Kevin's Watch

Elohim is one of the hebrew words for God, used in the very first line of Genesis. "B'rishit Elohim bara et ha arets v et ha shamiim." It's always been one of the more interesting hebrew words, because the -im at the end denotes a plural noun, yet it is universally clear that God is singular (especially in the Old Testament).

Just find it interesting considering the nature (or should I say wurd) of the Elohim.

Any thoughts?

Very interesting subject, Sylvanus.

The choice of the plural "Elohim" has been a cause of great grievance to many a theologist. A common explanation is that "Elohim" refers to the Court or Council of God, which would consist of angels or demi-gods. Contemporary biblical researchers and theologists see this as a remnant of the Sumerian Creator-God "El", who lived on a high mountain, surrounded by a council of lesser gods (much like Zeus on the Olympus).

The biblical Leviathan is also consistent with the Babylonian Marduk&Tiamat myth. In the Babylonian epos of creation "Enuma Elish" we learn about the female Chaos creature or great Sea monster Tiamat, who wanted to consume the lesser gods. The highest god Marduk then fought and vanquished her, and shaped Earth of her body. This story sounds a lot like "The Worm of the World's End" doesn't it?

Also, the story of Kastenessen and the origin of Mereviwes has great similarities to the apochryphical "Book of Enoch", where God severely punishes angels who had wed human women and taught them forbidden knowledge. The women were turned into sirens as punishment.

If you're interested in this sort of thing, I highly recommend "God – A Biography" by Jack Miles (Pulitzer Award winner 1996).

Council of God...very interesting as I have always believed the Elohim 2 b the Creator's children who fell through the breach in the story of "The Wounded Rainbow", or stars ripped from the sky. At one point they might have been "angels" but lenght of entrapment, self contemplation and journeys towards the dark have corrupted them.

To me they r some form of Earthpower incarnate and I have always believed the Elohim, devling deep into the Earth, emerged in the Land in the form of Wraiths. Still dancing as the Creator's children did on the rainbow. What's next? Gilgamesh?

Sylvanus,

Thank you SO much for starting this! I had no idea that the word existed pre-SRD. Amusingly, TCTC was also the first time I ever heard of the words <I>moksha, turiya, </I>and <I>samadhi.</I> You can imagine my surprise when I learned what those words mean! lol

What do they mean?

I know that dukkha is Sanskrit for "suffering." Or the equivalent.

~Foamy~

Take a look here, Foamfollwer: w1.461.telia.com/~u46108092/tc.html

I think it's quite interesting that turiya, moksha and samadhi actually have positive meanings (or do I get it wrong?).

You do not get it wrong. They do, indeed, have positive meanings. They are Hindu words, all with sanskrit roots. Here's other definitions, from <U>The Encyclopedia of Eastern Philosophy and Religion</U>.

Moksha: The final liberation and release from all worldly bonds, from karma and the cycle of life and death through union with God or knowledge of the ultimate reality... For the spiritual aspirant, the realization of <I>moksha</I> is the sole aim of life.

Samadhi: A state of consciousness that lies beyond waking, dreaming, and deep sleep, and in which mental activity ceases. It is a total absorption in the object of meditation. If that object is God or the Absolute, the result is union. There are various stages of <I>samadhi</I>, of which the highest is <I>nirvikalpa-samadhi</I>.

Turiya: Literally "the fourth"; the superconscious state of illumination, called the fourth because it transcends the three familiar states of waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. This state of absolute consciousness is beyond thought, causality, and identification with the body; it is indescribable.

I see them as kind of different ways of saying the same thing - the state of joining with Brahman. Which is, more or less, the Hindu view of God. ("The irreducible ground of existence. The essence of every thing." "The eternal, imperishable Absolute. The supreme nondual reality of Vedanta.") SRD used these words for the ravers' names to say that evil often views itself as good. (That's what he told me, I'm not putting words in his mouth )

Yes .. this Donaldson name thing is pretty interesting ... from Elohim to all his Indian-word names (moksha, samedhi, etc.) ... I discovered that LOTS of Land-isms seem to come from other sources -- words in other languages, like Donaldson figured nobody would catch on or somethign

They r prob words he picked up as a kid living in India and though they were cool. I think he knew we'd catch them--they'r, sorta, fringe words--like they either sound familiar, but u 4get what they mean. Unless u teach World Religions, he throws them in 4 coolness and curiosity so we can bcome more edjecated!!

Hmmm interesting.... Must give it more thought

"For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth and the flower thereof falleth away: but the Word of the Lord endureth forever." 1 Peter 1:24,25 (Isaiah 40: 7, 8 )

One of my favorite pastimes is studying all the different ways the word "word" is used in the Bible.

