Genesis

[shemayet_3]

hello group, l~l~&~p to all

i have a question about a couple of verses from the book of genesis,
specifically genesis 3:22, and 11:7...

chapter 3:22 states:

22 then the lord god said, " behold, the man has become like one of
*us*, (note the capitilization) to know good and evil. and now, lest
he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and
live forever" --**

i thought capitilization in the bible was reserved specifically
for "god" and/or "jesus christ"

and then...

chapter 11:7 again uses this capitilization of *us*

(for reference i'm going to use chapters 1-7)

1 now the whole earth had one language and one speech. 2 and it came
to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in
the land of shinar, and they dwelt there. 3 then they said to one
another, "come, let us (no capital used) make bricks and bake them
thoroughly." they had brick for stone, and they had asphalt for
mortar. 4 and they said, "come, let us (no capital used) build
ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us
(no capital used) make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered
abroad over the face of the whole earth." 5 but the lord came down
(for reference please note: the lord "came down") to see the city
and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 and the lord
said, "indeed, the people are one and they all have one language,
and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to
do will be withheld from them.

now to verse 7:

7 "come, let *us* "go down" and there confuse their language, that
they may not understand one another's speech."

okay i'm stumped, who is the "us" that these two verses refer to??

anyone here have a clue??? (i think i might)

namaste

shemayet~*

** does anyone, know why a dash is used after this sentence? i am
just curious because i have yet to find another dash proceeding a
verse in the bible. not only does it have this dash, but it also
sounds as though it proceeds a sentence that is not complete, as
though someone has taken something out and left a marker for
themselves. i don't know, it's just pure speculation on my part. i
question everything!! :|

[Trevor Traub]

dear group,

<chapter 3:22 states:

<22 then the lord god said, " behold, the man has become like <one of
<*us*, (note the capitilization) to know good and evil. and now, <lest
<he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, <and
<live forever" --**

<i thought capitilization in the bible was reserved specifically <for "god"
and/or "jesus christ"


you are correct. as i have read, in the original hebrew texts of the bible, the
word for go is elohim. in hebrew, as i understand it, this word is in past,
present and future tense! as well as being plural and implying both genders. in
the bible, also in genisis god states that he desired to make man in "our"
image, implying the trintiy and the notion that 3 individual entities (the
father, son, and the holy spirit,) cmbine to make up god/elohim.

the uncapatalized us is refering to mankind alone and thus does not imply
divinity, at least not to the hebrews.

i hope that helps a little.

love and light

trevor


---------------------------------
do you yahoo!?
protect your identity with yahoo! mail addressguard

[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[shemayet_3]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, trevor traub <rainsleeper31@y...>
wrote:

snip >>> in the bible, also in genisis god states that he desired to
make man in "our" image, implying the trintiy and the notion that 3
individual entities (the father, son, and the holy spirit,) cmbine
to make up god/elohim.

i hope that helps a little. <<< snip

me: > l~l~&~p to all

no trevor, it actually helps me a lot!

sometimes the most obvious answer, is the hardest one to find~!

thank you for taking the time to explain.

blessed be,

shemayet~*

[Light Eye]

dear shemayet,

concerning the word elohim. well, if my memory serves me correctly we have yhwh
elohim which many consider to be the creator. we also have the b'nai elohim
which are often considered the "children of god(s)" a la the nephilim. we also
have just the word elohim which in hebrew is both singular and plural and can
mean god or gods, but is often used in the singular. it depends on one's
interpretation. i was once confused about this word's meaning and contacted
http://www.torah.org

i received a reply from a rabbi who was also a math wiz (prof.) and had lots of
other credentials and he said that in the end elohim meant god.

take it for what it's worth. contact the site if you're in doubt. not that
you're going to be any smarter.

be well, be love.

david



ny versjon av yahoo! messenger
nye ikoner og bakgrunner, webkamera med superkvalitet og dobbelt sãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ã ƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâ ƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚⥠morsom

[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Lesley Schultz]

hello trevor and shemayet, l/l & peace to all:

--- shemayet_3 <shemayet@...> wrote:

> --- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, trevor traub
> <rainsleeper31@y...> > wrote:> snip >>> in the
bible, also in genisis god states > that he desired to
> make man in "our" image, implying the trintiy and
> the notion that 3 > individual entities (the father,
son, and the holy > spirit,) cmbine > to make up
god/elohim.
>
> i hope that helps a little. <<< snip
>
>ls: actually this is not the interpretation if you
want to interpret according to the jewish tradition of
genesis. you can, of course, use this explanation if
you intrepret the old testament entirely in the
context of the new testament. but if you want to stay
true to what was written, at the time, by jews, you
have to go back to what elohim means. elohim is a
plural word. yes, plural. the implies that god may
be loosely intrepreted as being "more than one." in
this case "we" and "us" makes perfect sense. but it
still creates a problem, because judaism makes a great
deal out of the concept that god is one.

there are some jewish writing that talk about god or
elohim [which means "lords"] being a council of 12.
there have been threads on this idea of judaism having
some the concepts of the law of one and why not- ra
says, i think, that yahweh was an smc that was a
member of the confederation and wound up having to do
a name change when the message they of yahweh were
trying to convey got mangled.

perhaps yahweh has a bit of karmic entanglement going
with humanity as well as ra also.

i don't know, but if you pick up a copy of the torah,
and read the way the rabbis these days translate
genesis and the other books of moses, it's an
eye-opener.

sorry to mess up your neat explanation of elohim...

