mfbukowski Posted January 10, 2022 Posted January 10, 2022 CALLING HEBREW SCHOLARS and @CV75 @Olmec Donald, @OGHoosier, @Robert F. Smith = Folks I think might be interested..... This is absolutely the BEST commentary I have ever seen on this topic as well as the entire problem of science vs scripture. It is easy to understand and yet at the highest level of scholariship I have seen to explain how NAMING CREATES reality by defining the thing's PURPOSE and FUNCTION I would like comments from Hebrew scholars to confirm that for ancient Hebrews - naming something and defining its purpose CREATES/ORGANIZES the thing, NOT scientific observation. In other words, you KNOW something by knowing its purpose and function, not just see it. It is not "created/organized" until it is given a name and definition - like "The evening and the morning were the first "DAY" therby defining what a "Day ' was. In a sense then, "days" did not exist- or were not organized - until they were defined by purpose and function. Yes it's an hour and a half video, but it could change your whole perspective on what scripture is, and it's from Book of Mormon Central- totally LDS perspectives. Excellent. 3
CV75 Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 28 minutes ago, mfbukowski said: CALLING HEBREW SCHOLARS and @CV75 @Olmec Donald, @OGHoosier, @Robert F. Smith = Folks I think might be interested..... This is absolutely the BEST commentary I have ever seen on this topic as well as the entire problem of science vs scripture. It is easy to understand and yet at the highest level of scholariship I have seen to explain how NAMING CREATES reality by defining the thing's PURPOSE and FUNCTION I would like comments from Hebrew scholars to confirm that for ancient Hebrews - naming something and defining its purpose CREATES/ORGANIZES the thing, NOT scientific observation. In other words, you KNOW something by knowing its purpose and function, not just see it. It is not "created/organized" until it is given a name and definition - like "The evening and the morning were the first "DAY" therby defining what a "Day ' was. In a sense then, "days" did not exist- or were not organized - until they were defined by purpose and function. Yes it's an hour and a half video, but it could change your whole perspective on what scripture is, and it's from Book of Mormon Central- totally LDS perspectives. Excellent. I will make very effort to try it out... in little pieces at a time. But just a hint concerning what I've been thinking about lately: At certain points in Creation, the Gods called certain things a certain something, e.g., "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night." But later on as things progressed, He gave Adam the responsibility to give "names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field..." This is worded differently in the accounts found in Genesis and the Pearl of Great Price to greater effect in the latter, but I'm thinking it has to do with the principle you shared and our reliance upon God to do what He does with this principle first. 1
Robert F. Smith Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 32 minutes ago, CV75 said: ......................... But just a hint concerning what I've been thinking about lately: At certain points in Creation, the Gods called certain things a certain something, e.g., "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night." But later on as things progressed, He gave Adam the responsibility to give "names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field..." This is worded differently in the accounts found in Genesis and the Pearl of Great Price to greater effect in the latter, but I'm thinking it has to do with the principle you shared and our reliance upon God to do what He does with this principle first. In the Book of Moses, everything is first created spiritually (as in a blueprint), and only then is created physically. 2
mfbukowski Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 23 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: In the Book of Moses, everything is first created spiritually (as in a blueprint), and only then is created physically. The assertion is that in ancient Hebrew culture, not just the scriptures, the idea of creation was connected to naming and defining the purpose and function of the thing, and not its "scientific appearance". So perhaps a dog would not be defined by its species, its size and color, but a friendly animal, good for guarding sheep from intruders If you don't know the purpose and function of the thing, its appearance etc is insufficient. That's consistent with "creating spiritually", concentrating on teleology instead of appearance, but would that be a preferred method of definition in ancient Hebrew?
Robert F. Smith Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 3 hours ago, mfbukowski said: The assertion is that in ancient Hebrew culture, not just the scriptures, the idea of creation was connected to naming and defining the purpose and function of the thing, and not its "scientific appearance". So perhaps a dog would not be defined by its species, its size and color, but a friendly animal, good for guarding sheep from intruders If you don't know the purpose and function of the thing, its appearance etc is insufficient. That's consistent with "creating spiritually", concentrating on teleology instead of appearance, but would that be a preferred method of definition in ancient Hebrew? The Hebrew word for it is תבנית tabnit "form, pattern, template," and Peter Leithart says this about it: Quote ...the Hebrew term tabnit, used in Exodus and Chronicles to describe the heavenly “pattern” of the sanctuary:.................. There is a heavenly pattern, disclosed to prophets like Moses, David, Ezekiel, John. We rightly build according to those patterns that are brought down from the mountain – Sinai, Zion, new Jerusalem. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/leithart/2018/05/patterned-by-idols/ . If I recall correctly, both Joseph and Brigham built temples according to a heavenly plan disclosed to them by revelation. Sounds almost Platonic.
