Type of translation affect meanings , thus doctrine

[loDebar]

I understand some difficulty exists translating scripture properly and there are different types. I am mostly literalist but have been made aware of a problem.

In previous threads we have discussed we do not have a record of the universe nor earth being created just darkness was upon a unformed earth. I submitted that Lucifer was cast into this darkness. We also have Job 38:7 showing heavenly beings and those in darkness reacted to Light being made created in v 3. I was expecting to consider yowm or yom as not correctly translated in this case as "day" since the sun was not created yet,

It was pointed out today in another the the verse "evening and morning" was the first day. This is a literal translation but I have to consider since no 24 hour day or earth should it be considered something else as simple as beginning and end?

 

[Allan]

A day does not necessitate that the sun must be the source of light.
A day consists entirely in the fact of the revolution of the earth on it's axis in relation to a light source a 24 hour period or as set forth in scripture - an evening and morning (the Jewish standard of day - where ours is a morning and evening). This is not metaphorical but literal.

Let me put it this way. Evening and morning define the parameters and are known and noted by setting and rising of light upon the earth. There are other words in the Hebrew that depict long periods of time and are used often. Here is it specific and the structure is not poetic nor apocalyptic, but narrative.

To me - It makes no sense to seek some other sense when common sense makes sense

 

[InTheLight]

A day does not necessitate that the sun must be the source of light.
A day consists entirely in the fact of the revolution of the earth on it's axis in relation to a light source a 24 hour period or as set forth in scripture - an evening and morning (the Jewish standard of day - where ours is a morning and evening). This is not metaphorical but literal.

Let me put it this way. Evening and morning define the parameters and are known and noted by setting and rising of light upon the earth.

Without the sun there would be no "setting or rising of light upon the Earth." There would only be constant starlight. Constellations would wheel around in the dark sky with no perceptible change in light intensity.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Allan]

Without the sun there would be no "setting or rising of light upon the Earth." There would only be constant starlight. Constellations would wheel around in the dark sky with no perceptible change in light intensity.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I think you missed my point. Regardless of if it is the sun or another another source of light like the sun, what makes an evening and morning, is the 24 hr rotation of the earth on it's axis in relation to the stationary source of light, ie. the sun.

 

[InTheLight]

I think you missed my point. Regardless of if it is the sun or another another source of light like the sun, what makes an evening and morning, is the 24 hr rotation of the earth on it's axis in relation to the stationary source of light, ie. the sun.

In creation days 1-3 there is no sun so how could there be a stationary source of light to know evening from morning?

Besides, the Bible says God created the sun to divide the night from the day, to create days and years, and to create seasons. Gen 1:14-16.

 

[loDebar]

The only other example that shows a different usage. This shows details of a long vision that the details will occur
Dan 8:26

And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days.

I believe this is "end to beginning" or the "entire" vision

 

[Allan]

In creation days 1-3 there is no sun so how could there be a stationary source of light to know evening from morning?

Besides, the Bible says God created the sun to divide the night from the day, to create days and years, and to create seasons. Gen 1:14-16.

Gen 1:3 - let there be light and light was. This light determined evening and morning on the earth. It was stationary, because in the rotation of the earth it provided both illumination and darkness.

Did God, from this, make all the other 'lights' in the heavens, it doesn't say but this original light is not mentioned again after the distribution of 'lights' and the creating of the major and minor (sun and moon). However it cannot be moved away from that evening and morning are defined parameters set by the rotation of the earth in conjunction to a light source. This is the main reason it cannot be anything other than a 24 hour period, aside from the narrative view, and context, and consistency of it's contextual usage in relation to light and darkness.

 

[InTheLight]

Gen 1:3 - let there be light and light was. This light determined evening and morning on the earth. It was stationary, because in the rotation of the earth it provided both illumination and darkness.

No, because Gen 1:14-18 specifically say the sun and moon were created to divide night from day.

14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years;
15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so.
16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth,
18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.
19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

 

[Allan]

No, because Gen 1:14-18 specifically say the sun and moon were created to divide night from day.

14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years;
15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so.
16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth,
18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.
19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Yes, but this doesn't change the fact that light was already created before the sun, moon, and stars. It doesn't change the fact that evening and morning are based, not on the sun, but on the rotation of the earth on it's axis in relation to light source that causes illumination when the earth faces it and darkness as it turns away. This is a continued usage even to this day. It doesn't have a different meaning now vs. then. There is nothing in the text to show such but consistency of the usage throughout scripture when speaking of both or one or the other is the same through out.

