That is just not true. hayah is a verb and everyone that disagrees is treating it as a noun or descriptive.
The Jew has the Gospel in their own language in Genesis 5, and How many Hebrew speaking Jews point this out?
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
GAP…theory…or…fact?
- Thread starter FreeGrace
- Start date
The Jew has the Gospel in their own language in Genesis 5, and How many Hebrew speaking Jews point this out?
never mind. you missed it.
its a figure of speech. there are times when jews don't take words literally
ie
that wasn't if I poked your eye out that you could poke my eye out and call that justice. it was for my eye judging the damage done and you paying what I say in front of the council. and idiom to mean that.
So hayah is a figure of speech? And It is not literal?
show me the context? and it depends. in genesis and particullay that section its literally and plainly read.
the HAYAH as in I AM and as in the HESHEM?
Do you even know what were talking about? You seriously don't know what verse we are talking about?
I am Sorry Jason. If you do not even know what verse we are talking about whats the point?
stovebolts
Member
Not sure where hayah came into the conversation. BTW, the first Christians were Jews. Read acts 2 and 3 so obviously some of them got it. There are still Jews coming to Jesus through Torah study.
Anyway, the way it was explained to me, a door swings, and its name reflects that action or attribute. Jews think in action and attributs in a conceptual way. Greeks and modern americans tend to think in terms of objects primarily, and those objects perform actions and have attributes. Sm I explaining this OK?
I don't try to remember ever Hebrew in every chapter. if I did, well then my bother reading the bible.
since you said that and want to say to be doesn't mean to be then
god doesn't exist IS THAT WHAT he said about himself! I am . hayah.
what does to be mean to you?
see exodus 6 for that hayah. its there and it is the very name of god.
in jewisht thought, that hayah means I am what I need to be for you. that is what stove was saying. but in genesis, its simply as stated.
StoveBolts rashi has stated that the wording of the first chapter of beersherith is better stated as the heavens were formed first. I don't agree with that.
Not sure? Its been 1 of the main points in this whole conversation.
We have tried to explain it over and over, the word Hayah is EXACTLY the way you explain it and I agree with you. Hayah is action, and describes something that actively fell away from something that it WAS. And every body is treating Hayah as an Object, like a Greek!
ok. so you want to think that the be is as in let there be light was something before? as is genesis one:one?
hayah never has a past tense to it in that context. its not translated as there was light. its let there be light. god spoke that as it says and god said let there be light.
hayah never has a past tense to it in that context. its not translated as there was light. its let there be light. god spoke that as it says and god said let there be light.
Sorry, that is just mass confusion to me. I have no Idea what you are saying.
I am Sorry jason, I cannot understand what you are saying. Are you from a country other than America? Because I have a hard time following you. The way you say things is hard for me to understand.
Deborah13
Member
lol, you can't know how many times I have thought that but didn't say it because I didn't know if it would be appropriate considering our Jewish population, you. But it must be OK.
I have no idea.
Not sure what your question is, or where it came from.
You quoted this:
18 For thus said Jehovah, Creator of heaven, He is God, Former of earth, and its Maker, He established it -- not empty He prepared it, For inhabiting He formed it: `I [am] Jehovah, and there is none else
Then made this comment:
I only know the verse #, what book and chapter? And the verse didn't say God created the heavens in 6 days and "reterreformed" (whatever that means) the earth.
Gen 1:1 is very clear. God created the heavens and earth. Barah indicates this creation was out of nothing, or ex nihilio.
Yes, God created the earth, and then repaired (katartizo) it.
I'm really puzzled by your questions about satan. I see no connection. But to answer your question, read Job 1 and 2 to see what he can make. ;)
Seems you aren't understanding the contradiction between what Isaiah wrote and what Moses wrote, IF there is no time gap. satan has nothing to do with creation.
Yes, there is a very clear contradiction. If there is no time gap between the verses, v.2 clearly says that when "God created the heavens and earth", that the earth was "tohu wabohu". But Isaiah said God DIDN'T create the earth "tohu wabohu". That is a contradiction. And your 6 day process doesn't solve anything.
I've already shown that it is legitimate to translate v.2 as "but the earth became "tohu wabohu". That immediately solves any contradiction. Because there is no contradiction. Your view doesn't solve it.
If God stopped, that would have been His plan, and we wouldn't be having this conversation. Your point is not taken.
If there is no time gap, there IS a very big contradiction between Moses and Isaiah.
your opinion about what would be in vain is pointless. We have clear statements by Moses and Isaiah, and if there is no time gap, they have contradicted each other. Plain and simple.