Robert F. Smith Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 7 hours ago, mfbukowski said: CALLING HEBREW SCHOLARS and @CV75 @Olmec Donald, @OGHoosier, @Robert F. Smith = Folks I think might be interested..... This is absolutely the BEST commentary I have ever seen on this topic as well as the entire problem of science vs scripture. It is easy to understand and yet at the highest level of scholariship I have seen to explain how NAMING CREATES reality by defining the thing's PURPOSE and FUNCTION I would like comments from Hebrew scholars to confirm that for ancient Hebrews - naming something and defining its purpose CREATES/ORGANIZES the thing, NOT scientific observation. In other words, you KNOW something by knowing its purpose and function, not just see it. It is not "created/organized" until it is given a name and definition - like "The evening and the morning were the first "DAY" therby defining what a "Day ' was. In a sense then, "days" did not exist- or were not organized - until they were defined by purpose and function. Yes it's an hour and a half video, but it could change your whole perspective on what scripture is, and it's from Book of Mormon Central- totally LDS perspectives. Excellent. ..................................... I watched the whole video, and appreciated their analogy with theatrical or dramatic functionality. However, they didn't go far enough in my opinion, perhaps because it was intended to help regular members in a Sunday School setting. So to have broached the actual, liturgical meaning or context might have been too much for the average crowd. I would also have applied the dramatic stage context to the nature of the two trees planted in the Garden and their symbolism (as with the tree envisioned by Lehi and Nephi). 1
mfbukowski Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said: The Hebrew word for it is תבנית tabnit "form, pattern, template," and Peter Leithart says this about it: If I recall correctly, both Joseph and Brigham built temples according to a heavenly plan disclosed to them by revelation. Sounds almost Platonic. Yes but it makes The Word into the creator of Forms, and Yahweh the creator of all we can know, and does it philosophically!! The BOA reiterates John 1 - Reality does not exist without the reification / incarnation of The Word! Well if these guys Tyler and Taylor are right, they are describing a pragmatic theory of language, in which "the Word" really does literally create reality as we know it, Wittgenstein becomes a theologian, and there is no possible conflict between science and religion, and the scriptures become compatible perfectly with contemporary philosophy and Humanism, but they do not appear to see the philosophical ramifications of their point IF their point is valid and I do not know Hebrew. For me, it becomes a kind of Rosetta Stone that makes religion/science exactly like the good old rabbit and duck, dependent on one's perspective, but this time based on the very essence of the ancient Hebrew Zeitgeist. It really DOES make the gospel into Godly Humanism. But I don't know ancient Hebrew so my case is weak If these guys have that part right, I think it can be seen to change our understanding of scripture into the way I have always seen it, but without linguistic evidence for my position It makes ancient scripture writers into Wittgensteinians and vice versa! Their perspectives are identical! From a teleological perspective science and religion are on the same team- organizing reality and exploring what it is to be human.
mfbukowski Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 24 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: I watched the whole video, and appreciated their analogy with theatrical or dramatic functionality. However, they didn't go far enough in my opinion, perhaps because it was intended to help regular members in a Sunday School setting. So to have broached the actual, liturgical meaning or context might have been too much for the average crowd. I would also have applied the dramatic stage context to the nature of the two trees planted in the Garden and their symbolism (as with the tree envisioned by Lehi and Nephi). Agreed, it is watered / dumbed down. But were they right that Hebrews defined the world teleologically/pragmatically, around purpose and function, rather than sensory perception of appearances? A house existed to be a place for a family to live, rather than 2x4's and shingles, pipes, and stress analyses?
