I'm thinking though that today many places have payroll every two weeks. That's a lot of money to be holding onto depending on how big the company is. They can be earning interest while their employees have to wait two weeks to pay bills, buy food etc. With instant banking nowadays I don't think it would be too hard to have their daily pay deposited directly into the employees bank accounts.

 

[Lulav]

DamianWarS said: ↑
the grounds are from the context that light is spoken into. "the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." what is innate about before day 1 is a state of disorder,"

"Lulav said: ↑
One must believe that God is a creator of chaos or did it just happen and he had to fix it?"

That's not the goal of the text to answer (or a problem I might add)

So you understand all levels of PaRDeS for Genesis 1:2?

That's a leading question. It would bet better just to say what you want to say.

I wasn't saying anything, leading or otherwise. You were the one who stated what the goal of the text was, since you said that as fact I was asking if you understood Hebrew exegesis. But from what you wrote after that you are the one thinking in Greek terms so it's probably a moot point.

 

[Leaf473]

Not sure about that last part but Jesus himself used this law for a parable in Matthew 20.

I'm thinking though that today many places have payroll every two weeks. That's a lot of money to be holding onto depending on how big the company is. They can be earning interest while their employees have to wait two weeks to pay bills, buy food etc. With instant banking nowadays I don't think it would be too hard to have their daily pay deposited directly into the employees bank accounts.

To me, the employer holding on to the pay for two or even 4 weeks is not a big deal, as long as the employee understands that before working.

But I do agree that nowadays daily direct deposit is very doable.

 

[Leaf473]

Here's another law. I think it would fall into the love your neighbor category.

If brothers are living together and one of them dies without a son, his widow must not marry outside the family. Her husband’s brother shall take her and marry her and fulfill the duty of a brother-in-law to her. NIV
Deuteronomy 25 - NIV Bible - When people have a dispute, they are to take it to...

I don't think it should be followed today because we don't think in terms of carrying on the name the way they did.

Also a widowed woman today isn't necessarily destitute.

 

[Lulav]

This is why creation starts with the primordial waters, and is described as "formless and empty, [and] darkness was over the surface of the deep".

I see this is where you are having trouble.

Creation does not start with primordial waters. Creation started here.

In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Period, the whole of creation is stated there.

Now verse two is a different story. But first lets look and see what happened when God created the heavens and the earth.

In Job 38 the LORD answered to Job after his rant and he asks him where he was when he was creating the heaven and earth and the morning stars sang together and the sons of GOD shouted for joy.

So verse 2:

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.​

Doesn't sound like a glorious thing to shout for joy over, does it?

Formless and void. Does that sound like our Creator would create something like that?

Formless - from the Hebrew word tohu
This word is translated into English using these words

1. chaos
   
2. confusion
   
3. desolation
4. emptiness
5. empty space
6. formless
   
7. futile
   
8. meaningless
   
9. nothing
   
10. waste or waste place

Again doesn't sound like anything for the sons of God to celebrate, does it?


Void - from the Hebrew word bohu

Meaning of bohu:

1. indistinguishable ruin
   
2. emptiness
3. void

So we can see by a look at the meaning that 1 & 2 are not homogeneous

 

[For_Faith]

In Job 38 the LORD answered to Job after his rant and he asks him where he was when he was creating the heaven and earth and the morning stars sang together and the sons of GOD shouted for joy.

So verse 2:

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.​

Doesn't sound like a glorious thing to shout for joy over, does it?

Formless and void. Does that sound like our Creator would create something like that?

1. emptiness
2. empty space
3. formless
   
4. futile
   
5. meaningless
   
6. nothing
   
7. waste or waste place

Again doesn't sound like anything for the sons of God to celebrate, does it?


Void - from the Hebrew word bohu

Meaning of bohu:

1. indistinguishable ruin
   
2. emptiness
3. void

So we can see by a look at the meaning that 1 & 2 are not homogeneous

Formless could simply mean that the earth was not yet prepared as concerns it being inhabited. No life was on the earth. However, water was not present except that it was present on the earth.

 

[DamianWarS]

In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

1:1 parallels 2:1. They are bookends to the account not an explicit action but more of a summary.

"Create" is an abstract word but it is far more concrete in Hebrew and carries more of a meaning of forming, shaping, even fattening that which is already there. We get a sense of this in chapter 2 where we see how God creating/forming man. He doesn't zap him into being, he instead takes what's already there and forms him, like the potter and the clay.

