Paradise on Earth

[onewithhim]

When I learned that the Bible speaks of a restored Garden of Eden and the restoration of mankind to the perfection and endless life that Adam forfeited, I was thrilled. Who doesn't want to keep living on this beautiful earth, with our loved ones, and being able to do all the things we love to do---endlessly?

If God said to you today, "When do you want to die?" would you say "now!!"? I don't think very many people would say that.

We CAN live forever here on Earth. The Bible tells us that we can.

Matthew 5:5
Psalm 37:9-11,29

[onewithhim]

1. Do you accept that land inhabitants includes people, animals, some fowls etc?
2. If yes, then the earth sings, which include people, animals, some fowls and etc.
3. Then for me that is the correct metonym/substitution, not just the human society.

So saying EARTH instead of "people, animals, some fowls etc" would be a metonym correct?

My question therefore for you is:

Are there any METONYMS in the bible?

PSALM 66:4 King James Bible
All the earth shall worship thee, and shall sing unto thee; they shall sing to thy name. Selah.

Metonym explained as substitute for something.
Earth (erets) one definition is land inhabitants.
Land inhabitants includes people, animals, some fowls etc.
If you say "earth as substitute to people, animals, some fowls etc."(metonym applied) I think no because earth has many definition.
It might be "land inhabitants as substitute to people, animals, some fowls, etc."
But it could never be "human society" as substitute to earth.

It has been shown over and over that "human society" can be the definition of "earth" in many places. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.")

Can you show me lexicon that the word "earth" during that time of usage in the Bible is human society?

I have shown you. You just pass right by it. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.") That is what the Bible says, not a lexicon that can be biased.

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

[Capbook]

1. Do you accept that land inhabitants includes people, animals, some fowls etc?
2. If yes, then the earth sings, which include people, animals, some fowls and etc.
3. Then for me that is the correct metonym/substitution, not just the human society.

So saying EARTH instead of "people, animals, some fowls etc" would be a metonym correct?

My question therefore for you is:

Are there any METONYMS in the bible?

PSALM 66:4 King James Bible
All the earth shall worship thee, and shall sing unto thee; they shall sing to thy name. Selah.

Metonym explained as substitute for something.
Earth (erets) one definition is land inhabitants.
Land inhabitants includes people, animals, some fowls etc.
If you say "earth as substitute to people, animals, some fowls etc."(metonym applied) I think no because earth has many definition.
It might be "land inhabitants as substitute to people, animals, some fowls, etc."
But it could never be "human society" as substitute to earth.

It has been shown over and over that "human society" can be the definition of "earth" in many places. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.")

Can you show me lexicon that the word "earth" during that time of usage in the Bible is human society?

I have shown you. You just pass right by it. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.") That is what the Bible says, not a lexicon that can be biased.

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

[onewithhim]

So saying EARTH instead of "people, animals, some fowls etc" would be a metonym correct?

Metonym explained as substitute for something.
Earth (erets) one definition is land inhabitants.
Land inhabitants includes people, animals, some fowls etc.
If you say "earth as substitute to people, animals, some fowls etc."(metonym applied) I think no because earth has many definition.
It might be "land inhabitants as substitute to people, animals, some fowls, etc."
But it could never be "human society" as substitute to earth.

It has been shown over and over that "human society" can be the definition of "earth" in many places. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.")

Can you show me lexicon that the word "earth" during that time of usage in the Bible is human society?

I have shown you. You just pass right by it. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.") That is what the Bible says, not a lexicon that can be biased.

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

[Capbook]

Metonym explained as substitute for something.
Earth (erets) one definition is land inhabitants.
Land inhabitants includes people, animals, some fowls etc.
If you say "earth as substitute to people, animals, some fowls etc."(metonym applied) I think no because earth has many definition.
It might be "land inhabitants as substitute to people, animals, some fowls, etc."
But it could never be "human society" as substitute to earth.

It has been shown over and over that "human society" can be the definition of "earth" in many places. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.")

Can you show me lexicon that the word "earth" during that time of usage in the Bible is human society?

