Genesis: One Man's Observations and Suppositions

[Huckleberry]

So here is what scripture says in plain English:

and you shall bruise his heel.”[SUP]16 [/SUP]To the woman he said,
“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children.
Your desire shall be for[SUP][f][/SUP] your husband,
and he shall rule over you.”

You see you set your debate up on the basis that it stands only on the King James... that is why you start of with a blurb about you using King James. and you still get it wrong.

Maybe I am wrong.
I'm not claiming to be absolutely-without-a-doubt correct here.
I'm just making suppositions based on the written text of, yes, the KJV.
God says very clearly to Eve, "I will multiply thy sorrow and thy conception".
I'm not adding to or taking away from it.
You're declaration of my being wrong is based on an altered translation.
Also, one could argue that the KJV is written in very plain English.

 

[phil36]

Maybe I am wrong.
I'm not claiming to be absolutely-without-a-doubt correct here.
I'm just making suppositions based on the written text of, yes, the KJV.
God says very clearly to Eve, "I will multiply thy sorrow and thy conception".
I'm not adding to or taking away from it.
You're declaration of my being wrong is based on an altered translation.
Also, one could argue that the KJV is written in very plain English.

You misunderstand what it says.. read the whole verse and don't just take the bit you think fits your ideas.

I am not against the King James, and yes it was written in plain English.. 400 years ago. Not only have words changed and some no longer in use, but even the grammar is different. But as you said in your op, your not here to debate the King James.

 

[Huckleberry]

You misunderstand what it says.. read the whole verse and don't just take the bit you think fits your ideas.

I have read "the whole verse", and all the ones before and after it, many times.
I've not taken a "bit".
On the contrary, I've taken "the whole verse", and it says what it says.
It's not like I had this idea and tried to shoehorn it into the Scripture.
I got the idea from the Scripture.
Somebody please enlighten me concerning the phrase "and thy conception".
It is in the original manuscript, not added by the translators.

 

[phil36]

This is not my own work, but will help you huckleberry.

47tn Heb “your pain and your conception,” suggesting to some interpreters that having a lot of children was a result of the judgment (probably to make up for the loss through death). But the next clause shows that the pain is associated with conception and childbirth. The two words form a hendiadys (where two words are joined to express one idea, like “good and angry” in English), the second explaining the first. “Conception,” if the correct meaning of the noun, must be figurative here since there is no pain in conception; it is a synecdoche, representing the entire process of childbirth and child rearing from the very start. However, recent etymological research suggests the noun is derived from a root הרר (hrr), not הרה (hrh), and means “trembling, pain” (see D. Tsumura, “A Note on הרוֹן (Gen 3,16),” Bib 75 [1994]: 398-400). In this case “pain and trembling” refers to the physical effects of childbirth. The word עִצְּבוֹן (’itsÿvon, “pain”), an abstract noun related to the verb (עָצַב, ’atsav), includes more than physical pain. It is emotional distress as well as physical pain. The same word is used in v. 17 for the man’s painful toil in the field. (bible.org)

 

[Huckleberry]

This is not my own work, but will help you huckleberry.

47tn Heb “your pain and your conception,” suggesting to some interpreters that having a lot of children was a result of the judgment (probably to make up for the loss through death). But the next clause shows that the pain is associated with conception and childbirth. The two words form a hendiadys (where two words are joined to express one idea, like “good and angry” in English), the second explaining the first. “Conception,” if the correct meaning of the noun, must be figurative here since there is no pain in conception; it is a synecdoche, representing the entire process of childbirth and child rearing from the very start. However, recent etymological research suggests the noun is derived from a root הרר (hrr), not הרה (hrh), and means “trembling, pain” (see D. Tsumura, “A Note on הרוֹן (Gen 3,16),” Bib 75 [1994]: 398-400). In this case “pain and trembling” refers to the physical effects of childbirth. The word עִצְּבוֹן (’itsÿvon, “pain”), an abstract noun related to the verb (עָצַב, ’atsav), includes more than physical pain. It is emotional distress as well as physical pain. The same word is used in v. 17 for the man’s painful toil in the field. (bible.org)

1- That's somebody's opinion and it settles nothing. Yes, I did read it.
2- Here's a brand new thought for ya: Maybe you're the one who needs help.

 

[phil36]

Hi Huckleberry,

I certainly need help and I get it daily from Christ Jesus, I hope you do to.

anyhow, the passage you refer to refers to the pain of childbirth.

 

[Bookends]

Oh boy another knucklehead to contend with, well, welcome to CC forums. Nice to see I'm not the only knucklehead.

 

[Huckleberry]

...anyhow, the passage you refer to refers to the pain of childbirth.

Agreed.
Greater-than-before pain in childbirth is the referenced multiplied sorrow. I get it.
So, the exponential increase in pain is from what?
Some arbitrary or unknown and uncaused effect?
Eve's conception (child) is also multiplied.
I didn't say it, God did.
God multiplied Eve's conception.
The child(ren) would be bigger than before, relative to her size.

