Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 112 (8734 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-30-2017 4:47 AM
435 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 434 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 802,213 Year: 6,819/21,208 Month: 2,580/2,634 Week: 243/525 Day: 2/74 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1516
17
181920Next
Author Topic:   Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2
greyseal
Member (Idle past 1216 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 241 of 295 (581807)
09-17-2010 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by purpledawn
09-17-2010 7:20 AM


Re: Inerrancy
It doesn't matter whether one feels the stories are contradictory or not, the issue at hand is whether the differences that the originator mentioned disproves that the Bible is inerrant which is a doctrinal position.

So you're arguing that the two stories aren't supposed to be taken as factual accounts (I definitely agree they are not) and because of that, their apparent contradictions do not render the bible as non-inerrant.

My position is that the stories weren't created to go together... (they) weren't written as factual accounts. They need to be understood as they were written.

I'm with you so far, I think, but I don't agree that what you're suggesting doesn't matter.

Ordinarily I would have to say it wouldn't matter that there are two fictional stories in an otherwise non-fictional book, but the ultimate author of this book is supposed to be beyond reproach. He is supposed to have inspired directly these sets of books and imbued them with his own perfection.

...which is all well and good, but then you talk about

Each author had a different point to make to his audience. The redactor that "stitched" them together also had his own purpose for doing so

Now you're saying that normal, fallible human beings have not only touched but directly and wilfully changed the text that was supposed to be in the bible for their own ends.

I don't know whether you are a believer or not, but if your position is common, then I think it proves the bible inerrant from almost page 1.

The two genesis accounts, visibly and obviously altered by if not their own authors but the person who "stitched them together" and all the armies of translators have indelibly left their mark on these books.

If you wish to call them "the (factual) word of god" then you have a problem because mankind has done more than touch them, he has altered them.

If you wish to say these words aren't factual but tell some sort of story, then you are admitting that the book is no longer factual, and as such, inerrancy is meaningless.

That's what I take away from this - the discrepency between genesis 1 and 2 doesn't make sense if you demand that the book be factual - and so it cannot be inerrant.

The discrepancy can be explained away by calling it a fairy story, but then calling it "inerrant" is meaningless because it has no basis in fact.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by purpledawn, posted 09-17-2010 7:20 AM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by purpledawn, posted 09-17-2010 6:22 PM greyseal has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 811 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 242 of 295 (581829)
09-17-2010 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by greyseal
09-17-2010 3:50 PM


Re: Inerrancy
quote:
So you're arguing that the two stories aren't supposed to be taken as factual accounts (I definitely agree they are not) and because of that, their apparent contradictions do not render the bible as non-inerrant.
Biblical inerrancy is the doctrinal position that the Bible is considered accurate and totally free of error.

Yes, my position is that they are foundational myths and aren't to be looked to for factual accounts.

quote:
Ordinarily I would have to say it wouldn't matter that there are two fictional stories in an otherwise non-fictional book, but the ultimate author of this book is supposed to be beyond reproach. He is supposed to have inspired directly these sets of books and imbued them with his own perfection.
The Bible is a religious book that contains various works and various styles.

quote:
Ordinarily I would have to say it wouldn't matter that there are two fictional stories in an otherwise non-fictional book, but the ultimate author of this book is supposed to be beyond reproach. He is supposed to have inspired directly these sets of books and imbued them with his own perfection.
Inspiration is not dictation. All writers are inspired by something.

quote:
Now you're saying that normal, fallible human beings have not only touched but directly and wilfully changed the text that was supposed to be in the bible for their own ends.

I don't know whether you are a believer or not, but if your position is common, then I think it proves the bible inerrant from almost page 1.


There have been unintentional errors in the various Bibles over the centuries such as "typos", placement of sentences, accidental addition of notes, etc. That's why most who support the inerrancy doctrine are talking about the absolute original documents that don't exist anymore.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by greyseal, posted 09-17-2010 3:50 PM greyseal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by barbara, posted 09-17-2010 8:40 PM purpledawn has responded
 Message 244 by greyseal, posted 09-18-2010 2:46 AM purpledawn has responded

barbara
Member (Idle past 2156 days)
Posts: 167
Joined: 07-19-2010


Message 243 of 295 (581864)
09-17-2010 8:40 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by purpledawn
09-17-2010 6:22 PM


Re: Inerrancy
Genesis 1 is a story written for a young child to understand. Science's version is for the adult to understand. Both versions come from the limitations of our brain and its sensory abilities that is unique to us. However, this does not make us the best experts or the best qualified to tell the story accurately or truthfully. Since there is no other life form to dispute our conclusions of how life really formed, we have only ourselves to conflict it's theories.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by purpledawn, posted 09-17-2010 6:22 PM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by purpledawn, posted 09-18-2010 9:19 AM barbara has not yet responded

  
greyseal
Member (Idle past 1216 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 244 of 295 (581909)
09-18-2010 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 242 by purpledawn
09-17-2010 6:22 PM


Re: Inerrancy
There have been unintentional errors in the various Bibles over the centuries such as "typos", placement of sentences, accidental addition of notes, etc. That's why most who support the inerrancy doctrine are talking about the absolute original documents that don't exist anymore.

