An easy Question?

Question

Genesis 1 : 10 -
And " God " called the dry land " Earth " and the gathering together of the waters " Seas " .....
Is the earth called earth ? are the seas called seas...
Yes they are .... I've heard hundreds of people on R & S, say the Bible is a fairy tale and holds no " Truth "....
Give me a legit reference of where we got these names from if not from " The Lord " ..and His word..
Someone very well could have named the other celestial bodies that's not my question , but who specifically named these two mentioned...
I'm very curious.....As for me I believe God named them and I know this statement from Genesis is true ..But I want to know the other side of the spectrum as viewed by others..Shouldn't we try to understand each other....Yes we should ...If this statement from " God " is not truth then I would like to see " proof "..
And don't label me religious , you don't know me ..As I don't know you....This is an easy question? Insults are very hilarious but not legit answeres...

Is that all you got , lol...Well king James translated the bible from it's original language so your petty points on language are mute..It's meaning is still earth and seas..Don't be so predictable ...and laughable..Silly kids ..lol...And this is a question, not a shoving down your throat contest if you don't like it then step off...

An easy question, non believers I'm sorry not the brightest light bulb now are you , it was a yes it is a truth or no it is not ...Yes or no...I said for the hundreds that say the bible is a fairy tale , fairy tells hold no truth..My point is that ,it is truth what God had said in any language....If you studied the bible as much as you slam it you might get somewhere..And I also said I want to understand why you think the way you do ..No non believer gave me that..And once again I am not religious look that one up..I am in a relationship with a living God..Huge difference...lol.....And here I am trying to get your viewpoint and offering mine , so we can understand ...Sorry you missed that..

Solo - we can all see why you chose that name and what's up with the rambling ..lol..
What does cleavage have to do with my question ...and my age ...lol...Tsk, Tsk, you don't know anything , and you are an insult to that superman
icon ..You are like a little boy with no toys, I'm sorry honey..Why don't you go play somewhere else....because you don't play well with others..
Don't be so quick to judge little one..lol..And you still didn't answere my question and btw - I was not raised in a faith based home quite the opposite indeed..I obviously know truth when I see it...lol...Your funny...Thanks for the laughs..

and hey yeah- thanks dude for the cool link to my page I'm lovin it..

Answer 1

hi,
Great question actually! In the original language of the Old Testament which was Hebrew,

Earth- comes from an unused root word which means
-to be firm. This makes sense the entire planet was water at the time.

Sea- also comes from an unused root word which means
- to roar. I can only imagine how loud it was when the continents were formed.

Personally I'm with you, just because they are English words now, doesn't meant that they weren't first spoken to the Hebrew people by God. Specifically to Moses, who through the power of the Holy Spirit (who is God), wrote the book of Genesis.

God Bless and Merry Christmas!

Answer 2

Are you truly serious? I will try my best to be.

You wrote: " but who specifically named these two mentioned...
I'm very curious.....As for me I believe God named them and I know this statement from Genesis is true ."

It is the very nature of people and language to "label" or name things. So we may talk about them. And language existed many thousands of years before anyone even contemplated writing the Bible. And Hebrew -- the language of the Old Testiment-- was only one of these myriad languages. Even the most primitive tribe ever discovered -- the Tasaday in the Phillippines -- had words for the earth and for the sea.

As many languages as developed there were probably that many different words for earth.(Although that they had a word for "sea" it would depend on whether or not they knew of its existence).

Now in the Hebrew Bible there too are words (words in the Hebrew language) for the concepts of earth and sea. Today we TRANSLATE them into English for English speaking people.

You wrote: "And " God " called the dry land " Earth " and the gathering together of the waters " Seas " ....."

This is a statement from Genesis. It can neither be provem nor disproven. For those, like yourself, who BELIEVE it to be true, I have to take your word for it. And I respect your belief.

But know one more thing about this "creation story" in Genesis. It can be traced back much further in history than the Bible of the Jews. The Jews thus TRANSLATED this story INTO their language.