Back to Elohim for a moment: in the context of the Bible, many believe (and I am one of them) that this plural name for God is one indication of His Tri-unity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Verse 2 of Genesis 1 records that, "...the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." Some translations say "brooded over."

The chapter continues with, "And God said..." A phrase which takes the reader right around to the word "word".

For me, the first chapter of Genesis along with the first chapter of the Gospel of John and the first chapter of the Epistle of John are the most profound writings that I have ever read.

- Hearthcoal

Here is a link to the Catholic Encyclopedia's definition of Elohim.
www.newadvent.org/cathen/05393a.htm

here's where i run into problems being a hebrew scholar instead of a biblical scholar. talmid vs talmud.

the only problem i see with Elohim being indicitave of the trinity is that as an Old Testament word, the writers at that time would have no knowledge of the trinity.

i should point out that in the transliteration posted above, bara is a singular verb. if Elohim had truly been considered plural, the correct verb would have been barim.

Sylvanus wrote:here's where i run into problems being a hebrew scholar instead of a biblical scholar. talmid vs talmud.

the only problem i see with Elohim being indicitave of the trinity is that as an Old Testament word, the writers at that time would have no knowledge of the trinity.

If I may be so bold as to answer for those who actually believe in this stuff, I think the answer lies in who wrote the Bible. If men wrote it, then yes, they couldn't have known. But if God wrote it, through these human vessels (it says this is the case somewhere in at least the translation of the Bible that I have, but I don't remember where off hand), or even if he just said, "Hey, use the word 'Elohim'", then it's ok. They might not have known what he was talking about, but they could have had faith that he knew what he was doing. Eventually, centuries later, it made sense.

...from December 30, 2002, CNN website:

The company that claims to have created the world's first human clone says the baby girl will return home Monday and will undergo testing to verify her genetic makeup.

Clonaid, a firm founded by members of a religious sect called the Raelians, said Friday it has developed the first human clone -- a 7-pound baby girl named Eve. Former French journalist Claude Vorilhon, who now calls himself "Rael," is leader of the Raelian movement, which professes human life began with extraterrestrials.

CNN Anchor Carol Lin talked to the Raelian leader Monday about the cloning claims.

LIN: First and foremost, I want to find out if the baby Eve has actually arrived here in the United States. Has she?

RAEL: I don't know. ... I want to be very clear, the cloning company, Clonaid, led by Dr. [Brigitte] Boisselier is completely separated from the Raelian movement. Of course, I initiated the project; I launched the idea, if you want. I inspired her to create a company, but there is absolutely no link between the cloning company and the Raelian movement, but we support her spiritually, philosophically and religiously.

LIN: In what sense? Do you have similar beliefs about cloning and the origins of humankind?

RAEL: No, the origin of humankind, humanity, was created scientifically using DNA and genetic engineering a long time ago by Elohim, a very advanced civilization, which came on Earth a long time ago. And cloning, as they explained to me, is a way to reach eternal life. That's why we support human cloning.

I doubt if SRD was aware of the "Raelians" when he wrote TCTC1&2; maybe, but I doubt it.

Still, it's interesting to think about their use of the word Elohim vs. SRD's use.

- Hearthcoal

Wow! I wasn't expecting to see him use that word. Interesting.

This Raelian sect apparantly makes a big point out of the word Elohim being in the plural form in the Bible, they take this as proof that there wasn`t one God, but a race of creators. Some people are real grammar freaks.

...and spelling too (eh, Skyweir); nevertheless, it seems extreme to base such an important part of their belief system on one word.

I suppose they construe the "Eve from Adam's Rib" narrative to indicate cloning. Perhaps it does. I've never thought about it from that angle.

- Hearthcoal

Hearthcoal wrote:I suppose they construe the "Eve from Adam's Rib" narrative to indicate cloning. Perhaps it does. I've never thought about it from that angle.

In an episode of <I>Star Trek: TNG</I> the ancient, legendary founder of the Klingon Empire, the very model of all Klingon virtue, returned, as had been fortold by prophecy. But it turned out that the priests had cloned him from the blood of an ancient knife, and programmed him with knowledge. They said, "How do you know that this isn't the way the prophecy was to be fulfilled?"

Hearthcoal wrote:it seems extreme to base such an important part of their belief system on one word.

I was under the impression that your belief in the Trinity was based on the same thing. Then I reread:

Hearthcoal wrote:Back to Elohim for a moment: in the context of the Bible, many believe (and I am one of them) that this plural name for God is <B>one indication</B> of His Tri-unity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The bold is mine. So I guess you didn't base this part of your belief system on just one word. In fact, I suppose, if there weren't other indications that made it specific, you might have decided on a Quad-unity, Oct-unity, or anything else.

Don't mind me, I just like to ponder other people's belief