Raamattu ei ole Jumalan kirjoittama kirja, eikä edes hänen sanelunsa mukaan kirjoitettu kirja. Jumala on kirjoittanut omalla sormellaan kyllä kymmenen käskyn tekstin Mooseksen veistämiin kivitauluihin, mutta kovin moni meistä ei ole päässyt näkemään niitä. Laintaulujen olemassaolosta on esitetty monenlaisia spekulatiivisia tietoja. Joku toimittaja voi väittää päässeensä paikkaan, jossa niitä säilytetään, vaikka taulujen näkeminen ei ole ollut hänelle sallittua.
God has not written the Bible, and it has not been written according his dictation either. God truely wrote with his own finger the ten commandments on the tables made by Moses, but not many of us have ever seen them. There are many speculative claims concerning the existence of the Law. Some journalist may say that he/she has visited the place where they are although he/she has not been allowed to see them.
God has not written the Bible, and it has not been written according his dictation either. God truely wrote with his own finger the ten commandments on the tables made by Moses, but not many of us have ever seen them. There are many speculative claims concerning the existence of the Law. Some journalist may say that he/she has visited the place where they are although he/she has not been allowed to see them.
Se tosiasia, että raamattu on ihmisten kirjoittama kirja, tulee esiin hyvin monella tavalla ja monessa tekstissä. Raamatun teksti heijastaa kirjoittajansa ajatusmaailmaa, maailmankuvaa, ymmärrystä ja tietomäärää jne. Raamatun teksti on lähtökohtaisesti siis hyvin inhimillistä. Esimerkkejä olisi vaikka kuinka paljon, mutta otan nyt malliksi vain yhden tekstin... raamatun ensimmäisestä luvusta ns. elohistisesta luomiskertomuksesta.
We can see many times and in many texts of the Bible that it has been written by human beings. The texts reflect the author's thinking, worldview, understanding, knowledge etc. The Bible text is very much human made. There are very many examples of that in the Bible, but I'll take now only one text from the first chapter of the Bible.
We can see many times and in many texts of the Bible that it has been written by human beings. The texts reflect the author's thinking, worldview, understanding, knowledge etc. The Bible text is very much human made. There are very many examples of that in the Bible, but I'll take now only one text from the first chapter of the Bible.
1. Moos. 1: 6 - 8:ssa kerrotaan toisen luomispäivän tapahtumista. Jokainen voi lukea tekstin omasta raamatustaan. Huomioni kiinnittyy sanaan "taivaanvahvuus". Mitähän tuo sana mahtaa oikeasti tarkoittaa? Varmaa on, ettei tuo sana sisällä ainakaan mitään kovin tarkkaa tieteellistä faktaa. Vilkaisen englanninkieliseen kuningas Jaakon käännökseen: "firmament" = "taivaankansi". Samoin uusin suomenkielinen käännös vuodelta 1992 käyttää sanaa "kaartuva kansi".
We can read in Gen. 1: 6 - 8 of the second day of the creation week. I'm wondering the word "firmament" .
We can read in Gen. 1: 6 - 8 of the second day of the creation week. I'm wondering the word "firmament" .
Hetkinen! Millä vuosisadalla me oikein elämme? Thaleen (636 - 546 e.Kr.) ja Anaksimeneen (585 - 526 e.Kr.) opetus vedessä kelluvasta pannukakku-Maasta näyttää juurtuneen harvinaisen tiukasti ihmiskunnan ajatusmaailmaan!
Eikö jo Kristoffer Kolumbus (1451 - 1506) tiennyt maan olevan pyöreä pallo eikä litteä pannukakku, jonka yllä taivas on kaartuvana kantena. Kolumbuksen aikalainen Nikolaus Kopernikus (1473 - 1543) sai taistella raamattuun pitäytyvää kirkkoa vastaan puolustaessaan ajatuksiaan aurinkoa kiertävästä maapallosta. Myös Galileo Galilein (1564 - 1642) katsottiin opettavan raamatun sanaa vastaan väittäessään maan pyörivän, sillä kirkonmiehet olivat tottuneet siihen ajatukseen, että maa on kiinnitetty lujasti ja pysyvästi omalle paikalleen (1. Aik. 16: 30; Ps. 93: 1; 96: 10; 104: 5; Saarn. 1: 4, 5).