In the mechanical translation (RMT) it is translated this way: "In the summit Elohiym shaped the skies and the land,". We also see in 1:2 the earth is formless. Formless is not a product of create. 1:1 functions as a summary and it is inconcistent in the account for God to form the sky and land before he speaks light. The first 3 days are not God creating, God speaks it into being for example the text never says God created light, it just says he spoke it. The last 3 days are where the creating happens and are like a filling up from the first 3 days where day 1 parallels day 4. Day 2 parallels day 5 and day 3 parallels day 6.

So 1:1 and 2:1 are connected. In the begining God created the heavens and the earth.... Thus the heavens and the earth were created. So very clearly the action of creating the heavens and earth is the account not v1:1.

Days 1-3 are connected with days 4-6.

This leaves 1:2 and 2:2-3. What should we do with them? 1:1 is of chaos, incomplete, darkness, unformed, empty, and general unrest. Where 2:2-3 is everything 1:2 is not. It is finished, complete, formed, full, and of rest. They are a parallel.to each other and are connected.

I'm not saying God didn't created the premordial waters. I'm saying the text is not focused on that. These waters are used to point to day 7 and day 7 is the goal. Everything else in the account points to day 7. The entire thing is in a chiastic structure that makes clear as to what the goal is. Light is first, it starts a process that leads to rest.

 

[For_Faith]

"Create" is an abstract word but it is far more concrete in Hebrew and carries more of a meaning of forming, shaping, even fattening that which is already there.

beginning (noun)
the point in time or space at which something starts:
"he left at the beginning of February" ·

create (verb)
created (past tense) · created (past participle)
bring (something) into existence:
"he created a thirty-acre lake"

The heavens and earth are objects. Objects exist. "An object...is created...(∃)."[1][2][3]

Another way to say Genesis 1:1 is as follows:

The heavens and earth in the beginning were created by God.

The preposition "in" shows a relationship between "something" that does not exist and the start of its existence.
--------------------------------
"[1] "In this definition, the predicate terms: "is manifest," "is thought," "is expressed," "is created," "is referred to," "is signified," "is present," "is evident," "is constructed," "is built," "is made," "is used," "is conveyed," "is moved," "is transferred," "is put or placed," "is stated," "is denoted", "exists," "occurs," "comes," "arrives," "appears," "acts," and "does" are equivalent and essentially undefined. We call these predicate terms "existential" because they are all defined to be synonymous with the essentially undefined existential term "is" (albeit with the possibility of later-defined semantic nuances for each particular term, as will occur later in this outline, for example, with the definition of the subject terms "other" and "self")."
(footnote 27, p.7 - Prepositional Logic [Outline] by Anthony J. Palik)

[2] "Although this outline is not concerned primarily with a so-called "symbolic” logic (so-called because all logic is symbolic to some degree, whether expressed in spoken English or something more abstract), the symbols commonly used in first-order, second-order, and higher-order predicate logics will be introduced within parentheses, when they first become relevant. In this case, ∃ denotes the state of existence.
(footnote 25, p.7 - Prepositional Logic [Outline] by Anthony J. Palik)

[3] The backwards capital ∃ is read "There exists". "There" is an adverb that is defined as "in or at that place" (Merriam-Webster). In mathematics, a vertical bar ( | ) is read "such that".
Example 1: ∃x | x is created.
read...There exists an x such that x is created.
Example 2: ∃x | x is not created.
read...There exists an x such that x is not created. (cf. Hebrews 11:6)
(my comment and explanation)

 

[DamianWarS]

beginning (noun)
the point in time or space at which something starts:
"he left at the beginning of February" ·

create (verb)
created (past tense) · created (past participle)
bring (something) into existence:
"he created a thirty-acre lake"

The heavens and earth are objects. Objects exist. "An object...is created...(∃)."[1][2][3]

Another way to say Genesis 1:1 is as follows:

The heavens and earth in the beginning were created by God.