That sounds like trying to have your cake and eat it. If the copies we have aren't inerrant then they aren't.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by purpledawn, posted 09-17-2010 6:22 PM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by purpledawn, posted 09-18-2010 8:05 AM greyseal has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 811 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 245 of 295 (581933)
09-18-2010 8:05 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by greyseal
09-18-2010 2:46 AM


Re: Inerrancy
quote:
That sounds like trying to have your cake and eat it. If the copies we have aren't inerrant then they aren't.
I don't hold the position that the Bible is inerrant. My position with this thread is that the differences in the OP are not proof against the inerrancy doctrine. There are plenty of real errors for that.

Textual critics have found thousands of textual differences between the manuscripts.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by greyseal, posted 09-18-2010 2:46 AM greyseal has not yet responded

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 811 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 246 of 295 (581945)
09-18-2010 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 243 by barbara
09-17-2010 8:40 PM


Re: Inerrancy
quote:
Genesis 1 is a story written for a young child to understand. Science's version is for the adult to understand. Both versions come from the limitations of our brain and its sensory abilities that is unique to us. However, this does not make us the best experts or the best qualified to tell the story accurately or truthfully. Since there is no other life form to dispute our conclusions of how life really formed, we have only ourselves to conflict it's theories.
I would say that Genesis 2 is geared more towards children and Genesis 1 was written to support the Sabbath Rule.

I would say the doctrine of inerrancy is in error. It has only been around a few centuries.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by barbara, posted 09-17-2010 8:40 PM barbara has not yet responded

NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2284 days)
Posts: 51
Joined: 09-14-2010


Message 247 of 295 (582092)
09-19-2010 7:06 PM


Galizzions of years apart
There are many in this thread employing a new scientific evidence technique (unknown to me before now) called The throw away line IE:

Genesis 1 Animals, Plants, and Man. Genesis 2 Man, Plants, Animals, Woman.
Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are two "separate" ACCOUNTS.
Genesis 1 and 2 are contradictory
Genesis 1 and 2 took place billions of years apart
Genesis 1 and 2 are two separate EVENTS
Genesis 1 is for Jewish Adults ( IE grown ups) in support of the Sabbath and Genesis 2 was written for children. Awe sweet.
Genesis 1 is for Moses Genesis two is for the musical group Peter Paul and Mary

Etc, etc.

Ad infinitum

Based on what?

Umm because I said so, and or well its just my interpretation whilst under the influence of a Navaho Indian peace pipe session held in a wigwam on the reservation.

Or, whilst at a the Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal Church I ingested the illegal hallucinogenic drug dimethyltrytamine under religious grounds and read Genesis1 and Genesis 2 and the TRUTH became clear to me.

We have one chap here claiming to be a Bible Literalist/fundamentalist who states that the first man, where God blew the first breath of air into his lungs, was not Adam? He goes on to claim that billions of years later God created Adam and Eve. Mind you the same chap claims that one must be under the influence of the Holy Spirit in order to see it the way he sees it.

I would like to say that you are all a very entertaining bunch of chaps and God bless you.

That said is there anyone who is willing to provide proof, primary evidence, supporting documents or what ever else you "scientists" demand from the Bible believers as admissible evidence for your outlandish claims? I will accept a picture of a crack pipe or even a picture of an empty bag of cannabis ( with cannabis resin still present) as admissible evidence in this instance your honor.

My "evidence" is the two texts themselves. (Notably the same text as the OP has alluded/eluded to) I have clearly posted the two texts in posts 170 and 171 showing and proving that a read through of the text (granted you must be at least 11 before you can read it with some basic understanding of English) is

Is not contradictory
Is not billions of years apart
Is not two separate events,
Is not two different manifestations of gods or God
Is not one for children one for grown ups,
Is not one for Moses and the other for the musical group Peter Paul and Mary

And is in actual fact simply chapter 1 and chapter 2 of quite a thrilling "biblical record" of the creation events. Further more a basic read through with a basic understanding is proof enough that chapter 1 and chapter of Genesis do not prove that the bible is inerrant.

Does it proof that God created the world? No, but that is not the point of the OP. In conclusion, who ever you believe God to be or not to be. The Op does not prove that He did not create the world either.

What this thread does prove however is that the bible detractors have one set of rules and guidelines for themselves and another for the bible believers. It would appear both are equally open to the interpreters interpretation depending on what side he/she rolled out of bed that morning.

Does this make for any meaningful debate going forward?