I have shown you. You just pass right by it. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.") That is what the Bible says, not a lexicon that can be biased.

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

So, "land inhabitants" cannot solely be "human society"? Yes or no.

[onewithhim]

It has been shown over and over that "human society" can be the definition of "earth" in many places. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.")

Can you show me lexicon that the word "earth" during that time of usage in the Bible is human society?

I have shown you. You just pass right by it. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.") That is what the Bible says, not a lexicon that can be biased.

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

So, "land inhabitants" cannot solely be "human society"? Yes or no.

That is true. There are animals that would inhabit the land. "Human society" means people.

[Capbook]

Can you show me lexicon that the word "earth" during that time of usage in the Bible is human society?

I have shown you. You just pass right by it. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.") That is what the Bible says, not a lexicon that can be biased.

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

So, "land inhabitants" cannot solely be "human society"? Yes or no.

That is true. There are animals that would inhabit the land. "Human society" means people.

Then change interpretation of "human society" to all people, where all people are land inhabitants.
It is more acceptable that just "group of people".(as human society is defined)

[onewithhim]

I have shown you. You just pass right by it. See Genesis 11:1. ("Now all the earth continued to be of one language.") That is what the Bible says, not a lexicon that can be biased.

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

So, "land inhabitants" cannot solely be "human society"? Yes or no.

That is true. There are animals that would inhabit the land. "Human society" means people.

Then change interpretation of "human society" to all people, where all people are land inhabitants.
It is more acceptable that just "group of people".(as human society is defined)

I am changing "human society" to "people." They mean the same.

[Capbook]

I just believe, you have no idea what lexicons are.
Lexicographers have the higher credentials than us to define Bible words at the time of its usage.
That is to be safe from eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

So, "land inhabitants" cannot solely be "human society"? Yes or no.

That is true. There are animals that would inhabit the land. "Human society" means people.

Then change interpretation of "human society" to all people, where all people are land inhabitants.
It is more acceptable that just "group of people".(as human society is defined)

I am changing "human society" to "people." They mean the same.

You may find a definition of human society online with a link, will it be the same with "all people"?

[onewithhim]

Let's use words and descriptions that everyone can understand. Try just presenting your arguments in your own clear words and referring to the Scriptures only. Even Lexicographers can have bias. You do not comment on Genesis 11:1 that makes clear that the "earth" is the society of humans, in some instances, this being one of them. Why are you afraid to comment on that scripture?

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

So, "land inhabitants" cannot solely be "human society"? Yes or no.

That is true. There are animals that would inhabit the land. "Human society" means people.

Then change interpretation of "human society" to all people, where all people are land inhabitants.
It is more acceptable that just "group of people".(as human society is defined)

I am changing "human society" to "people." They mean the same.

You may find a definition of human society online with a link, will it be the same with "all people"?

"Human society" is all people.

[Capbook]

I believe I have already defined "earth" in Gen 11:1 as the same definition what lexicon gives.
And I don't believe that lexicons definitions are bias, lexicons are dictionaries, it defines Bible words at the time of its usage.
As I've said, without consulting them we may be guilty of eisegesis.

One of your lexicon's definitions of "earth" is "the inhabitants thereof, the human society." Did you miss that? And tell me: Does the verse at Genesis 11:1 mean that the land itself was speaking one language? Or would it be the people on the land?

I believe I've already shown you the difference between them. I hope you answer the questions below..
1. Does "land inhabitants" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no.
2. Does "human society" includes animals, some fowls, insects and etc.? Yes or no?
If you'll answer that truthfully, you'll see that they are not the same.

1. Yes.
2. No..... Human society would be only humans.

So, "land inhabitants" cannot solely be "human society"? Yes or no.

That is true. There are animals that would inhabit the land. "Human society" means people.

Then change interpretation of "human society" to all people, where all people are land inhabitants.
It is more acceptable that just "group of people".(as human society is defined)

I am changing "human society" to "people." They mean the same.

You may find a definition of human society online with a link, will it be the same with "all people"?

"Human society" is all people.

Where is the definition link?