Tangent here:
Adam and Eve, and the antediluvians in general, are the basis for the ancient Greek religion.
Remember the giant mighty men of renown referenced in Genesis 6:4? Well, the Greeks did.
I don't know how big Adam was, but I'm hypothesizing pretty big. As in GIANT.
The problem with a lot of so-called Bible-believers is that they don't believe the Bible.

 

[Praus]

Oh, so there are people here in "Bible Discussion" who actually do discuss the Bible.
That's a relief.

Not sure what your point is about "seeking and testing the spirits".
I'm just wanting to discuss the Bible, but thanks for not deigning to "chastise" me.

Lots of pesky details in the Bible.

but the general tone of the discussion here
in "Bible Discussion" is definitely food for thought.
I've obviously come to the wrong place.

It's from the Bible, the KJV.

1 Iohn 4:1 Beloued, beleeue not euery spirit, but trie the spirits, whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the spirit of God: euery spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God. 3 And euery Spirit that confesseth not that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God: and this is that spirit of Antichrist, whereof you haue heard, that it should come, and euen now already is it in the world.

 

[Praus]

Also, one could argue that the KJV is written in very plain English.

Very plain English that requires a dictionary to understand.

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...-james-version-counterfeit-4.html#post1167006

A dictionary will clear that up for you.

 

[Starcrash]

First post pure speculation bordering on heresy at that. Congrats!
From where do you derive your teachings?

All he did was point out confusing passages and pose questions. If you had answers (that would have taken "the heresy" out of those questions) then you should've supplied them.

I personally never noticed any of these details, but I'm sure I'll be pondering them today...

 

[Jehanne]

book genes excellent so YHWH directed you to that book? so it means what YHWH is telling you it means every servant's jobs are not the same and the word Almighty means Almighty including what your brain your eyes are seeing and hearing in YHWH book.yes.j

 

[Jehanne]

hello just a couple of things --eve's or the woman? things to keep in mind rEVErse transcripTASE she tasted something sweet and so she ate then gave to her husband and he also ate---adam or atom?---man woman atom eve husband wife could they not mean the same things?----genes is 3 what is Archeae? "ancient things" when given the proper partner what could happen? what are tunics of skin? if given the improper partner what could happen? what is a fiG leaf? why CURSED more than CATTLE? how was the Anthrax Vaccine made? what are retro viruses? how do they gain their lipid layer?---gold was mentioned what is a eucocyte cell? there is a diagram that can be googled---when reading if a word looks like something else something "pops" into your head look it up let YHWH direct you to what you are to be Taught by YHWH YHWH Creates the jobs---to give each according to their jobs--YHWH does not come to Judge YHWH comes to Save----if YHWH says something to be destroyed or death or die or judgement what would that be referring to?---well for one there are some angels (messengers nucleotides) that did not keep their proper domain (biology term) but left their own abode that were locked in chains of darkness until the judgement of the great day----what does YHWH shall put enmity between them mean? genes is 3 what does enmity mean? could that be divorce of improper pairings?----what is ATP? what does the structure look like? what does day and night in YHWH Throne room holy holy holy LORD God Almighty mean?---what does to which the second death hath no power and a man only has to die once mean? what was the first death? what does YHWH holds the keys to life and death mean? is there a genetic marker related to the black death to which the second death hath no power?----also what is the ever living gospel? what shall be the end of these things? what things? what book does YHWH say that in? too much?----how about this what is a jihad? does that involve murder? or to the church of write? is that a muslim invent? non so writing is good.yes.j

 

[reject-tech]

If so, that means that direct sunlight before the Flood was diffused.

Ahhh, I never even considered that. An excellent observation.
Global cloud cover does jive nicely with waters above the firmament.
Thanks.

 

[phil36]

Agreed.
Greater-than-before pain in childbirth is the referenced multiplied sorrow. I get it.
So, the exponential increase in pain is from what?
Some arbitrary or unknown and uncaused effect?
Eve's conception (child) is also multiplied.
I didn't say it, God did.
God multiplied Eve's conception.
The child(ren) would be bigger than before, relative to her size.

Tangent here:
Adam and Eve, and the antediluvians in general, are the basis for the ancient Greek religion.
Remember the giant mighty men of renown referenced in Genesis 6:4? Well, the Greeks did.
I don't know how big Adam was, but I'm hypothesizing pretty big. As in GIANT.
The problem with a lot of so-called Bible-believers is that they don't believe the Bible.

Hi Huckleberry,

Since you are not here to debate the King James as per your op. Lets have a look and see what the text means.

[SUP]16 [/SUP]To the woman he said,
“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children.
Your desire shall be for[SUP][f][/SUP] your husband,
and he shall rule over you.”




MMmm, it doesn't say anything anywhere near what you are saying its does. Using the text above can you show your weird theory..after all its not a KJV debate. Thank you.


And regarding your TANGEBT, well that's all it is.. a theory you have dreamed up..