 

[InTheLight]

Yes, but this doesn't change the fact that light was already created before the sun, moon, and stars. It doesn't change the fact that evening and morning are based, not on the sun, but on the rotation of the earth on it's axis in relation to light source that causes illumination when the earth faces it and darkness as it turns away.

What light source is the earth turning away from in creation days 1 through 3 that would divide night into day?

 

[Allan]

The one God created. He said let the be light and there was. The earth was formless and void first and in this much was created, can not the light in the heavens be so to? It says it was created and gave both evening and morning upon the earth and it was the first 'day'.

 

[loDebar]

This is far reaching, so prepare

I believe v 3 is the creation of visible light itself. not necessarily our known sources.

Remember the sinful angels had to be sent here in darkness because darkness had to be created since there is none in Heaven.

We know the "sons of god" " shouted for joy" in Job 38 7 .

The fallen angels were chained in darkness when they were used to having continual the light in Heaven. I believe the response is appropriate at the light being created. So much so that the unfallen angels described a "morning stars" praised God .

 

[John of Japan]

I understand some difficulty exists translating scripture properly and there are different types. I am mostly literalist but have been made aware of a problem.

In previous threads we have discussed we do not have a record of the universe nor earth being created just darkness was upon a unformed earth. I submitted that Lucifer was cast into this darkness. We also have Job 38:7 showing heavenly beings and those in darkness reacted to Light being made created in v 3. I was expecting to consider yowm or yom as not correctly translated in this case as "day" since the sun was not created yet,

It was pointed out today in another the the verse "evening and morning" was the first day. This is a literal translation but I have to consider since no 24 hour day or earth should it be considered something else as simple as beginning and end?

If you translate it as "beginning and end," you take the ambiguity out. A literal "evening and morning" allows the reader to interpret it as a literal statement or a metaphor (an interpretation I disagree with here). In other words, "beginning and end" is more explicit to me than "morning and evening." So "beginning and end" would be a functional equivalence rendering.

 

[loDebar]

Is it proper to say then it was more than a day and the verse indicates beginning and end of the period?

 

[John of Japan]

Is it proper to say then it was more than a day and the verse indicates beginning and end of the period?

I don't see how. The Hebrew word for evening (ערב, 'ereb) occurs in 130 verses, always a literal evening as far as I can tell. (Haven't looked at every usage.) The word for morning (בּקר, bôqer) occurs in 189 verses, again as the literal "morning."

Can you give a usage where these words are metaphorical or symbolic?

 

[loDebar]

Just the verse in Daniel 8 :26 where phrase , evening and the morning is used together indicate the vision is complete.

When used together , I find only this verse and the Gen 1 verses.

I do not find it used together anywhere else

Dan 8:26
And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days

All say the evening and the morning. Is there a significance?

 

[John of Japan]

Just the verse in Daniel 8 :26 where phrase , evening and the morning is used together indicate the vision is complete.

When used together , I find only this verse and the Gen 1 verses.

I do not find it used together anywhere else

Dan 8:26
And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days

All say the evening and the morning. Is there a significance?

The Daniel 8:26 reference is back to 8:14, where a vision of "300 days" (KJV), which is 'ereb bôqer, or "evenings & mornings." That is literal, so the 8:26 reference is literal also, not figurative.

Have to go. Back online on Monday. Have a great weekend.

 

[loDebar]

That is the point, each day of the 300 did not have " evenings & mornings" The vision had one "evenings & mornings" or completion

 

[John of Japan]

That is the point, each day of the 300 did not have " evenings & mornings" The vision had one "evenings & mornings" or completion

I'm at MacDonald's right now, so I can answer briefly.

I disagree. As you say, it is plural, "mornings and evenings," so there were 2,300 mornings and 300 evenings in the prophecy. In translation, you can't change a plural to a singular willy-nilly. Interpreters may do that (though it is not valid to do so), but translators may not, not even with the dynamic/functional equivalence method (and I've read a bunch of Eugene Nida's books).

You're still talking about translation, right?

 

[loDebar]

so the correct understanding is one 'ereb bôqer applies to the entire vision of 300 days. So it means more than evening and mourning for a day but complete or total vision