It Wasn't "In the beginning"



 Religions > Atheism > It Wasn't "In the beginning"

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Budikka666"
Date: 30 May 2007 04:23:28 PM
Object: It Wasn't "In the beginning"
Mark Perakh at www.talkreason.org reviews yet another of these rosey-
tinted theist books which pretends that nature just shouts "Design!".
It turns out it doesn't.
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Barr.cfm
A small part of his article states this:
"Furthermore, there are some problems with the exact meaning of the
quoted first sentence of the Torah. Its Hebrew text as rendered in
Latin characters is: "Bereshit bara Elohim et ha shamaim veet
haaretz." The first word of that sentence - Bereshit - is usually
translated as "In the beginning." In fact the expression "in the
beginning" would be in Hebrew "Behatkhalah," rather than "Bereshit."
"Beginning" in Hebrew is "Hatkhalah." The word "Bereshit" more
precisely should be translated as "First of all." Hence, the sentence
in question tells about the order of creation, stating that the first
things created were the heaven and the earth. It mentions no beginning
of time, and does not necessarily imply a "beginning" in general."
In short, when fundies talk of the Bible as stating that there was a
beginning, thereby claiming to pre-empt discovery of the so-called Big
Bang by several thousand years, they're lying.
Budikka
.

User: "Michael Gray"

Title: Re: It Wasn't "In the beginning" 30 May 2007 09:24:25 PM
On 30 May 2007 14:23:28 -0700, Budikka666 <budikka1@netscape.net>
wrote:
- Refer: <1180560208.631340.48960@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>

Mark Perakh at www.talkreason.org reviews yet another of these rosey-
tinted theist books which pretends that nature just shouts "Design!".
It turns out it doesn't.
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Barr.cfm

A small part of his article states this:
"Furthermore, there are some problems with the exact meaning of the
quoted first sentence of the Torah. Its Hebrew text as rendered in
Latin characters is: "Bereshit bara Elohim et ha shamaim veet
haaretz." The first word of that sentence - Bereshit - is usually
translated as "In the beginning." In fact the expression "in the
beginning" would be in Hebrew "Behatkhalah," rather than "Bereshit."
"Beginning" in Hebrew is "Hatkhalah." The word "Bereshit" more
precisely should be translated as "First of all." Hence, the sentence
in question tells about the order of creation, stating that the first
things created were the heaven and the earth. It mentions no beginning
of time, and does not necessarily imply a "beginning" in general."

In short, when fundies talk of the Bible as stating that there was a
beginning, thereby claiming to pre-empt discovery of the so-called Big
Bang by several thousand years, they're lying.

No news in that.
They lie through their genocidal teeth 24 hours a day.
--
.


  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
The Beginning of The Universe
- THE BEGINNING OF THE END -
The very plans Lucifer tried to execute in Heaven, he is now conditioning the people of the world to accept. Just as Satan, or Lucifer, concealed his real plans from the angels in Heaven in the beginning to overthrow the worship of God, so is Lucifer
OT: Free Poster from Exorcist: The Beginning
OT: Is Bush's Base Beginning to Crumble?
OT: The beginning of the end...
TOBS: "In the Beginning", comments by Robert Jastrow & Freeman Dyson
Re: ..The First and the last, the beginning and the End.
In The Beginning Was Nothing: A Creation Story For Young Materialists
In the beginning there was the computer
I am really beginning to HATE...
The beginning of the universe: Nobody saw it, but it was good...
A new beginning
Re: Beginning of a new celebration
Article: Monotheism was a con from the beginning
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER