Hebrew Professor and the Gap Theory

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

Just about every mammal can speak, how is that a gift from God just for humans?  Where does the Bible say that the ability to speak is a gift of God?  You are grasping at straws now.   Just for fun, what language did God speak? 

 

LOL  that is just ridiculous.  Animals don't speak.   Speaking is uniquely human; we use words and communicate ideas, thoughts and information  Dogs and cats do not "speak." Stop being absurd.   The person grasping at straws is you. 

 

Doesn't matter what language God used.  What matters is that He spoke.  

 

 

10 Animals That Can Speak for Themselves

http://news.discovery.com/animals/10-animals-with-human-like-communication-130903.htm

[LookingForAnswers]

 

Speaking of literary devices, the words "And God said" appear 6 times in Genesis 1.  Did God actually speak or is this a literary device conveying a different meaning?  If an actual voice and words didnt come out of God's mouth, would that make this a figurative device?  Does God have a mouth in the same way we humans do?

 

 

Does the verse state that God spoke through His physical mouth?

 

You are attempting to apply temporal, physical limitations to an eternal, spiritual being. You observe that humans speak through our mouths, you then extrapolate that observation to assume all beings (both physical and spiritual) require physical mouths to utter speech. That assumption is not justified. If anything – it is we physical beings who are subject to such limitations.

 

When God manifested Himself to Moses as a burning bush, did that burning bush require a physical mouth to speak to Moses? Is there any reference to the burning bush’s mouth in the passage – or did it simply appear as a physical manifestation of a burning bush?

 

If God speaks into our spirit (instead of our ears), is it really speech – or should we call it something else?

 

Ultimately, the premise of your point is an assumption that God cannot utter speech without a physical mouth – but you have failed to qualify this premise. I think this premise unnecessarily and unjustifiably limits God. I therefore have no problem with God speaking – regardless of the presence of a physical mouth.

 

Furthermore, even if God was limited (such that He requires a physical mouth to speak), He is perfectly capable of creating a physical mouth for that very purpose.

 

So there is no intrinsic, exegetical reason to necessarily apply figurative assumptions to scriptural occurrences of “God said”.

 

 

what does it mean to "speak"?

[Sheniy]

Just about every mammal can speak, how is that a gift from God just for humans?  Where does the Bible say that the ability to speak is a gift of God?  You are grasping at straws now.   Just for fun, what language did God speak?

LOL  that is just ridiculous.  Animals don't speak.   Speaking is uniquely human; we use words and communicate ideas, thoughts and information  Dogs and cats do not "speak." Stop being absurd.   The person grasping at straws is you.

So...the serpent in the garden is figurative?

What about Balaam's donkey?

[Sheniy]

Synechdoche yes.  it's like..... lend me a Hand.  You don't want the persons hand LOL.  It's a part that represents a whole.

The trouble I had with this is I probably wouldn't recognize a Synecdoche in Genesis if it sank it's teeth into me (that's an anthropomorphism!). I'm not a former Hebrew slave living in the time of Moses, so I likely wouldn't recognize their figures of speech. Also, naturally, our modern figures of speech likely wouldn't appear in ancient Hebrew text. (right?)

I thought I did pretty well for my limited experience with Hebrew. I give me an A for effort.

 

 

Honestly, I've forgotten the point of the exercise.  Why did I need to find a rhetorical device again?

 

Now that was hilarious!!  Yes, we were looking for Rhetorical Devices in Genesis 1 to prove it wasn't a Historic Narrative.

 

But...I believe it is an historical narrative...lol.

 

Oh well. It was a fun exercise.  And I learned what synecdoche means, so not entirely fruitless.

[Enoch2021]

 

Synechdoche yes.  it's like..... lend me a Hand.  You don't want the persons hand LOL.  It's a part that represents a whole.

The trouble I had with this is I probably wouldn't recognize a Synecdoche in Genesis if it sank it's teeth into me (that's an anthropomorphism!). I'm not a former Hebrew slave living in the time of Moses, so I likely wouldn't recognize their figures of speech. Also, naturally, our modern figures of speech likely wouldn't appear in ancient Hebrew text. (right?)

I thought I did pretty well for my limited experience with Hebrew. I give me an A for effort.