I happen to BELIEVE otherwise -- and in general I believe in the Bible -- just not the its LITERAL intepretation. For myself I BELIEVE that the "creation story" is allegorical -- teaching a religious truth of God creating the universe. However I do not believe that every nuance is to be taken literally.

Please respect my belief.
--------------------------------------
I'm having difficulty here. From your last remark you say it is not a question of language. Then how can you expect any answer to your challenge? I'm sorry I can make no other logical sense of your question. If you believe that God named the "earth" and "sea" to do so -- whoever He was giving this information -- it HAD to be in some language.

Answer 3

Unfortunately your hypothesis does not stand up to even casual scrutiny as the correct designation for our planet is Terra not Earth.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong here, but not every nation uses the words "Earth" and "Sea". I'm not that hot with other languages but I believe that the French would say "terre" and "mer".

So, unless your God went around every emergent culture and gave them specific words to use in their own languages then, again, your hypothesis is flawed.

In addition, I believe (from reading about your mythos) the language of God and the angels would have been very different from terrestrial languages. Surely your God would have named his alleged creations in his own language wouldn't he?

If the Bible was the literal word of God it would have been written in angelic script which would have been the symbolic representation of the language spoken by the Writer. Any translation of a translation of an edited version of a translation that you are currently reading would bear very little resemblance to the original work (if such a work existed in the first place).

Ever played Chinese Whispers? Because, unfortunately, what you believe in is the end result of 4,000 years of Chinese Whispers.

All of the above, of course, supposes that there is God in the first place. I mean, using your hypothesis, there is as much proof of the existence of Hobbits as there is of your God. e.g.

"In a hole in the ground lived a Hobbit."

See, I've just proved the existence of Hobbits by using 7 words taken from a book. I know that this statement is true because an author wrote the words down and I read them QED.

Answer 4

I find your question very interesting. I have taken the time to read your points and your question carefully, so please be considerate and do the same for me. I am not one of these "kids" that you have thrown up to rebuff these answers you have already received.

"Shouldn't we try to understand each other". Bam! Hit the nail straight on the head. Of course we should. We're all people on a very small rock in the vastness of the universe. It doesn't matter if you're Christian, Muslim, agnostic, atheist, Jewish, Buddhist or whatever. I shall try to understand your point. Whatever version of the Bible you have, the book of Genesis does indeed say that God called the earth "earth" and the waters "seas". I agree. Of course it says this, to refute this would be stupid and pointless! However, because this reference is the Bible, your source is incorruptible, untouchable, and unable to be questioned? Why? What makes the Bible, as a source, any more reliable than anything else that has been cited? Was it not written by men? How can you seemingly preach open-mindedness with your comment about understanding each other when you are clearly in possession of a mind so closed that it is akin to a fortress with its gates barred and drawbridge raised? Your point is "I know this statement... is true". If you "know" it is true, then what's the point in this question? So you can prove your faith to yourself by laughing at and ignoring every reasonable answer given to you? I don't know where you're going. You seem unwilling to accept anyone else's opinion as valid. Why? You asked for them.

However, to tackle your question and further point about King James, and how this renders the language points "mute". I cannot see how this makes sense. Your question is, if we strip away the religious overtones, a question ABOUT language. King James translated a version of the Bible from Hebrew into English. A form of English that isn't particularly similar to English now. However. Let us go back into the mists of time. For the sake of argument, let's say your God created language and gifted us language. OK. However. This language would be most likely Hebrew or a form of Greek. Leading on from this, King James translated the Bible into English. When he did this, English already had the words "Earth" and "seas". So... God did not create these words. Spibbles has in fact provided you with the etymology of where these come from. So, as far as I can see, despite your dismissal, your point fails there; the key is "translate" not "create". We had these words in our language before we got an English Bible. Is this your point? Or is the point I should be addressing a conviction that your God gave us language? If that is your belief, then I don't understand the point in your question at all. I could show all the evidence in the world from linguistics professors and anthropological studies by authors such as George Yule and Ronald Carter showing the development of language in etymological and morphological terms; and you could argue all this shows is the process of your God giving us language. So what's the point in any of us even doing that?


