[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by g_n_o_s_i_s

Usually what follows the words "said" as in Untellectual said We are reading in English. We mean you actually said that.

That is what we are used to with quotation marks in English. I'm telling you we are reading a religious text written in a different language, where quotations marks are not used. In writing classes in English we learn about plagiarism, and that we should give credit where credit is due, quoting the person and citing how we know they said what they said, if possible. We are then accustomed to reading quotes, and thinking with the mindset that no one has rephrased what we are hearing. Story telling in the Hebrew oral and written tradition is not like that. That is what I currently believe. I am open to learning other views, but I can't tell you I believe something I don't believe and so I am stuck telling you what I believe and not making up something to believe.

[g_n_o_s_i_s]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

I am the LORD[/url]. In Genesis we have Genesis 15:7 and Genesis 28:13. Both passages are dealing with Abraham. The next occurance of this phrase is in Exodus.

You need to look for Strong's number H3068. The I am YHWH in Gen 28:13 is of course the very passage I'm referring to. YHWH talking to Jacob.

[g_n_o_s_i_s]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

That is what we are used to with quotation marks in English. I'm telling you we are reading a religious text written in a different language, where quotations marks are not used. In writing classes in English we learn about plagiarism, and that we should give credit where credit is due, quoting the person and citing how we know they said what they said, if possible. We are then accustomed to reading quotes, and thinking with the mindset that no one has rephrased what we are hearing. Story telling in the Hebrew oral and written tradition is not like that. That is what I currently believe. I am open to learning other views, but I can't tell you I believe something I don't believe and so I am stuck telling you what I believe and not making up something to believe.

Seriously? YHWH said ...., means he didn't say it?

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by g_n_o_s_i_s

You need to look for Strong's number H3068. The I am YHWH in Gen 28:13 is of course the very passage I'm referring to. YHWH talking to Jacob.

I understand that is the word written by whoever penned the words of Genesis, but my argument is not saying this was not written, but does admit that it was written.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by g_n_o_s_i_s

Seriously? YHWH said ...., means he didn't say it?

No, it means there is a conversation in the story.

[moldstadt]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

In this case I believe the word "name" is being used to represent who He is, from the perspective of who "we" know Him to be now. It is not saying there is a contradiction with the Exodus verses.

Exodus 6:3 (KJV) And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by [the name of] God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

Using the same approach, is it not simpler to say that Ex 6:3 is stating that they didn't fully know who God was? That he revealed himself more completely to Moses? Is there any reason to choose Gen 4:26 to have this meaning and not Ex 6:3? This way you won't have the issue of trying to resolve all the apparent contradictions. And you won't have to say that God didn't say what the Bible says he did say.

Also, what would it mean that they only started calling on God at that time? Didn't Adam or Abel call on God?

I understand your argument (even though I can't confirm or deny it) that although the original language is being interpreted as a quotation, it may originally have been part of a narrative. For example, Gen 28:13 could then be translated something like:

And God stood above it and identified himself to Jacob, saying that he was the God of Jacob's ancestors, up to Abraham, and that he would give the land, on which Jacob was lying, to his ancestors.

Yet, it would still mean that the way the verse is written today (in English or Hebrew) is untrue. God didn't really identify himself as YHWH - the author added in that part!

Michael.

[g_n_o_s_i_s]

Originally Posted by moldstadt

Using the same approach, is it not simpler to say that Ex 6:3 is stating that they didn't fully know who God was? That he revealed himself more completely to Moses? Is there any reason to choose Gen 4:26 to have this meaning and not Ex 6:3? This way you won't have the issue of trying to resolve all the apparent contradictions. And you won't have to say that God didn't say what the Bible says he did say.

It wouldn't work. At least not how I understand Untellectual's argument. He is arguing that at the time of being written down the name was known, thus the author would use the name in passages earlier than the passage where the name became known (ex 6:3).

Originally Posted by moldstadt

Also, what would it mean that they only started calling on God at that time? Didn't Adam or Abel call on God?

The argument here is that they called on God, just not by name.

Originally Posted by moldstadt

I understand your argument (even though I can't confirm or deny it) that although the original language is being interpreted as a quotation, it may originally have been part of a narrative. For example, Gen 28:13 could then be translated something like:
Yet, it would still mean that the way the verse is written today (in English or Hebrew) is untrue. God didn't really identify himself as YHWH - the author added in that part!

This is the problem with Untellectual's argument. It puts words into the mouths of the patriarchs as well as YHWH himself that was never uttered by either.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by moldstadt

Using the same approach, is it not simpler to say that Ex 6:3 is stating that they didn't fully know who God was? That he revealed himself more completely to Moses? Is there any reason to choose Gen 4:26 to have this meaning and not Ex 6:3? This way you won't have the issue of trying to resolve all the apparent contradictions. And you won't have to say that God didn't say what the Bible says he did say.

I believe they were calling on the one true God, and that the name of God being used in the record of this written in the Bible from oral tradition reflects that.

Also, what would it mean that they only started calling on God at that time? Didn't Adam or Abel call on God?

Yes, they did. But Exodus 6:3 seems to say that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob knew God Almighty, the one true God, but not by His personal name, YHVH.

I understand your argument (even though I can't confirm or deny it) that although the original language is being interpreted as a quotation, it may originally have been part of a narrative. For example, Gen 28:13 could then be translated something like:
Yet, it would still mean that the way the verse is written today (in English or Hebrew) is untrue. God didn't really identify himself as YHWH - the author added in that part!

Michael.

There is no other (true) God, so no I don't think this takes away from God's name being revealed to us as YHVH. I believe His name was revealed before Genesis was written.

[moldstadt]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

Yes, they did. But Exodus 6:3 seems to say that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob knew God Almighty, the one true God, but not by His personal name, YHVH.

I agree with you that Adam and Abel called on God, just not by the personal name YHWH. That is why Gen 4:26 makes the specific distinction that they called on him by his personal name YHWH. Based on your interpretation Gen 4:26 is UNTRUE, since men had already called on God before that time.

Hence the reason I would rather interpret Ex 6:3 in light of Gen 4:26, rather than the other way around.

Then it could be interpreted as follows:

• God revealed his name to mankind from the beginning
• They started calling on him by his name in Gen 4:26
• He revealed himself more clearly to mankind (through Moses) in Ex 6.

There is no other (true) God, so no I don't think this takes away from God's name being revealed to us as YHVH. I believe His name was revealed before Genesis was written.

You haven't answered my objection. I am not disagreeing that God's name was revealed as YHWH, or that he revealed his name before Genesis was written.

Originally Posted by moldstadt

I understand your argument (even though I can't confirm or deny it) that although the original language is being interpreted as a quotation, it may originally have been part of a narrative. For example, Gen 28:13 could then be translated something like:
And God stood above it and identified himself to Jacob, saying that he was the God of Jacob's ancestors, up to Abraham, and that he would give the land, on which Jacob was lying, to his ancestors.
Yet, it would still mean that the way the verse is written today (in English or Hebrew) is untrue. God didn't really identify himself as YHWH - the author added in that part!

I'm saying that if we use your reasoning, Gen 28:13 is UNTRUE. God didn't identify himself as YHWH to Jacob.

Michael.

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by moldstadt

I agree with you that Adam and Abel called on God, just not by the personal name YHWH. That is why Gen 4:26 makes the specific distinction that they called on him by his personal name YHWH. Based on your interpretation Gen 4:26 is UNTRUE, since men had already called on God before that time.

Hence the reason I would rather interpret Ex 6:3 in light of Gen 4:26, rather than the other way around.

Then it could be interpreted as follows:

• God revealed his name to mankind from the beginning
• They started calling on him by his name in Gen 4:26
• He revealed himself more clearly to mankind (through Moses) in Ex 6.

You haven't answered my objection. I am not disagreeing that God's name was revealed as YHWH, or that he revealed his name before Genesis was written.



I'm saying that if we use your reasoning, Gen 28:13 is UNTRUE. God didn't identify himself as YHWH to Jacob.

Michael.

I'm not trying to make anything untrue. I just don't believe the idea of personal name is found in the text we are examining. His personal name was introduced later, so I have difficulty believing they called on Him by a name they did not know. That is where my difficulty lies. I hope I am making sense. I am not telling you what to believe, just sharing what I currently believe myself.

[g_n_o_s_i_s]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

I just don't believe the idea of personal name is found in the text we are examining.

You are starting to really confuse me now Untellectual. His personal name is found in the texts we are examining. How do you come to your belief they are not found in them? Can you clarify a bit more?

[Untellectual]

Originally Posted by g_n_o_s_i_s

You are starting to really confuse me now Untellectual. His personal name is found in the texts we are examining. How do you come to your belief they are not found in them? Can you clarify a bit more?

Yes. I am saying the idea of God having a personal name is something we derive from the Bible. That is, we have our own ideas about it, and the way we think of it is the way we think it should be.

I'm suggesting that "personal name", in terms of those words (idea), is not found in the text. We are, in my opinion, trying to force our ideas upon the text... in order to say Exodus 6:3 is not accurate because the word (name for God) YHVH appears in the book of Genesis, which records events prior.

[Yoḥanon-benYaʿăqov]

Originally Posted by Untellectual

Do you transliterate the Hebrew word for prophets as Nevi'im? And law (instruction, teaching) as Torah (Law being the first five books of the Bible)? I was reading writings as Ketuvim.

I transliterate between Hebrew and English according to the Academy of Hebrew Language (AHL) Precise Transliteration Table, which transliterates the Hebrew Alef Bet as follows:

א – ʾ or nothing
בּ/ב – b/v
ג – g
ד – d
ה – h
ו – v
ז – z
ח – ḥ
ט – t or ṭ
י – y
כּ – k
כ/ך – ḵ
ל – l
מ/ם – m
נ/ן – n
ס – s
ע – ʿ or nothing
פּ – p
פ/ף – f
צ/ץ – tz
ק – q
ר – r
שׁ – sh or š
שׂ – s or ş
ת – t

ַ – a
ָ – a
ֲ – ă
ֶ – e
ֵ – é
ֱ – ĕ
ְ – ’ or ə
ִ – i
אֹ/וֹ – o
ׇ - ŏ
ֳ – o
ֻ – u
וּ – u

Therefore, according to the AHL Precise Table – תוֹרָה – Torah; נְבִיאִים – N’viyʾiym; and – כְּתוּבִים – K’tuviym. Then of course there is – תְנַךְ – T’NaḴ’.