 

 

Honestly, I've forgotten the point of the exercise.  Why did I need to find a rhetorical device again?

 

Now that was hilarious!!  Yes, we were looking for Rhetorical Devices in Genesis 1 to prove it wasn't a Historic Narrative.

 

But...I believe it is an historical narrative...lol.

 

Oh well. It was a fun exercise.  And I learned what synecdoche means, so not entirely fruitless.

 

 

 

The trouble I had with this is I probably wouldn't recognize a Synecdoche in Genesis if it sank it's teeth into me (that's an anthropomorphism!).

 

 LOL Sheniy  :24:

 

Love the Sense of Humor!!

 

 

Oh well. It was a fun exercise.  And I learned what synecdoche means, so not entirely fruitless.

 

Good.   See, I'm not such a bad guy (as far as you know)

[Tristen]

 

 

Speaking of literary devices, the words "And God said" appear 6 times in Genesis 1.  Did God actually speak or is this a literary device conveying a different meaning?  If an actual voice and words didnt come out of God's mouth, would that make this a figurative device?  Does God have a mouth in the same way we humans do?

 

 

Does the verse state that God spoke through His physical mouth?

 

You are attempting to apply temporal, physical limitations to an eternal, spiritual being. You observe that humans speak through our mouths, you then extrapolate that observation to assume all beings (both physical and spiritual) require physical mouths to utter speech. That assumption is not justified. If anything – it is we physical beings who are subject to such limitations.

 

When God manifested Himself to Moses as a burning bush, did that burning bush require a physical mouth to speak to Moses? Is there any reference to the burning bush’s mouth in the passage – or did it simply appear as a physical manifestation of a burning bush?

 

If God speaks into our spirit (instead of our ears), is it really speech – or should we call it something else?

 

Ultimately, the premise of your point is an assumption that God cannot utter speech without a physical mouth – but you have failed to qualify this premise. I think this premise unnecessarily and unjustifiably limits God. I therefore have no problem with God speaking – regardless of the presence of a physical mouth.

 

Furthermore, even if God was limited (such that He requires a physical mouth to speak), He is perfectly capable of creating a physical mouth for that very purpose.

 

So there is no intrinsic, exegetical reason to necessarily apply figurative assumptions to scriptural occurrences of “God said”.

 

 

what does it mean to "speak"?

 

 

Exactly!

 

Does the definition of the term “said” necessarily and exclusively incorporate the use of a physical mouth? Can spiritual eternal beings (such as God) be rationally limited by such definitions – such that they cannot ‘say’ anything without manifesting a physical mouth (i.e. is it logically possible for an eternal spirit to “speak” or 'say' anything without the necessary construction of a physical mouth)?

 

(And if it’s possible for God to construct a physical mouth for speech – there’s no necessary inconsistency anyway).

 

Can people who have used sign language to communicate be considered to have “said” anything – because by your implied, assumptive, limited definition, this would be a misuse of terminology? Similarly, can something be "said" in writing - or only ever physical, oral communication?

 

Your argument appeals to an unnecessarily limited definition of "said" (IMO) - which I don't think you have justified. I am not prepared to limit God’s capacity by applying such restrictive definitions to Him. And I therefore have no reason to take the word "said" as figurative. I don't see the point of rendering "said" figuratively anyway - if He didn't 'say' it, why does the Bible claim that He "said" it? If "said" is the antecedent, what is the figurative interpretation? When the author claims "God said", what is he trying to convey - other than "God said"? Does it mean 'God thought - but couldn't actually say due to the lack of a physical mouth'? If so, why not just say "God thought". In a context with no other figurative indicators, surely such phraseology is unecessarily deceptive.

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

 

Speaking of literary devices, the words "And God said" appear 6 times in Genesis 1.  Did God actually speak or is this a literary device conveying a different meaning?  If an actual voice and words didnt come out of God's mouth, would that make this a figurative device?  Does God have a mouth in the same way we humans do?

 

 

Does the verse state that God spoke through His physical mouth?

 

You are attempting to apply temporal, physical limitations to an eternal, spiritual being. You observe that humans speak through our mouths, you then extrapolate that observation to assume all beings (both physical and spiritual) require physical mouths to utter speech. That assumption is not justified. If anything – it is we physical beings who are subject to such limitations.

