David Bokovoy Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Found this post on another board. Thought some people here might be interested:Hello Friends,As many here know, one of the fundamental tenets of Mormon theology includes a belief in human existence prior to the creation of the world. This idea shocks many other Christian groups who interpret the creation account in Genesis 1 as evidence against any existence prior to Link to comment
ERayR Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Found this post on another board. Thought some people here might be interested:Ya gotta love it don't you. Link to comment
Zakuska Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 "In a Beginning" or for those English speakers among us... "Once upon a time". Link to comment
Olavarria Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 David, correct me of I'm wrong but doesn't ??????????? make more sense as "at the summit, at the pinaccle" as in a mountain or Egyptian benben stone? I forget where I heard this. Link to comment
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 One such article includes a fascinating study of the passage by Daniel M. Berry published in 2003 in the Jewish Bible Quarterly. Berry presents a careful analysis of the opening words of the Bible from a translator's perspective. His study clearly shows that rather than the King James translation, Link to comment
David Bokovoy Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share Posted December 2, 2009 David, correct me of I'm wrong but doesn't ??????????? make more sense as "at the summit, at the pinaccle" as in a mountain or Egyptian benben stone? I forget where I heard this.Hey Pedro! I'm afraid that I'm not familiar with this argument. I would love to learn more though.BTW, how do you type a post using Hebrew font? Link to comment
David Bokovoy Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share Posted December 2, 2009 I love this, this is great. This has some very serious implications to mainstream thought. I must ask what all did God create? Were are His bounds? This is awesome.I agree. I believe that it's a fascinating idea and love how it parallels Brigham's statement regarding beginnings. Fascinating post. Link to comment
Sargon Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Very interesting stuff David. I'm glad you shared it with us. I'm always impressed that we Mormons do not shy away from higher scholarship, even if it isn't always theologically comfortable. It is fun to note the many places, however, where such scholarship makes our theology even more comfortable. David, are you familiar with the recent book by John Walton entitled, "The Lost World of Genesis One"? From what little I've read about it it seems to present a useful perspective for Latter-day Saints....and Walton is apparently an Evangelical!http://www.amazon.com/Lost-World-Genesis-One-Cosmology/dp/0830837043/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259794742&sr=8-1Thanks.Sargon Link to comment
Zakuska Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 and Walton is apparently an Evangelical!Thanks.SargonYou do realize that makes him cursed?! Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 It could be consistent with multiple universes, multiple big bangs, the "new heaven and earth" of the millennium, or even an evolutionary view that we live in a "new world" after Adam. There's no end to what the implications of this could be.Thanks David! Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 David, I think Pedro cut-n-pasted from Mechon Mamre. Personally, bereishit makes little sense as being on top of a summit, as it means the beggining, front, or chiefest. The mountain top would be rosh hahar.Anyway, I recall a conver ssation with my high school vice-principal- a religious Jew who knew the OT by heart- where he stated pretty much the same thing about bereishit that your source does. He also said that he had no problem with dinosaurs because who knows what went on outside the garden or for how long! Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 But even in English we talk about the "top of the ninth (inning)"? It seems conceptually linked regardless. I of course know absolutely no Hebrew, so I don't have a clue, I will be the first to admit. Link to comment
CV75 Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 "In a Beginning" or for those English speakers among us... "Once upon a time".Or, "To start with...". This point can be an apex (represented by the top of a mountain), from where God condescends to perform His creative works, and, where once finished and brought to/arrived at the same place, men in turn initiate a new beginning of more creative works--and so this point is referred to as the plural "beginnings". Link to comment
Olavarria Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Hey Pedro! I'm afraid that I'm not familiar with this argument. I would love to learn more though.BTW, how do you type a post using Hebrew font?Hey, like Volgo said, I did cut and paste from Mechon Mamre. There has to be a Hebrew font program you can get for free because I know they have it for Chinese. There has to be one for Hebrew as well.I dont remember where I heard the idea. The connection to the benben stone was from moi. It's probably wrong. haha. Link to comment
maklelan Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Given the fact that the earth wasn't created until several verses into Genesis 1, I prefer the construct reading of ?????? ???. Link to comment
Maya Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Interesting thank youYou do realize that makes him cursed?! Hahhahhaaa Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 But even in English we talk about the "top of the ninth (inning)"? It seems conceptually linked regardless. I of course know absolutely no Hebrew, so I don't have a clue, I will be the first to admit.Were I to say reshit of the mountain, I would probably be refering to its base, not its summit. Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Given the fact that the earth wasn't created until several verses into Genesis 1, I prefer the construct reading of ?????? ???.???Huh?Would you please translate for those of us in the peanut gallery? Link to comment
The_Monk Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 ???Huh?Would you please translate for those of us in the peanut gallery?The earth isn't actually created until v. "When God began to created the heavens and earth, the earth was formless and shapeless-" No earth created yet, just chaotic matter. We don't actually get any land until v. 9. Link to comment
volgadon Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 I think verse 1 is the introduction. God created the heavens and the earth. We are then given an account of him creating them. Link to comment
maklelan Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 The earth isn't actually created until v. "When God began to created the heavens and earth, the earth was formless and shapeless-" No earth created yet, just chaotic matter. We don't actually get any land until v. 9.This reading seems to have become the consensus, if I remember correctly. It also doesn't present any absolute beginning, which I think is correct. Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 The earth isn't actually created until v. "When God began to created the heavens and earth, the earth was formless and shapeless-" No earth created yet, just chaotic matter. We don't actually get any land until v. 9.Thanks.That makes a lot of sense. Link to comment
J Green Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 David, are you familiar with the recent book by John Walton entitled, "The Lost World of Genesis One"?You can download a lecture he gives on this subject in MP3 format on Logos' Lecture Series website here. Link to comment
J Green Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Pertinent to the OP about the endless first day is the belief that the first day relates to a timeless period wherein the heavenly host themselves were created. Neh 9:6 gives us a creation context that includes the heavenly host, Jubilees 2:2 tells us angels were created on the first day, etc. Barker cites sources to the effect that when Moses receives the pattern for the tabernacle on Sinai (Ex 25), he sees a vision of the creation and is told to pattern the tabernacle after the creation. Thus day one, pertains to the Holy of Holies and the heavenly timeless realm beyond the veil. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.