Also: "Don't label me religious". Um. Sorry. I have done. How can we possibly not label you religious? Don't get me wrong, that is 100% not a bad thing at all, but saying you know God created the earth and seas labels you religous by the strength of your conviction. Again, no bad thing. Indeed, rather refreshing in this day and age of people too scared to share their true thoughts, but then to say you're not religous is laughable. You have made your points. Stand by them.

I guess my final point would be that I don't understand why you are asking this question when you seem so unwilling to even consider any answer given to you and would rather dismiss them out-of-hand than actually think about them; especially when you supposedly want to understand everyone more but you hypocritically insult and disregard any other opinion given. Good luck in finding an answer that you're unwilling to receive... or maybe you do just want to insult people who don't share your religious beliefs.

Answer 5

Very good question, this should give the people that don't believe God exist something to ponder, can't wait too see what they come up with too side step giving proof, because their is none.I will star this question. EDIT>>>> hehe, they are side stepping giving you a straight answer as I knew they would, the only thing they can focus on is the language the bible was written in,we know that part, it was all translated at a later time, that doesn't prove he didn't name the earth and the seas.

Answer 6

To me that is a bit strange unless Earth and Sea's are direct translation of ancient Hebrew ... as did he not speak in that tongue ? ... I do not know of course, maybe they are.

From the Anglo-Saxon word ... erda ... meaning ground or soil. Oddly an 8th century creation ... To the Aztecs it was called Tonantzin, no doubt every civilization calling it something else, after all, it is but a label.

All words take definition, that definition originates at a point and varies over time, letters lost here and there, inflection etc. etc. You are not asking a religion question, but one of glottogony. As language requires syntax, lexeme and mental capability, much of which was not physically possible until way into human history, which does kind of go against the works of Genesis.

Answer 7

Solo, give her a break.
What was in the original text TRANSLATED Earth and Seas. She didn't translate the text!

Morganie, Genesis in Hebrew originally, SO???? What is your point?

Mooseback: The Bible was written thousands of years after humans came to be? Were you there?

I am sorry Leah, you pretty much opened yourself up here.I just can't read the rest, though I gave MOST of them a thumbs down!

I have this to say, that the original text that we get our Bible from, I believe is GREEK....not Hebrew. Greek is the most correct translation .

GRANTED the original WAS in Hebrew, but the Greek translation is the most correct, and those words were translated as EARTH and Seas. Those are the closest in meaning to the Greek as I understand it.

Answer 8

Yeah, sorry, the Bible wasn't originally English (it was translated in the Middle Ages), and the Hebrew words probably were different. Humans wrote the Bible, whether God spoke to them or not. And I am a Christian.

Answer 9

Not that easy at all... still I would try to reason it out!

God All-wise taught Adam names, they God asked the Angels but they did not remember, So God asked Adam & he repeated what he learned from God.

All different forms of life are living in their perceptions, they way we see this world is not the way a honey bee sees it, or an Ant (for example). We cannot behold Jinns but they might see us!

To my understanding, Adam was not just created and was left on his own, God taught him very well.

Answer 10

I thought you're a Christian? It's common knowledge that the bible was written in Hebrew before it arrived on the shores of UK.

Anyway, people name things. Not hard to understand. You think god told someone to name a box full of electronics "a computer"?

And let's assume, for argument's sake, you're right. So why doesn't every language have the same word for earth and sea? We all originate from Adam and Eve right?

edit: You mean they're moot (not mute). By what you added, your question loses coherence in that you argue God NAMED it but your additional notes suggest the meaning is important. Which is it? Also, of course people name things like the sea since it helps communication. You are so strange.