 

When God manifested Himself to Moses as a burning bush, did that burning bush require a physical mouth to speak to Moses? Is there any reference to the burning bush’s mouth in the passage – or did it simply appear as a physical manifestation of a burning bush?

 

If God speaks into our spirit (instead of our ears), is it really speech – or should we call it something else?

 

Ultimately, the premise of your point is an assumption that God cannot utter speech without a physical mouth – but you have failed to qualify this premise. I think this premise unnecessarily and unjustifiably limits God. I therefore have no problem with God speaking – regardless of the presence of a physical mouth.

 

Furthermore, even if God was limited (such that He requires a physical mouth to speak), He is perfectly capable of creating a physical mouth for that very purpose.

 

So there is no intrinsic, exegetical reason to necessarily apply figurative assumptions to scriptural occurrences of “God said”.

 

 

what does it mean to "speak"?

 

 

Exactly!

 

Does the definition of the term “said” necessarily and exclusively incorporate the use of a physical mouth? Can spiritual eternal beings (such as God) be rationally limited by such definitions – such that they cannot ‘say’ anything without manifesting a physical mouth (i.e. is it logically possible for an eternal spirit to “speak” or 'say' anything without the necessary construction of a physical mouth)?

 

(And if it’s possible for God to construct a physical mouth for speech – there’s no necessary inconsistency anyway).

 

Can people who have used sign language to communicate be considered to have “said” anything – because by your implied, assumptive, limited definition, this would be a misuse of terminology? Similarly, can something be "said" in writing - or only ever physical, oral communication?

 

Your argument appeals to an unnecessarily limited definition of "said" (IMO) - which I don't think you have justified. I am not prepared to limit God’s capacity by applying such restrictive definitions to Him. And I therefore have no reason to take the word "said" as figurative. I don't see the point of rendering "said" figuratively anyway - if He didn't 'say' it, why does the Bible claim that He "said" it? If "said" is the antecedent, what is the figurative interpretation? When the author claims "God said", what is he trying to convey - other than "God said"? Does it mean 'God thought - but couldn't actually say due to the lack of a physical mouth'? If so, why not just say "God thought". In a context with no other figurative indicators, surely such phraseology is unecessarily deceptive.

 

 

So then, just what does the term "and God said" mean?   

 

Did God need to speak for these things to happen?  Is God's power limited to his ability to speak things into being? 

 

As for this question...if He didn't 'say' it, why does the Bible claim that He "said" it?  Why does the Bible say God changed His mind when most people don't actually think he changed his mind.    Why does the Bible say God stretched out is His hand, or speak of the breath of His mouth, or His mighty arm?

 

Do you believe that God has wings, or is that just figurative speech?

 

 Why does the Bible ever use figurative speech? 

Edited February 19, 2014 by LookingForAnswers

[Tristen]

 

 

 

 

Speaking of literary devices, the words "And God said" appear 6 times in Genesis 1.  Did God actually speak or is this a literary device conveying a different meaning?  If an actual voice and words didnt come out of God's mouth, would that make this a figurative device?  Does God have a mouth in the same way we humans do?

 

 

Does the verse state that God spoke through His physical mouth?

 

You are attempting to apply temporal, physical limitations to an eternal, spiritual being. You observe that humans speak through our mouths, you then extrapolate that observation to assume all beings (both physical and spiritual) require physical mouths to utter speech. That assumption is not justified. If anything – it is we physical beings who are subject to such limitations.

 

When God manifested Himself to Moses as a burning bush, did that burning bush require a physical mouth to speak to Moses? Is there any reference to the burning bush’s mouth in the passage – or did it simply appear as a physical manifestation of a burning bush?

 

If God speaks into our spirit (instead of our ears), is it really speech – or should we call it something else?

 

Ultimately, the premise of your point is an assumption that God cannot utter speech without a physical mouth – but you have failed to qualify this premise. I think this premise unnecessarily and unjustifiably limits God. I therefore have no problem with God speaking – regardless of the presence of a physical mouth.

 

Furthermore, even if God was limited (such that He requires a physical mouth to speak), He is perfectly capable of creating a physical mouth for that very purpose.