Which poster are you referring to here? Please identify.
Nor me. I've been crystal clear in my total rejection of everything evolutionary.
Actually, He did. He "spoke" the worlds into existence.
The Hebrew for "made" is asah, which means to make something from existing materials. This thread has covered all that already.
Deborah13
Member
KJV
Isaiah 45:18
......he formedH3335 it to be inhabited:H3427.....
yaw-tsar' - H3335
probably identical with H3334 (through the squeezing into shape); (compare H3331); to mould into a form; especially as a potter; figuratively to determine (that is, form a resolution): - X earthen, fashion, form, frame, make (-r), potter, purpose.
yaw-shab' - H3427
A primitive root; properly to sit down (specifically as judge, in ambush, in quiet); by implication to dwell, to remain; causatively to settle, to marry: - (make to) abide (-ing), continue, (cause to, make to) dwell (-ing), ease self, endure, establish, X fail, habitation, haunt, (make to) inhabit (-ant), make to keep [house], lurking, X marry (-ing), (bring again to) place, remain, return, seat, set (-tle), (down-) sit (-down, still, -ting down, -ting [place] -uate), take, tarry.
Now from this scripture can you tell me Exactly where does Isaiah contradicts Moses.
Gen 1:1 .... createdH1254 (H853) ....
baw-raw' - H1254
A primitive root; (absolutely) to create; (qualified) to cut down (a wood), select, feed (as formative processes): - choose, create (creator), cut down, dispatch, do, make (fat).
ayth - H853
Apparently contracted from H226 in the demonstrative sense of entity; properly self (but generally used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or preposition, even or namely): - (As such unrepresented in English.)
You keep saying that in this verse the word is 'barah' rather than 'bara', it is not.
bā·rā — 5 Occurrences Genesis 1:1
HEB: בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת
bə·rā·’āh — 1 Occurrence Isaiah 41:20
HEB: וּקְד֥וֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל בְּרָאָֽהּ׃ פ
The "hei' or 'hey' is not present in Genesis 1:1. A man who is now speaking and reading Hebrew flauntingly about four years ago said that he was told by his Jewish friend, who lives in Israel, that the 'hey' on a word denotes something different than without it. The 'hey' adds an idea that was not there without it. Each letter of the Hebrew alphabet is a picture. The 'hey' is like looking through a window. It is not the window itself but looking through it at what is on the other side.
A Jewish saying is, 'in hey all things are created' and 'the hei is a mystery'.
Abram to Abraham, Sarai to Sarah. Something changed. 'hei' grace
Before you try to prove 'theories' using the Hebrew language I suggest that maybe you should learn something more than Strong's about that language. Find a Jewish person who is flaunt in the old Hebrew, speaks, reads, and writes it. One who knows the Messiah, a messianic, and be diligent in understanding the nuances of the language.
Gladly.
Gen 1:1-2
1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void (tohu wabohu); and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Isa 45:18
18For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain (tohu wabohu), he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
Moses wrote that God created the…earth and the earth was tohuwabohu.
Isaiah wrote that God did NOT create it tohuwabohu.
I do not know how to make it more simple than that. Both used the same words in reference to creation. If v.2 was translated correctly, then there is a contradiction. Period.
I haven't proven a theory. I've proven that tohu wabohu is translated as a waste place in Isa 45:18 (NASB). But even that doesn't really matter.
What matter is that both authors used those same 2 words in reference to creation. And if v.2 was translated correctly (and the earth was…), then there is a contradiction. Because Isaiah wrote that God did NOT create it tohuwabohu.
Regardless of what meaning you want to put on tohuwabohu, they both used those 2 words in reference to creation, and they are saying contradictory things, if v.2 was translated as we find it: "and the earth was…".
The ONLY way there is NO contradiction is if v.2 says "but the earth became…".
Why do I need to find a "flaunt" Jewish person? And why do they have to know the Messiah? Are you suggesting that those who aren't fluent in Hebrew can't read the Hebrew? Or not capable of proper translation? That seems odd.
The problem with the Jews is that they rejected Jesus as their Messiah. They fully understood the OT, but rejected Him as their Messiah. But this is irrelevant to the contradiction that YEC have in their rejection of the proper way to translate v.2.
I've proven that "was" HAS BEEN translated as "became" in 4 other places, so there is no reason to reject that fact.
Plus, if you don't accept that fact, then you have a glaring contradiction.