Siteadmin, Check users, Administrators
12,071
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2:
Line 2: + Line 8:
Line 9: + + +
Talk:Genesis 1-8 (Translated) (view source)
Revision as of 22:27, October 27, 2009
, 22:27, October 27, 2009no edit summary
:That's a major re-write, something we're not doing. While I agree we should make clear that Genesis 2:6-25 expands on what happened in Genesis 1:26-27, re-writing Genesis is a more drastic step than that action requires. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 15:31, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
:That's a major re-write, something we're not doing. While I agree we should make clear that Genesis 2:6-25 expands on what happened in Genesis 1:26-27, re-writing Genesis is a more drastic step than that action requires. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 15:31, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
::I agree, but it would be best to ensure that the two chronologies are the same. As it is, it looks like a different story starts from genesis 2:4 - and this is the usual Liberal complaint.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:29, 16 October 2009 (EDT)
::I agree, but it would be best to ensure that the two chronologies are the same. As it is, it looks like a different story starts from genesis 2:4 - and this is the usual Liberal complaint.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 16:29, 16 October 2009 (EDT)
:::Not required, actually. Genesis 1 gives the overview, and Genesis 2 gives the details. Verse 4 makes this clear, as you can see from my translation: "This is the story..." Notice also that Verse 5 undergoes a badly needed repair, because as it was, it didn't make a bit of sense.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 18:27, 27 October 2009 (EDT)
== Genesis 1:2 ==
== Genesis 1:2 ==
:Take your absurd gotcha questions elsewhere. Maybe wikipedia will appreciate them. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 14:28, 19 October 2009 (EDT)
:Take your absurd gotcha questions elsewhere. Maybe wikipedia will appreciate them. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 14:28, 19 October 2009 (EDT)
::Let me get this straight. You guys are changing the words of the most revered English-language Bible, and then, when asked to account for a word-change, call the question "absurd". Gotcha. [[User:AngusF|AngusF]] 18:44, 20 October 2009 (EDT)
::Let me get this straight. You guys are changing the words of the most revered English-language Bible, and then, when asked to account for a word-change, call the question "absurd". Gotcha. [[User:AngusF|AngusF]] 18:44, 20 October 2009 (EDT)
For the benefit of all observers: "Oceans" can mean the full quantity of all the waters.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 18:27, 27 October 2009 (EDT)
== 24 hours rather than days? ==
== 24 hours rather than days? ==
Is this desirable? In my opinion no, as it takes away from the beauty of the book - '24 hours' rather than 'day' seems to be more suited to a textbook, rather than a beautiful book like the Bible. I will remove it, but feel free to put it back in if you disagree. [[User:DerickC|DerickC]] 13:07, 15 October 2009 (EDT)
Is this desirable? In my opinion no, as it takes away from the beauty of the book - '24 hours' rather than 'day' seems to be more suited to a textbook, rather than a beautiful book like the Bible. I will remove it, but feel free to put it back in if you disagree. [[User:DerickC|DerickC]] 13:07, 15 October 2009 (EDT)
: As you can see, I left an explanation in the Analysis column that "day" means "solar day" and thus 24 hours.
==baramin==
==baramin==