~lesley


__________________________________
do you yahoo!?
protect your identity with yahoo! mail addressguard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

[shemayet_3]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, lesley schultz <msthoth@y...> wrote:

snip >>> hello trevor and shemayet, l/l & peace to all <<< snip

me: > hello lesley

snip >>> ra says, i think that yahweh was an smc that was a member of
the confederation <<< snip

me: > okay, forgive my ignorance :|, what is an smc?

blessed be,

shemayet~*

[Trevor Traub]

dear group,

<you can, of course, use this explanation if
<you interpret the old testament entirely in the
<context of the new testament. but if you want to stay
<true to what was written, at the time, by jews, you
<have to go back to what elohim means. elohim is a
<plural word. yes, plural. the implies that god may
<be loosely interpreted as being "more than one." in
<this case "we" and "us" makes perfect sense. but it
<still creates a problem, because judaism makes a great
<deal out of the concept that god is one.


very true, the hebrews certianly did place much emphasis on there being one god
or god being one but the source that it get my interpretation of elohim from
states that el is the hebrew word for god and the ..him... part is what gives it
tense and promotes it to the one true god. the source ("knowing the doctrines of
the bible" 1947) stated the best way to look at god as three separated entities
is to envision his wholeness of that of an equilateral triangle. to make the
triangle, you need three equal but separate sides. apart from each other, they
are not defined as god/elohim, but the father, the son, and the holy spirit.
together the sides make another shape that is different than the sides that
define it because they combine to make a more complex single shape, the
triangle. the sides are separate and are not the triangle unless they are
together yet, as the triangle they are still one in its triangle-ness. this is
the major paradox for the christian/jewish religion. and whats
so beautiful is the word elohim stuffs that big paradox into one word.

this is just my understanding that i got from reading my fathers old theology
books. i'm not at my house near the book to provide stronger quotes about the
word elohim but i will soon if it is requested.

love and light
trevor



---------------------------------
do you yahoo!?
protect your identity with yahoo! mail addressguard

[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Alma Miranda]

the basic problem with bible interpretation is who reads and what we make of it.
the word elohim is also applied to human rulers in the bible. which makes me
think that the word, depending how you apply it always implicates a ruling
class.

as far as saying what it really means, even scholars are divided as to who the
real god of the old testament is. some cite a definite division between gentle
el and angry yahweh.

i have read several interesting interpretations of genesis pointing out to a few
clues that most of us are not aware of. first, that adam and eve were not human
as we know them, but beings with a higher spiritual component lost in the fall.
yet, not high enough to know about good or evil.
second, that many of the words in the creation story point to processes of
physics, therefore making the word not a person but holy sound and light the
creating force. and third , that what we know as the holy ghost, the word
'ruach' in hebrew) is feminine.

alma



---
outgoing mail is certified virus free.
checked by avg anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
version: 6.0.538 / virus database: 333 - release date: 11/11/2003

[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[amilius2001]

if one regards that everything occurs for a purpose, perfectly, and
exactly as it should for the desired experiences of the creative
beings involved, might the substitution of the acronym of
"graciously organized design" resolve questions about
conscious energy simply? substitute the acronym even in our
discourses and many questions resolve themselves. such is
the way of graciously organized design, especially regarding
obscuring idioms and translations applied in the past. it is an
understanding that might increase our appreciation of the many
varied understandings from a variety of sources, if one releases
the stipulation that god is both hard to understand and difficult to
appreciate as a totally beneficial source and influence on its
children. love, amilius
p.s. atlantis and lemuria chose that it might be hard for others
to understand as they chose to share it. we might do better and
lessen the consequences of past choices if not obviate them
altogether.

[shemayet_3]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "amilius2001" <angelfatigues@h...>
wrote:

snip >>> if one regards that everything occurs for a purpose,
perfectly, and exactly as it should for the desired experiences of
the creative beings involved, might the substitution of the acronym
of "graciously organized design" resolve questions about conscious
energy simply? substitute the acronym even in our discourses and
many questions resolve themselves. such is the way of graciously
organized design, especially regarding obscuring idioms and
translations applied in the past. it is an understanding that might
increase our appreciation of the many varied understandings from a
variety of sources, if one releases the stipulation that god is both
hard to understand and difficult to appreciate as a totally
beneficial source and influence on its children. <<< snip


me > hello amilius, group

that's a thoughtful way of looking at it. (i like it very much!) yet,
some still need to believe that their is someone they can relate to,
up there, watching over us. i know i do. in a way, it's just taking
the "it" and giving it a human face. which, for male as well as
female, will differ as to it's gender, but that's okay. i believe it
manifests itself, whatever way is best, for each individual. there is
no wrong way, even in the negative paths.

when i pray to gaia, i picture the earth, literally. i believe she,
is my closest "deity", and humanity's most important! i would
certainly agree she is a "graciously organized design"!

namaste

shemayet~*