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by ringo, posted 09-19-2010 8:14 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 12825
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 248 of 295 (582098)
09-19-2010 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 247 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN
09-19-2010 7:06 PM


NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN writes:

That said is there anyone who is willing to provide proof, primary evidence, supporting documents or what ever else you "scientists" demand from the Bible believers as admissible evidence for your outlandish claims?


At face value, the accounts in Genesis 1 and genesis 2 are different, so the "outlandish" viewpoint is the one that claims they're not different.

Is the Big Bad Wolf in the story of the Three Little Pigs the same as the Big Bad Wolf in Little Red Riding Hood? Are the man and woman in Genesis 2 the same as the men and women in Genesis 1?

Every point of difference needs to be addressed as if it was a contradiction. The onus is on you to show that the differences are not contradictory.

But more important, the question is: Do the differences mean that the Bible is errant? You seem to have missed the point that some of us are arguing no.


"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, posted 09-19-2010 7:06 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, posted 09-19-2010 8:21 PM ringo has responded

NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2284 days)
Posts: 51
Joined: 09-14-2010


Message 249 of 295 (582099)
09-19-2010 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by ringo
09-19-2010 8:14 PM


Ringo, your not getting way with telling lies (to me at least). On face value they are not different so please provide some evidence that proves and or supports your claim that they are different on face value. I have proved that they are not different.

Stop clowning around please and thank you and prove that they are different. No one has done that in this thread nor has the OP which merely takes portions of scripture in each chapter out of context to make it appear that they contradict which is deceptive dishonest and dispicable at best.

AND NO I HAVEN'T MISSED THE POINT WHICH IS ANOTHER LIE FROM YOU. CAN YOU PLEASE STOP TELLING LIES AND MAKING FALSE OBSERVATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by ringo, posted 09-19-2010 8:14 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by ringo, posted 09-19-2010 8:34 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded
 Message 251 by Theodoric, posted 09-19-2010 8:35 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded
 Message 252 by jar, posted 09-19-2010 8:43 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 12825
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 250 of 295 (582104)
09-19-2010 8:34 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN
09-19-2010 8:21 PM


NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN writes:

On face value they are not different so please provide some evidence that proves and or supporst you calim that they are different on face value.


The order of events is different, obviously. I said "different", not "contradictory". Different is a given.

NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN writes:

I have proved that they are not different.


You've done no such thing. You've rehashed points that have been rebutted earlier in the thread. You've contributed nothing new.

The orders of events are different. That doesn't necessarily make the stories incompatible. Even if they are incompatible, that doesn't necessarily make the Bible errant.


"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi
This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, posted 09-19-2010 8:21 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5705
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 251 of 295 (582105)
09-19-2010 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN
09-19-2010 8:21 PM


Lies? What lies?
Could please tell us what lies you are talking about? Also, please show us why they are lies.
Or are we supposed to just take your say-so that Ringo is posting lies?


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, posted 09-19-2010 8:21 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28460
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 252 of 295 (582108)
09-19-2010 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN
09-19-2010 8:21 PM


The god in Genesis 1 is competent, aloof, sure, unerring, overarching, creating by an act or will alone, but also separate from the created, impersonal.

The god in Genesis 2& 3 is unsure, unaware, sometimes afraid, a tinkerer learning by doing, creating by hand from mud and magic, but also human, personal having direct interaction with the created.

Two entirely different descriptions of god.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, posted 09-19-2010 8:21 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded

NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2284 days)
Posts: 51
Joined: 09-14-2010


Message 253 of 295 (582112)
09-19-2010 8:51 PM


Moderator
I shall be making some comments to moderators about the line of "arguement" in this thread. All the best guys.

Kind regards

NOMA

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Coragyps, posted 09-19-2010 10:30 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded

Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5266
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 6.1


Message 254 of 295 (582128)
09-19-2010 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN
09-19-2010 8:51 PM


Re: Moderator
You could leave through the door where you entered, you obnoxious Kiwi.

If you'll spend 45 seconds looking around the forums, you'll find places to talk to moderators. N.B. : You aren't one, as I am not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, posted 09-19-2010 8:51 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has not yet responded

  
NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2284 days)
Posts: 51
Joined: 09-14-2010


Message 255 of 295 (582129)
09-19-2010 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Coragyps
08-24-2010 3:29 PM


Re: Chronology
What an obnoxious 62.7 year old yank. Just because I live in NZ doesn't make me a Kiwi. Another wrong assumption.

In your photo when your looking out into God's beautiful creation., what is it you looking for?? Proof of evolution? Let us know when you find any LOL. Because, I might add, if you ever did find any none of you would be circle jerking about in pathetic excuses for debates in threads like this would you? Of course you wouldn't. You'd be fending off attacks from within the Walled City by imbeciles with a death wish like we have to do day in day out.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.

Edited by NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Coragyps, posted 08-24-2010 3:29 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by jar, posted 09-19-2010 11:43 PM NOMA&NOPAAKAAN ORPHAN has responded

RewPrev1
...
1516
17
181920Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017