David1701 Posted November 6, 2021 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,731 Content Per Day: 3.55 Reputation: 3,522 Days Won: 12 Joined: 11/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted November 6, 2021 6 minutes ago, one.opinion said: The description of the woman made from the man’s “rib” has led to the mistaken conclusion that women are inferior to men because they originate from one small part of the male anatomy. Yet the Hebrew word צלע (tsela) does not mean “rib,” but rather “side.” According to Exodus, for example, God told Moses to make four gold rings for the Ark of the Covenant, “two rings on one side (צלע; tsela) of it, and two rings on the other side of it” (Exod 25:12). Likewise, when God takes one tsela from the man to make the woman, Eve comes from an entire side of Adam’s body, not a single rib. Adam’s own words clarify that Eve comes from one of his sides when he declares of his wife, “Finally, this is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh!” (Gen 2:23). Had Eve been created from the man’s rib alone, Adam would only have been able to say that she was “bone of his bone.” As Adam’s bone and flesh, the woman is the man’s “other half.” When man and woman cleave to one another and return to being “one flesh” (2:24), the two equal halves of humanity are brought back together. https://weekly.israelbiblecenter.com/eve-come-adams-rib/ This analysis does take context into account. I've already proved that the main meaning of the Hebrew word is "rib" (although it can also mean "side"), so I'm not going to entertain any more unbelieving Jewish nonsense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted November 6, 2021 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Online Share Posted November 6, 2021 10 minutes ago, one.opinion said: Likewise, when God takes one tsela from the man to make the woman, Eve comes from an entire side of Adam’s body, not a single rib. Thanks for that. Enlightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted November 6, 2021 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Online Share Posted November 6, 2021 3 hours ago, dad2 said: I have Jesus, and the Spirit of God. I do not see that in your attacks on creation and His word. I see that you say so. But your behavior is more persuasive. You are not God, so my critique of your new doctrines is not an attack on His creation or His word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparks Posted November 7, 2021 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 23 Topic Count: 28 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 6,159 Content Per Day: 2.04 Reputation: 2,513 Days Won: 8 Joined: 01/20/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2021 1 hour ago, one.opinion said: This analysis does take context into account. I think the explanation of Dr. Schaser's translation can be seen when he writes, "The description of the woman made from the man’s “rib” has led to the mistaken conclusion that women are inferior to men because they originate from one small part of the male anatomy." He is describing that his idea is meant to spare feelings. I don't think women feel inferior. In the modern times where men and women are supposed to be considered absolute equals, he prefers 'side' over 'rib.' The only Bible translation I could find that uses the word 'side' is the NET bible, in a very modern translation, and it's About page states that it offers nontraditional renderings. I understand you need to alter 16% of the Bible to be able to issue a copyright. The 37 translations below, including literal translations and the Septuagint, use the word 'rib.' New International Version New Living Translation English Standard Version Berean Study Bible New American Standard Bible NASB 1995 NASB 1977 Holman Christian Standard Bible Contemporary English Version Good News Translation GOD'S WORD® Translation International Standard Version King James Bible New King James Version King James 2000 Bible New Heart English Bible World English Bible American King James Version American Standard Version A Faithful Version Darby Bible Translation English Revised Version Webster's Bible Translation Geneva Bible of 1587 Bishops' Bible of 1568 Coverdale Bible of 1535 Tyndale Bible of 1526 Literal Standard Version Young's Literal Translation Smith's Literal Translation Douay-Rheims Bible Catholic Public Domain Version Peshitta Holy Bible Translated Lamsa Bible JPS Tanakh 1917 Brenton Septuagint Translation 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted November 7, 2021 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,506 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2021 2 hours ago, The Barbarian said: I see that you say so. But your behavior is more persuasive. You are not God, so my critique of your new doctrines is not an attack on His creation or His word. Belief in creation is as old as the bible and is confirmed cover to cover. Masking unbelief and rejection of Scripture as interpretation is not longer an option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 7, 2021 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.10 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2021 2 hours ago, David1701 said: I've already proved that the main meaning of the Hebrew word is "rib" (although it can also mean "side"), so I'm not going to entertain any more unbelieving Jewish nonsense. Ok fine, if the scholarship of experts isn’t enough for you, here is another commentary from a Christian scholar. First of all, about the word sometimes translated as “rib.” The Hebrew word is sela. It means, literally, “side” rather than “rib.” https://evidenceforchristianity.org/what-is-the-correct-meaning-of-the-word-normally-translated-as-adams-rib-in-the-creation-account/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Barbarian Posted November 7, 2021 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 27 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 5,051 Content Per Day: 0.66 Reputation: 969 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/20/2003 Status: Online Share Posted November 7, 2021 1 hour ago, dad2 said: Belief in creation is as old as the bible and is confirmed cover to cover. It's good you at least admit that much. But the problem is, you don't approve of the way He did it. 2 hours ago, dad2 said: Masking unbelief and rejection of Scripture as interpretation is not longer an option. I think you do believe in God. You just don't believe in creation His way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad2 Posted November 7, 2021 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 18 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,506 Content Per Day: 0.97 Reputation: 184 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/28/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2021 35 minutes ago, The Barbarian said: It's good you at least admit that much. But the problem is, you don't approve of the way He did it. I think you do believe in God. You just don't believe in creation His way. I would say that it is akin to blasphemy to deny that He is the creator just as the bible says. To wave off the first woman as unreal and 'figurative' is unbelief. No one in the bible did not believe in the first man and woman created by God. There is no possible fit of the bible with evolution (the theory that life is a result of evolving) or the Big Bang. Is there some other teaching in the bible that you really disagree with that would lead you to dishonour Scripture like this. (example, Sodom and Gomorrah) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparks Posted November 7, 2021 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 23 Topic Count: 28 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 6,159 Content Per Day: 2.04 Reputation: 2,513 Days Won: 8 Joined: 01/20/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2021 9 hours ago, one.opinion said: Ok fine, if the scholarship of experts isn’t enough for you, here is another commentary from a Christian scholar. Do you understand the significance and age of the Septuagint translation? The Septuagint is an extremely faithful translation of the from Hebrew Bible because it was written by the Jews themselves, translated to Greek in the 3rd century BCE (200-300 BC). The region was perfectly fluent in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic at the time, and this Greek translation said 'rib.' Not side. It might interest you to know that Jews, over the centuries, forgot how to read Hebrew, especially after the scribes and priests bailed from the Second Temple in 70 AD, and they used this faithful translation to re-learn how to read their original Hebrew Bible. They could read the more common Greek and used it as a reference. In fact, the New Testament was written in Greek. Septuagint means 70 in Latin, because there were 70 translators who worked on it from that era. Why second guess with some modern scholars? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1701 Posted November 7, 2021 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,731 Content Per Day: 3.55 Reputation: 3,522 Days Won: 12 Joined: 11/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted November 7, 2021 (edited) 11 hours ago, one.opinion said: Ok fine, if the scholarship of experts isn’t enough for you, here is another commentary from a Christian scholar. First of all, about the word sometimes translated as “rib.” The Hebrew word is sela. It means, literally, “side” rather than “rib.” https://evidenceforchristianity.org/what-is-the-correct-meaning-of-the-word-normally-translated-as-adams-rib-in-the-creation-account/ Why do you persist with this rubbish, when I've already proved that the word often means "rib". I gave you the work of three Hebrew scholars (Brown, Driver and Briggs). Here it is again, with corroboration. You provided unbelieving, Jewish opinion, not Christian scholarship, in your earlier posts. Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon - Original: צלעה צלע - Transliteration: Tsela` - Phonetic: tsay-law' - Definition: 1. side, rib, beam --a. rib (of man) --b. rib (of hill, ridge, etc) --c. side-chambers or cells (of temple structure) --d. rib, plank, board (of cedar or fir) --e. leaves (of door) --f. side (of ark) The first two meanings are kinds of rib. Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Hebrew Dictionary H6763 צֵּלָע צַּלעָה tsela` (tsay-law') (or (feminine) tsalTah {tsal-aw'}) n-f. 1. a rib (as curved), literally (of the body) or figuratively (of a door, i.e. leaf) 2. (hence) a side, literally (of a person) or figuratively (of an object or the sky, i.e. quarter) 3. architecturally, a (especially floor or ceiling) timber or plank (single or collective, i.e. a flooring) Note that "rib" comes first and that it is from this that "side" is derived (when referring to people), not vice versa. It means something curved, so, what in the side is curved? That would be ribs. Why do you think that the Hebrew experts, who translated 50+ English Bibles, all chose "ribs", rather than "side"? They all had access to Hebrew lexicons and all knew the language. The NET translation is the odd man out, but it is a hyper-critical translation, with many strange translation choices and textual choices. Edited November 7, 2021 by David1701 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts