• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Why is evolution wrong?

Status
Not open for further replies.

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟34,429.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

You do realize that you are begging the question, right?

I see the argument fine. But, we all know that this is not the final proof of anything?

Joshua/Jesus - "Jehovah is salvation"

Does that mean Jesus stood for a theological principle alone and that the resurrection wasn't real?
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟39,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP

Don't go postal, bd.

No one has been trying to make any theological points here. The grammar has been clarified. Strong's reasons for two insertions of "Adam" into his list has been clarified.

That's all I wanted to know.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The other issue with translating adam is the use of the definite article h'adm 'the man'. adm without the article can mean a man, people in general, mankind or it can be the personal name Adam. Most of the time on the beginning of Genesis, certainly most of Gen 2 and 3 you have h'adm, the man, not the personal name Adam.

The first three references are adm, but are translated man because they seem to refer to mankind in general. Gen 1:27&28 "Let us make man in our image" but it is talking about male and female rather than an individual male. Gen 2:5 is also translated man, because it seems to be referring to man in general, there was no man to work the ground.

After that all the references in chapter 2 have the definite article, except 20b But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. Again this could also be translated and to man hath not been found an helper--as his counterpart (Young's). Genesis 3 again uses 'the man' except for 17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened and 21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins. Again Young is quite happy to translate these the man.

The AV tended to translate a lot of the h'adm as Adam where more modern translations, especially the more literal ones, say 'the man'. The AV (and NKJV) have Adam 11 times in the first 3 chapters starting in Gen 2:19.

The NIV has Adam in 2:20b and 3:17,20&21.
The NLT uses it in 3:17,20&21.
The ESV and NASB uses it in 2:20b and 3:17&21.
The RSV has Adam in Gen 3:17&21.

The tendency it to translate the three references without the article Gen 2:20b and 3:17&21, as Adam, though not always 2:20b. Meanwhile less literal translations also throw in Gen 3:20 probably because it is referring to the man naming his wife Eve.

The first time the NRSV, Young's Literal Translation or Greens Literal Version use Adam is Gen 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again.

Again, as glaudys says this is simply discussing grammar and translation issues, not theology.
 
Upvote 0

trivista

Regular Member
Nov 22, 2006
359
27
✟30,657.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
That logic makes evil == good and Satan == good.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.