Why do you assume that it refers to a plural?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
In the Beginning...of What?
- Thread starter sandy whitelinger
- Start date
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Except that only one heaven was created in 1:1
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Language is tricky.
My understanding of the word used for heaven in 1:1 is a plural used as a singular much like we say a bunch of grapes; one bunch but many grapes. This leads me to think that heaven has the same dualistic qualities of of the creation.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
My understanding is that it's a plural noun but used in the singular.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Language is tricky. Your using a whole nuther set of terms here.
Let's start with the unconditional mind if you please. Is this more than a mind that is not bound by the here and now? I've heard Kaku expound on this in connection with quantum physics.
Yes, language is tricky. Note, for example, how easily you slide rom 'plural' to 'dualistic'.
Parenthetically, your comparison doesn't quite work. A single grape is neither a 'bunch' nor 'grapes'.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Yet as soon as something become plural, dualities exist.Yes, language is tricky. Note, for example, how easily you slide rom 'plural' to 'dualistic'.
Parenthetically, your comparison doesn't quite work. A single grape is neither a 'bunch' nor 'grapes'.
And, neither is a "bunch " one grape.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
A plural heavens...i had always read that as how the sky is referred to in English. It is as if the sky was understood to be a vast place far out of proportion to the earth and this at some point in the development of the term required a connotation of plurality. In this sense the heavens could be understood as the universe beyond the planet.
Is the plurality reflected in the Hebrew or introduced in the translation into English?
Is the plurality reflected in the Hebrew or introduced in the translation into English?
See Heavens in Judaism. Hebrew is a gendered language, and the second syllable is the standard form of the masculine plural.
an unconditional mind that hasn't become fixed to or on a form. minds, are not exclusive to this language, idea, culture vs some other culture, idea, language. the mind can create, adapt, transform.
with the unconditional mind all things become potentials; when not actualized.
there is nothing new under the sun, what has been will be again.
god is inherent in man by his spirit. man is inherent in god but not necessarily aware of this.
john 14:20
What? The first word of the Bible is בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית (beresheit), It is composed of the prefix “b-“ which modified the root to mean “in” in this case. The root is a conjugated form of “Rosh”. Rosh means head but also can mean front, start, or beginning, which is the case here. The suffix “-‘t” makes it a particular declarative. So it translates to “in (the) beginning”.
Last edited:
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
I think the beginning of time space and matter... the universe...
In the beginning God (God was there before time space or matter)
The Genesis of Grace
Sorry, that translation is just plain wrong. The first verse of the original Hebrew text reads,
“בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ”
The word in the verse “הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם” means heavens, in the plural. It is not ambiguous and is quite clearly plural.
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
It reflects a way God works
.. making things from nothing, physically and virtually and poetically
In the case of Proverbs 31, in the Hebrew Bible the book of Ruth follows. God can make a godly proverbs 31 woman from an unlikely gentile woman named Ruth out of a tragic situation.
In the case of Israel, god makes a universe, a world, from nothing and then makes a people 'from nothing' people from a man over 100 years old... and then a nation from a group of slaves using a miraculous deliverance then made into a nation in a formless and void dessert moved to a promised land flowing with milk and honey
So think of it physically on several levels and poetically as well
.. making things from nothing, physically and virtually and poetically
In the case of Proverbs 31, in the Hebrew Bible the book of Ruth follows. God can make a godly proverbs 31 woman from an unlikely gentile woman named Ruth out of a tragic situation.
In the case of Israel, god makes a universe, a world, from nothing and then makes a people 'from nothing' people from a man over 100 years old... and then a nation from a group of slaves using a miraculous deliverance then made into a nation in a formless and void dessert moved to a promised land flowing with milk and honey
So think of it physically on several levels and poetically as well
Last edited:
The original text has it as a plural,
“הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם”,
Translates to heavens in the plural.
The Hebrew context and construction doesn’t support your understanding. In Genesis (Beresheit) 1 it refers to heavens in the plural.
The Jewish translations with which I am familiar (Stone-Artscroll, Cabad's CJB, JPS, Fox , and Alter) interpret the opening verses as being in the construct form, i.e., "In the beginning of ...".
As for the rest, that a Hebrew word is "not ambiguous and is quite clearly plural" is not necessarily evidence that what it represents is "quite clearly plural." So, for example, this. Also see Burnett's A Reassessment of Biblical Elohim.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
In which case you will only find two heavens being created.