> General Discussions
Eating from the beginning until after the flood
cheekie3:
All -
Is Our Saviour not the Saviour of all the world; and are we sure that there are two types of mankind - and that not all mankind came from Eve?
Does Acts 17:26 refer back to a single man, the original created man?
Acts 17:26 (NIV):
From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.
Acts 17:26 (Complete Jewish Bible) (CJB):
“From one man he made every nation living on the entire surface of the earth, and he fixed the limits of their territories and the periods when they would flourish.
Acts 17:26 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition):
And hath made of one, all mankind, to dwell upon the whole face of the earth, determining appointed times, and the limits of their habitation.
Acts 17:26 (Wycliffe Bible) (WYC):
and made of one all the kind of men [for] to inhabit on all the face of the earth, determining times ordained, and terms of the dwelling of them [and terms of habitation, or dwelling, of them],
Acts 17:26 (Philips):
From one forefather he has created every race of men to live over the face of the whole earth.
Is 2 Corinthians 5:14 referring to two types of mankind (the pre-Adamic race and those that came from Eve); and if not, does it refer only to the Adamic race - and if so, what happened to the pre-Adamic race?
2 Corinthians 5:14 (Complete Jewish Bible) (CJB):
For the Messiah’s love has hold of us, because we are convinced that one man died on behalf of all mankind (which implies that all mankind was already dead),
2 Corinthians 5:14 (GNT):
We are ruled by the love of Christ, now that we recognize that one man died for everyone, which means that they all share in his death.
2 Corinthians 5:14 (NLV):
For the love of Christ puts us into action. We are sure that Christ died for everyone. So, because of that, everyone has a part in His death.
2 Corinthians 5:14 (YLT):
for the love of the Christ doth constrain us, having judged thus: that if one for all died, then the whole died,
2 Corinthians 5:14 (MSG):
Our firm decision is to work from this focused center: One man died for everyone. That puts everyone in the same boat. He included everyone in his death so that everyone could also be included in his life, a resurrection life, a far better life than people ever lived on their own.
Does all this fit into "the sum of His Word is Truth"?
Warmest Regards.
George
lareli:
Biblical Dates
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AnB2iXgII5U
Ray says "chronologically" which he says may not be exact due to the skipping over of generations; Adam was created about 4000 BC. That's just over 6000 years ago.
The Earth is Very Old
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2yt1MY_pJd8
Ray says that from an evolutionary standpoint mankind has been here for 50,000 to 100,000 years.
I personally do not see monsters arise from thinking about these things, even so, would I be wrong to believe that Ray wasn't afraid of whatever monsters may arise from musing these things? Of what value would my faith be if I hadn't stared a few monsters in the face?
If we're to be child like in our faith does that mean just accepting what we've been taught by others without constantly questioning and testing it all? When I think of a child I think of how children ask lots of questions and explore all possibilities. The "why?", "how come?", "what about?", "what if?" Sometimes seems to have no end when teaching a child. Eventually it gets annoying or perhaps even threatening to the adults own beliefs and the adults sooner or later teach the children to stop questioning and just conform or believe. This is especially evident in religion.. probably more so than anywhere else.
Dave in Tenn:
Cheekie, none of the translations you posted contain the word "blood" that is in the original Greek. Here, the KJV is closer. Along with two "literal" versions.
Act 17:26 AndG5037 hath madeG4160 ofG1537 oneG1520 bloodG129 allG3956 nationsG1484 of menG444 for to dwellG2730 onG1909 allG3956 theG3588 faceG4383 of theG3588 earth,G1093 and hath determinedG3724 the timesG2540 before appointed,G4384 andG2532 theG3588 boundsG3734 of theirG848 habitation;G2733
YLT Act 17:26 He made also of one blood every nation of men, to dwell upon all the face of the earth--having ordained times before appointed, and the bounds of their dwellings--
LITV Act 17:26 And He made every nation of men of one blood, to live on all the face of the earth, ordaining fore-appointed seasons and boundaries of their dwelling,
I certainly don't think there are two "types" of men in the "racial" sense. Before there was even the existence of a distinction between Jews and the rest of humanity, the "sons of God" married the "daughters of man". And even after there were Jews, the lineage that produced the Messiah contained Gentiles, didn't it? Where is this alleged "pure and separate race" in all that?
As far as I'm concerned, nowhere. Act 17:25, 26 "...seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Besides, that verse doesn't say what your provided translations say. That he has "Made" of one blood all nations of men is not the same as saying "...From one man he made all the nations..." The latter is a theological assumption. I have no comment on whether or not it is "accurate". I just want to point out that it is not here in that translation scriptural.
cheekie3:
Dave -
Thank you for providing this valuable information about the blood:
--- Quote from: Dave in Tenn on May 19, 2017, 03:35:07 PM ---Cheekie, none of the translations you posted contain the word "blood" that is in the original Greek. Here, the KJV is closer. Along with two "literal" versions.
Act 17:26 AndG5037 hath madeG4160 ofG1537 oneG1520 bloodG129 allG3956 nationsG1484 of menG444 for to dwellG2730 onG1909 allG3956 theG3588 faceG4383 of theG3588 earth,G1093 and hath determinedG3724 the timesG2540 before appointed,G4384 andG2532 theG3588 boundsG3734 of theirG848 habitation;G2733
YLT Act 17:26 He made also of one blood every nation of men, to dwell upon all the face of the earth--having ordained times before appointed, and the bounds of their dwellings--
LITV Act 17:26 And He made every nation of men of one blood, to live on all the face of the earth, ordaining fore-appointed seasons and boundaries of their dwelling,
I certainly don't think there are two "types" of men in the "racial" sense. Before there was even the existence of a distinction between Jews and the rest of humanity, the "sons of God" married the "daughters of man". And even after there were Jews, the lineage that produced the Messiah contained Gentiles, didn't it? Where is this alleged "pure and separate race" in all that?
As far as I'm concerned, nowhere. Act 17:25, 26 "...seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Besides, that verse doesn't say what your provided translations say. That he has "Made" of one blood all nations of men is not the same as saying "...From one man he made all the nations..." The latter is a theological assumption. I have no comment on whether or not it is "accurate". I just want to point out that it is not here in that translation scriptural.
--- End quote ---
Does it matter significantly whether the original word is blood or man? Do both, blood and man, not refer to mankind?
Warmest Regards.
George
Dave in Tenn:
I'd have to be a theologian to know if the failure to include a translation of a word in the original was a significant matter.
Not even the CLV (with the "L" standing for "literal") translates αἷμα aima blood.
CLV Act 17:26 Besides, He makes out of one every nation of mankind, to be dwelling on all the surface of the earth...
At least they didn't insert "man" even if they left out "blood". Kinda makes me wonder why not? To make it simpler to understand? To my mind, it doesn't if the meaning is "the same". I even looked in the list of "spurious" passages to see if that one was there. It isn't, unless I messed up and overlooked it.
Maybe there's a good reason. I just don't know what it is.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version