 

So there is no intrinsic, exegetical reason to necessarily apply figurative assumptions to scriptural occurrences of “God said”.

 

 

what does it mean to "speak"?

 

 

Exactly!

 

Does the definition of the term “said” necessarily and exclusively incorporate the use of a physical mouth? Can spiritual eternal beings (such as God) be rationally limited by such definitions – such that they cannot ‘say’ anything without manifesting a physical mouth (i.e. is it logically possible for an eternal spirit to “speak” or 'say' anything without the necessary construction of a physical mouth)?

 

(And if it’s possible for God to construct a physical mouth for speech – there’s no necessary inconsistency anyway).

 

Can people who have used sign language to communicate be considered to have “said” anything – because by your implied, assumptive, limited definition, this would be a misuse of terminology? Similarly, can something be "said" in writing - or only ever physical, oral communication?

 

Your argument appeals to an unnecessarily limited definition of "said" (IMO) - which I don't think you have justified. I am not prepared to limit God’s capacity by applying such restrictive definitions to Him. And I therefore have no reason to take the word "said" as figurative. I don't see the point of rendering "said" figuratively anyway - if He didn't 'say' it, why does the Bible claim that He "said" it? If "said" is the antecedent, what is the figurative interpretation? When the author claims "God said", what is he trying to convey - other than "God said"? Does it mean 'God thought - but couldn't actually say due to the lack of a physical mouth'? If so, why not just say "God thought". In a context with no other figurative indicators, surely such phraseology is unecessarily deceptive.

 

 

So then, just what does the term "and God said" mean?   

 

Did God need to speak for these things to happen?  Is God's power limited to his ability to speak things into being? 

 

As for this question...if He didn't 'say' it, why does the Bible claim that He "said" it?  Why does the Bible say God changed His mind when most people don't actually think he changed his mind.    Why does the Bible say God stretched out is His hand, or speak of the breath of His mouth, or His mighty arm?

 

Do you believe that God has wings, or is that just figurative speech?

 

 Why does the Bible ever use figurative speech? 

 

 

 

“So then, just what does the term "and God said" mean?”

 

It means what it says. The specific form of communication is not stated - and is only relevant to those with an extraneous motivation to have it mean something other than what it says; i.e. those with a predetermined agenda to define it figuratively.

 

 

“Did God need to speak for these things to happen?  Is God's power limited to his ability to speak things into being?”

 

No to both. As a Bible-believing Christian, I believe God “said” things because the Bible says He “said” things. Such Biblical claims would be unnecessary if not true.

 

 

“Why does the Bible say God changed His mind when most people don't actually think he changed his mind”

 

That would depend on the arguments presented by these “most people”. If they merely claimed the phrase to be figurative because it conflicted with their current perception of God, then their complaints are unjustified.

 

I suspect (having not bothered to track down the reference) that the positions argue along the line of foreknowledge versus predestination. That is, God was committed to a path that could only be changed by a certain human action. When that action occurred, God changed His path. Does God’s foreknowledge of the human decision mean that there was less commitment to the original path? i.e. Since He already knew what would happen, did God really change His mind? That’s a different issue to the question of figurative versus straight forward language.

 

 

“Why does the Bible ever use figurative speech?”

 

The same reason humans use “figurative speech”; The Bible is written to humans, and in certain contexts, ideas may be better conveyed through symbolic or figurative communication.

 

I have no problem with the Bible using figurative communication. But sincere believers do not consider themselves to have the right to merely relegate any inconvenient passage to the ranks of symbolic/figurative. Any such claim must be justified in the context of the passage itself.

 

It is also noteworthy that this very question concedes the point that “speech” can refer to communication other than physical, oral (i.e. referring to the Bible as “speech”).

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

 

 

“So then, just what does the term "and God said" mean?”

 

It means what it says. The specific form of communication is not stated - and is only relevant to those with an extraneous motivation to have it mean something other than what it says; i.e. those with a predetermined agenda to define it figuratively.

 

 

“Did God need to speak for these things to happen?  Is God's power limited to his ability to speak things into being?”

 

No to both. As a Bible-believing Christian, I believe God “said” things because the Bible says He “said” things. Such Biblical claims would be unnecessary if not true.

