Genesis 2:19

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>>Ray:

Also, while you are at it please post just one name of those many biblical
scholars that (not long ago, according to you) believed the gospels were
written after 200CE. You have posted message after message about all kinds of
things, including the ridiculous assertion you had won the debate about
Genesis 1 & 2, so there certainly has been time.


>CARTER (regarding the biblical scholarship):

I'll have to find the reference, it was something I briefly looked over
when studying a history of biblical criticism, however, if I was wrong
I will correct myself.

Ray:
Maybe comming on strong about things you "just briefly looked over" isn't
very smart.


>Carter (regarding G1 and G2):

I have only said I have shown than Gen 2:19 is not in contradiction with
Genesis 1. I have not said I have "won" on any other matter. I have stated
this only because I have found ample scholarship to attest to a
non-contradiction, and I have done more research on this particular topic
than anyone in the entire group.

Ray:
I do not think you have found ample scholarship that proves Gen 2:19 is
non-contradictory with the Gen 1. Perhaps the scholarship can maintain that
the specific verse of Genesis 2:19 can be translated so that it appears to
be non-contradictory, but we already knew that from the NIV translation. I
don't think anyone here claimed the NIV translation absolutely violated
Hebrew grammer. It was claimed that it was not consistent with the "WAW
consecutive" at least as normally used and results in a translation not
consistent with the context of the story. It is therefore a "bad"
translation. This is proven by the fact that essentially all translations
translate it alike and do not use the past perfect as the NIV does.
Apparently Turkel was not familiar with the other 2 obscure translations
someone on this board (probably Crea or Till) found that followed the NIV.
That made it something like 26 to 3 that the NIV translation was poor.

That it is poor can be seen by looking at the 5 translations below, where
it can be seen that the NIV is choppy and the others are not. It was
necessary to create two sentences in the NIV version where the others had
one with the two actions connected with a comma. In the NIV translation,
the first sentence stands there hanging onto nothing. It makes no sense
that this statement about what God had done before was even made. If this
sentence were really written with the assumption that G1 had just been
read, it would have said something like "He brought the beasts of the field
and all the birds of the air to see what he would name them". This is not
one of those cases where the same thing is stated right next to each other
slightly differently, which has been discussed here before. There is no
need to repeat that he had created them and it makes the reading choppy.

NIV:
Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts
of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the
man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man
called each living creature, that was its name.

RSV:
So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the
field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see
what he would call them; and whatever the man called every
living creature, that was its name.

KJV:
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the
field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to
see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every
living creature, that was the name thereof.

DBY:
And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim had formed every animal
 of the field and all fowl of the heavens, and brought [them] to
Man, to see what he would call them; and whatever Man called
each living soul, that was its name.

YLT:
And Jehovah God formeth from the ground every beast of the
field, and every fowl of the heavens, and bringeth in unto the
man, to see what he doth call it; and whatever the man calleth a
living creature, that [is] its name.

You can see that the other 4 translations read far more smoothly with a
comma between the two actions showing that connect the two actions. They
are not connected at all in the NIV version; they just stand there side by
side. This was what Crea said the "WAW consecutive" (I confess I know
nothing of this stuff) signifies, i.e., a sequence of events. Till really
closed the door on using the past perfect tense here by pointing out that
if you want to translate it that way in these passages, the whole story
becomes ridiculous.

So why did the NIV translate 2:19 as it did? A reason for that has also
been given and that is that the NIV has a history of streching a
translation to help avoid contradictions. This has been done before in the
KJV as well. Apparently the NIV is notorious for the practice. No doubt
they would not intentionally make a demonstrably false translation but
translators can strech the truth considerably if one is so motivated.

I didn't get into the other problems between G1 and G2 as they have already
been laid out and you seem to want to defer to Turkel, who is not inclined
to debate Till. You have promised to deal with the question of Elohim vs
Yaweh however and we await this exposition.

Regards, Ray

• Previous message: Genesis 2:19
• Next message: Genesis 2:19
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]