Robert F. Smith Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 2 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Agreed, it is watered / dumbed down. But were they right that Hebrews defined the world teleologically/pragmatically, around purpose and function, rather than sensory perception of appearances? A house existed to be a place for a family to live, rather than 2x4's and shingles, pipes, and stress analyses? Yes, and that is why they think first of the template or pattern -- which carries the purpose within it. I like to think of our DNA as the blueprint code which precedes embodiment. Perhaps not so odd that it looks like a book with words, predefining what will come to be. 2
mfbukowski Posted January 11, 2022 Posted January 11, 2022 (edited) 10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Yes, and that is why they think first of the template or pattern -- which carries the purpose within it. I like to think of our DNA as the blueprint code which precedes embodiment. Perhaps not so odd that it looks like a book with words, predefining what will come to be. AND, like the DNA analogy, we seldom also think of mathmatical EQUATIONS as being human statements written in the language of logic, linking ideas and purposes. The equals sign becomes the assertion that something IS something else, defined in another way, thereby linking two concepts that were not linked before, like "God = a glorified and exalted Human Being" is like "Water = H2O, two hydrogen atoms and one Oxygen atom". Both sentences say that A=B, no matter how complex A or B may be. E=mc2. So the LOGIC in those statements is the same, and creates a definition of a name. Water IS H2O, God IS love, E=mc2. Like it or not, all these are simply definitions equated to allow us see one side of the equation in the context of the other side of the equation. Somehow we see math as being "more accurate", but it is not. It all depends on the contexts and definitions- the models- the "tabnitim" of what underlies the statement of equality that creates the truth or falsity. In such complexity the question becomes do the definitions accomplish the PURPOSE of what they are designed to do? If we think of one variable in terms of the other variable, does that accomplish the PURPOSE desired to make those definitions sufficient? It is not about "reality" but about the achieving the pragmatic purpose of the definition, and the utility of the "tabnit" we are putting forward. Edited January 11, 2022 by mfbukowski 1
Risingtide Posted January 14, 2022 Author Posted January 14, 2022 On 1/10/2022 at 3:55 PM, mfbukowski said: CALLING HEBREW SCHOLARS and @CV75 @Olmec Donald, @OGHoosier, @Robert F. Smith = Folks I think might be interested..... This is absolutely the BEST commentary I have ever seen on this topic as well as the entire problem of science vs scripture. It is easy to understand and yet at the highest level of scholariship I have seen to explain how NAMING CREATES reality by defining the thing's PURPOSE and FUNCTION I would like comments from Hebrew scholars to confirm that for ancient Hebrews - naming something and defining its purpose CREATES/ORGANIZES the thing, NOT scientific observation. In other words, you KNOW something by knowing its purpose and function, not just see it. It is not "created/organized" until it is given a name and definition - like "The evening and the morning were the first "DAY" therby defining what a "Day ' was. In a sense then, "days" did not exist- or were not organized - until they were defined by purpose and function. Yes it's an hour and a half video, but it could change your whole perspective on what scripture is, and it's from Book of Mormon Central- totally LDS perspectives. Excellent. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I think I'll have this time Sunday to watch it. On 1/10/2022 at 3:55 PM, mfbukowski said: CALLING HEBREW SCHOLARS and @CV75 @Olmec Donald, @OGHoosier, @Robert F. Smith = Folks I think might be interested..... This is absolutely the BEST commentary I have ever seen on this topic as well as the entire problem of science vs scripture. It is easy to understand and yet at the highest level of scholariship I have seen to explain how NAMING CREATES reality by defining the thing's PURPOSE and FUNCTION I would like comments from Hebrew scholars to confirm that for ancient Hebrews - naming something and defining its purpose CREATES/ORGANIZES the thing, NOT scientific observation. In other words, you KNOW something by knowing its purpose and function, not just see it. It is not "created/organized" until it is given a name and definition - like "The evening and the morning were the first "DAY" therby defining what a "Day ' was. In a sense then, "days" did not exist- or were not organized - until they were defined by purpose and function. Yes it's an hour and a half video, but it could change your whole perspective on what scripture is, and it's from Book of Mormon Central- totally LDS perspectives. Excellent. Thank you for this 1
Tacenda Posted January 16, 2022 Posted January 16, 2022 I'm at my mother in law's place and she can't read the scriptures very well, she has immaculate degeneration. Do any of you know of some easy to listen tapes of the Bible. Or other technology? She's getting pretty frustrated. We have her read out of a tablet so far.
JustAnAustralian Posted January 16, 2022 Posted January 16, 2022 You can get MP3s of the standard works from the church website http://media2.ldscdn.org/assets/scriptures/lds-standard-works/2015-11-0000-standard-works-female-voice-complete-mp3-eng.zip http://media2.ldscdn.org/assets/scriptures/lds-standard-works/2015-11-0000-standard-works-male-voice-complete-mp3-eng.zip
Tacenda Posted January 17, 2022 Posted January 17, 2022 2 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said: You can get MP3s of the standard works from the church website http://media2.ldscdn.org/assets/scriptures/lds-standard-works/2015-11-0000-standard-works-female-voice-complete-mp3-eng.zip http://media2.ldscdn.org/assets/scriptures/lds-standard-works/2015-11-0000-standard-works-male-voice-complete-mp3-eng.zip Thanks, great idea!
Calm Posted January 17, 2022 Posted January 17, 2022 6 hours ago, Tacenda said: I'm at my mother in law's place and she can't read the scriptures very well, she has immaculate degeneration. Do any of you know of some easy to listen tapes of the Bible. Or other technology? She's getting pretty frustrated. We have her read out of a tablet so far. I sent my set of church scripture CDs for my mom to DI a few weeks ago because I couldn’t find any takers or I would have given them to you. I thought maybe the professional look would make Mom feel more comfortable with using them than using mp3s or somehow copying them to tapes or CDs, but it didn’t work, so they were in great shape. If your mil is willing to use a tablet though, the mp3s should be easy. If not, find out what she would be comfortable with (as in see her use it) before spending too much money by trying to track down out of print stuff.
Recommended Posts