 

 

“Why does the Bible say God changed His mind when most people don't actually think he changed his mind”

 

That would depend on the arguments presented by these “most people”. If they merely claimed the phrase to be figurative because it conflicted with their current perception of God, then their complaints are unjustified.

 

I suspect (having not bothered to track down the reference) that the positions argue along the line of foreknowledge versus predestination. That is, God was committed to a path that could only be changed by a certain human action. When that action occurred, God changed His path. Does God’s foreknowledge of the human decision mean that there was less commitment to the original path? i.e. Since He already knew what would happen, did God really change His mind? That’s a different issue to the question of figurative versus straight forward language.

 

 

“Why does the Bible ever use figurative speech?”

 

The same reason humans use “figurative speech”; The Bible is written to humans, and in certain contexts, ideas may be better conveyed through symbolic or figurative communication.

 

I have no problem with the Bible using figurative communication. But sincere believers do not consider themselves to have the right to merely relegate any inconvenient passage to the ranks of symbolic/figurative. Any such claim must be justified in the context of the passage itself.

 

It is also noteworthy that this very question concedes the point that “speech” can refer to communication other than physical, oral (i.e. referring to the Bible as “speech”).

 

 

So, when all is said and done, we dont really know what the phrase "and God said" means since it seems that "saying" something can be done in a multitude of ways and does not need to be verbal speech.  And save the passive/aggressive insults for someone else, if you cannot do so then just let me know and I will discontinue dealing with you.

[Tristen]

 

 

 

 

 

“So then, just what does the term "and God said" mean?”

 

It means what it says. The specific form of communication is not stated - and is only relevant to those with an extraneous motivation to have it mean something other than what it says; i.e. those with a predetermined agenda to define it figuratively.

 

 

“Did God need to speak for these things to happen?  Is God's power limited to his ability to speak things into being?”

 

No to both. As a Bible-believing Christian, I believe God “said” things because the Bible says He “said” things. Such Biblical claims would be unnecessary if not true.

 

 

“Why does the Bible say God changed His mind when most people don't actually think he changed his mind”

 

That would depend on the arguments presented by these “most people”. If they merely claimed the phrase to be figurative because it conflicted with their current perception of God, then their complaints are unjustified.

 

I suspect (having not bothered to track down the reference) that the positions argue along the line of foreknowledge versus predestination. That is, God was committed to a path that could only be changed by a certain human action. When that action occurred, God changed His path. Does God’s foreknowledge of the human decision mean that there was less commitment to the original path? i.e. Since He already knew what would happen, did God really change His mind? That’s a different issue to the question of figurative versus straight forward language.

 

 

“Why does the Bible ever use figurative speech?”

 

The same reason humans use “figurative speech”; The Bible is written to humans, and in certain contexts, ideas may be better conveyed through symbolic or figurative communication.

 

I have no problem with the Bible using figurative communication. But sincere believers do not consider themselves to have the right to merely relegate any inconvenient passage to the ranks of symbolic/figurative. Any such claim must be justified in the context of the passage itself.

 

It is also noteworthy that this very question concedes the point that “speech” can refer to communication other than physical, oral (i.e. referring to the Bible as “speech”).

 

 

So, when all is said and done, we dont really know what the phrase "and God said" means since it seems that "saying" something can be done in a multitude of ways and does not need to be verbal speech.  And save the passive/aggressive insults for someone else, if you cannot do so then just let me know and I will discontinue dealing with you.

 

 

 

“save the passive/aggressive insults for someone else, if you cannot do so then just let me know and I will discontinue dealing with you”

 

Whether or not you continue “dealing with” me is of course your choice. I attempted to respond to your points sincerely and courteously. There was no aggressive intent in my responses; passive or otherwise.

 

 

“when all is said and done, we dont really know what the phrase "and God said" means since it seems that "saying" something can be done in a multitude of ways and does not need to be verbal speech”

 

Where the Bible uses the phrase “God said”, the words themselves provide all of the relevant information we need to determine what is meant. It means that God made a statement. It does not explicitly tell us how “God said”, only that “God said”. You haven’t provided any justification as to why I should assume that this phrase means anything other than what is written. How is it figurative? If it is figurative, what does "God said" really mean if not what is written?