The preposition "in" shows a relationship between "something" that does not exist and the start of its existence.
--------------------------------
"[1] "In this definition, the predicate terms: "is manifest," "is thought," "is expressed," "is created," "is referred to," "is signified," "is present," "is evident," "is constructed," "is built," "is made," "is used," "is conveyed," "is moved," "is transferred," "is put or placed," "is stated," "is denoted", "exists," "occurs," "comes," "arrives," "appears," "acts," and "does" are equivalent and essentially undefined. We call these predicate terms "existential" because they are all defined to be synonymous with the essentially undefined existential term "is" (albeit with the possibility of later-defined semantic nuances for each particular term, as will occur later in this outline, for example, with the definition of the subject terms "other" and "self")."
(footnote 27, p.7 - Prepositional Logic [Outline] by Anthony J. Palik)

[2] "Although this outline is not concerned primarily with a so-called "symbolic” logic (so-called because all logic is symbolic to some degree, whether expressed in spoken English or something more abstract), the symbols commonly used in first-order, second-order, and higher-order predicate logics will be introduced within parentheses, when they first become relevant. In this case, ∃ denotes the state of existence.
(footnote 25, p.7 - Prepositional Logic [Outline] by Anthony J. Palik)

[3] The backwards capital ∃ is read "There exists". "There" is an adverb that is defined as "in or at that place" (Merriam-Webster). In mathematics, a vertical bar ( | ) is read "such that".
Example 1: ∃x | x is created.
read...There exists an x such that x is created.
Example 2: ∃x | x is not created.
read...There exists an x such that x is not created. (cf. Hebrews 11:6)
(my comment and explanation)

The text was written in Hebrew not English so you may define english words as much as you want but that is not what the text is written in. Ancient Hebrew is a very concrete language and modern English is a very abstract language so in an English translation it's going to have more abstracts. For example ,"father" is an abstract word. In Hebrew the basic word for father is "AB". A is the aleph or pictograph of an ox and B is Bet and pictograph of a tent. Abstractly ox can mean strength and power and the tent abstractly means the home. What is the strength of the tent? Concretely It's the center tent pole and that's what AB also means, a tent pole. But abstractly it means ones that holds up the family and it is this abstract meaning that is the word for father (or a tent pole). We loose this meaning in English and that doesn't make the translation wrong it just means we miss out on a lot more the text is saying.

That doesn't mean English takes over the traslation it is translated that way because we think in abastracts and it is better suited for the language. But ancient mindset thought in more concretes and this is what shaped their worldview. At some point in the depth of study we need to shed the translated language and favour the language it was written in.

2:1 says, "thus heavens and the earth where created" This connects 1:1 and 2:1 and sets them up as bookends. 2:1 is not creative action niether is 1:1. Everything inbetween is. "Beginning" is also not as clear as you suppose it to be. Ancient Hebrew more carries a meaning of "at the head" or "at the start". The text is not there to negate existence before 1:1 and does seem to set up primordial waters as preexising. That's a western abstract problem but it's not a problem in the text. The text is there to show that the one true God spoke light into the darkness and created everything we see today.

Obviously God created all things, includes whatever we see in 1:2. But the text is silent on who put the waters and darkness there because that's not the point of the text, the point is more who took it away.

I'm not sure why we are going so digressed here. This establishes a powerful typology of God speaking light into darkness, a type of salvation event but one without the need of law to show that darkness needs light.

 

[For_Faith]

Obviously God created all things

Apart from the bible, why is that obvious?

What is obvious is that things exist.

 

[For_Faith]

In Hebrew the basic word for father is "AB". A is the aleph or pictograph of an ox and B is Bet and pictograph of a tent.

So, a pictograph is a symbol for an object that exists. An ox is referred to by a pictograph, and that is the meaning that an author intended to convey, provided that is the commonly accepted meaning of a symbol in a particular language. A pictograph is not the real thing itself.

 

[Leaf473]

Deuteronomy 6
These words, which I command you today, shall be on your heart;
7 and you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise up.

I think this law would fall under the Love God category.
I think it should still be followed today, at least in principle. I wouldn't want to get slavishly literal about it.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Leviticus 21:1 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them:

‘No one shall defile himself for a dead person among his people, 2 except for his relatives who are nearest to him, his mother and his father and his son and his daughter and his brother, 3 also for his virgin sister, who is near to him because she has had no husband; for her he may defile himself. 4 He shall not defile himself as a relative by marriage among his people, and so profane himself. 5 They shall not make any baldness on their heads, nor shave off the edges of their beards, nor make any cuts in their flesh.

This set of commandments has been superseded by the modern funeral industry.