Just a moment! On what century we are living now? Thales (636 - 546 B.C.) and Anaksimenes (585 - 526 B.C) did teach that the Earth is like a pancake floating on water. Do we still believe in it! Already Christoffer Columbus (1451 - 1506) knew that the Earth is a round ball and not a pancake with a firmament or a curving cover over it. Copernicus (1473 - 1543) had to fight with the church when he tried to prove that the Earth is circling around the sun. When Galileo Galilei (1564 - 1642) claimed that the Earth is whirling around it's axle, the church men thought that he was trying to push down the Bible, because they have used to believe that the Earth has been firmly founded (1. Chron.16: 30; Ps. 93: 1; 96: 10; 104: 5; Ecc. 1: 4, 5).
Just a moment! On what century we are living now? Thales (636 - 546 B.C.) and Anaksimenes (585 - 526 B.C) did teach that the Earth is like a pancake floating on water. Do we still believe in it! Already Christoffer Columbus (1451 - 1506) knew that the Earth is a round ball and not a pancake with a firmament or a curving cover over it. Copernicus (1473 - 1543) had to fight with the church when he tried to prove that the Earth is circling around the sun. When Galileo Galilei (1564 - 1642) claimed that the Earth is whirling around it's axle, the church men thought that he was trying to push down the Bible, because they have used to believe that the Earth has been firmly founded (1. Chron.16: 30; Ps. 93: 1; 96: 10; 104: 5; Ecc. 1: 4, 5).
Mikäli elohistinen luomiskertomus olisi Jumalan itsensä kirjoittama, siinä tuskin olisi pienintäkään epävarmuutta koskien maan rakennetta, muotoa, asemaa, sijaintia tms., sillä onhan Jumala itse luonut koko universumin. Jumala tuskin olisi käyttänyt sanaa "taivaankansi"!
If God himself had written the Elohistic creation story, I think it would not have any uncertainty concerning the structure, shape, position etc. of the Earth, because God himself made the whole universe. He would scarcely use the word "firmament" at all!
If God himself had written the Elohistic creation story, I think it would not have any uncertainty concerning the structure, shape, position etc. of the Earth, because God himself made the whole universe. He would scarcely use the word "firmament" at all!
Jumala on suvaitsevainen ja kärsivällinen Isä. Hänellä on varaa antaa ihmisten etsiä totuutta... miettiä ja tuumailla itse. Hän ei riennä korkeuksistaan kertomaan meille ihmislapsille, kuinka nämä universumin asiat ovat. Isän tavoin hän tietää, että lapset oppivat parhaiten, kun saavat itse etsiä ja kokeilla... yrityksen ja erehdyksen kautta.
I think that God is a tolerant and patient Father. He can allow people to seek the truth by themselves... be thinking and ponding. He doesn't hasten from his hight to tell us how the things are in his universe. As a good Father he knows that the children learn best, when they are allowed to seek and try... by attempt and mistake.
I think that God is a tolerant and patient Father. He can allow people to seek the truth by themselves... be thinking and ponding. He doesn't hasten from his hight to tell us how the things are in his universe. As a good Father he knows that the children learn best, when they are allowed to seek and try... by attempt and mistake.
Mutta sitä en usko hänen suvaitsevuudessaankaan hyväksyvän, että joku ihminen voisi asettua jumalaksi toisten yläpuolelle ja sanella, miten on uskottava ja ajateltava.
But I don't think that not even for his tolerance He would not like that some man would ascend himself to be a god for others and order how to think and believe.
But I don't think that not even for his tolerance He would not like that some man would ascend himself to be a god for others and order how to think and believe.
Kun elohistinen luomiskertomus on siis hyvin inhimillistä tekstiä, miten saman kertomuksen alussa oleva monikollinen sana "elohim" voisi olla jumalallista alkuperää? Tuon monikollisen hepreankielisen sanan perusteellahan koko kristikunnalle tyrkytetään ajatusta kolmesta jumalpersoonasta. Eiköhän siinäkin ole kysymys vain erään ihmisen omasta henkilökohtaisesta tulkinnasta!
I have found the Elohistic creation story to be very human in words. And it's the same thing with the word "ALHIM" in the beginning of the story. How could it be more divine? But the claim that God is three persons stands on the bases of that word. I think it's very human thinking, too!
I have found the Elohistic creation story to be very human in words. And it's the same thing with the word "ALHIM" in the beginning of the story. How could it be more divine? But the claim that God is three persons stands on the bases of that word. I think it's very human thinking, too!
Kun ihminen ei voi vielä sanoa viimeistä sanaa universumista, miten hän voisi määritellä Jumalan, joka on suurempi kuin universumi?
People are not able to say the last word of the universe... how could they define God, who is higher that the universe?
People are not able to say the last word of the universe... how could they define God, who is higher that the universe?
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti