|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Genesis Creation Stories: Sequence Contradictions? | |||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
As has already been pointed out to you, the animals were created before man (Genesis 1) so Adam was already in the company of animals. He wasn't, though. Gen 2 makes that perfectly clear. There are no animals until God forms them out of the ground in an effort to find Adam a helpmeet at his level. I realize you "pointed it out", but you're mistaken. That's simply not what the Bible says. Gen 2 is very clear that Adam predates the creation of the animals, because they were created to be his helpers, etc. That's why he gets to name them.
It doesn't take a genius to see that Genesis 2 is the continuation of Genesis 1 since it begins like this: But it does take a scholar, apparently, to know that the chapter breaks are not from the original text, and can therefore be essentially disregarded. There's obviously two stories there. The second one starts at Genesis 2:4.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RustyShackelford  Inactive Member |
Isn't that interesting? Earth is a brand new creation
Who says? Certainly not the supposed second chronology of Genisis 2, which doesn't even give an ACCOUNT of the creation of Earth. a paradise where everything is "very good." Except, there's this desert where no crops are in the field because it hasn't rained and there's no one to do the plowing. It's a brand new world but there's already this place, this landmark in the desert, called Eden. God plants a garden not far from this landmark, like there's no better place for a garden, a place without rain. Then He puts the newly created man in the garden to do the weeding. Compare this with the role of mankind according to the first scenario (Genesis 1:26-28). See, for the most part, the only way you atheists can get the Bible to contradict itself is by reading a lot into it. The Bible never said there was no plant life before Adam.......it said "there was no herb of the field", or something to that extent, because it hadn;t rained yet, and there was no man to till the earth. Then the Bible goes on to depict an alternate irrigation method, something about a "mist that the Lord sent up from the ground"........now, it's perfectly clear to any person of moderate intelligence (especially ancient Hebrews who made their livelihoods from the Earth) that wild plants don't need men to till the ground in order to grow. It's also clear that there would be no need for an alternate method of irrigation if there was no plant life on earth. The apparent conclusion of these facts? "Herb of the field" was a reference specifically to horticulturally grown plantlife, and not of plant life itself.
Compare this with the role of mankind according to the first scenario (Genesis 1:26-28). What role? "Go forth and multiply"?
In the second scenario there is dry land, everywhere, and a river is brought forth. Prove it. Other than a vague reference to lack of rain, you have no proof for this. In fact, all you've managed to due is bring up ANOTHER weakness for the argument that Genisis 2 is a seperate chronolgy........that being that, apart from not accounting for the creation of heaven, earth, plant life, cattle and sea life, Genisis 2 ALSO doesn't account for the creation of oceans, lakes and other such bodies of water.
No one speaks ancient Hebrew Just goes to show your level of Biblical knowledge.....
but so what? You're right......no need to understand a language in order to accurately translate it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RustyShackelford  Inactive Member |
Your arrogance doesn't serve you well Doctrbill. What else do you expect of a man who has to point out with every post that he holds a doctoral degree? "Atheists are just like theists; they find it highly disturbing when you try to weaken their faith." Myself, a couple minutes ago I think it's cute that Sidelined changed his quote to be in direct opposition of mine. Internal thought "I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets...I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." The Nicene Creed Winner of the LSS's 2004 Longest Signature Award
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RustyShackelford  Inactive Member |
There's obviously two stories there. The second one starts at Genesis 2:4. Yes, the second story begins "this is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created".......and then goes on to not mention the creation of the heavens or the earth. Very logical. Don't you think it makes more sense to say that verse 4 was just a segway between the overall creation story and the detailed account of the creation of man? This message has been edited by RustyShackelford, 11-07-2004 02:32 PM "Atheists are just like theists; they find it highly disturbing when you try to weaken their faith." Myself, a couple minutes ago I think it's cute that Sidelined changed his quote to be in direct opposition of mine. Internal thought "I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets...I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." The Nicene Creed Winner of the LSS's 2004 Longest Signature Award
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Don't you think it makes more sense to say that verse 4 was just a segway between the overall creation story and the detailed account of the creation of man? Since the accounts directly contradict each other, no, I don't think that makes more sense.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RustyShackelford  Inactive Member |
They directly contradict each other.......on one minor detail of chronology. That's like saying that two eyewitnesses who give the exact same testimony, except one of them claims "the robber grabbed his gun so he could shoot the man" and the other said "the robber had his gun so he could shoot the man", are telling different stories........
I think it makes far more sense to say that there was a bit of detail flubbed in Genisis 2 than to say that a supposed creation story which only accounts for the existance of man, birds and wild animals was originally intended to be read as an entirely seperate chronolgy..... "Atheists are just like theists; they find it highly disturbing when you try to weaken their faith." Myself, a couple minutes ago I think it's cute that Sidelined changed his quote to be in direct opposition of mine. Internal thought "I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets...I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." The Nicene Creed Winner of the LSS's 2004 Longest Signature Award
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
They directly contradict each other.......on one minor detail of chronology. That's like saying that two eyewitnesses who give the exact same testimony, except one of them claims "the robber grabbed his gun so he could shoot the man" and the other said "the robber had his gun so he could shoot the man", are telling different stories........ No. It's more like telling your mom that first you went to the store and then to the barber, and then telling your dad that first you went to the barber and then went to the store. When your parents compare notes about your story, they're going to have a pretty good argument that you went to neither place at all, and instead, went smoking with your friends behind the liquor store, like they told you not to do.
I think it makes far more sense to say that there was a bit of detail flubbed in Genisis 2 Yes, that's exactly the point. The genesis storytellers flubbed the story; introduced mistakes and errors. That's why we can't trust the genesis account to be true - who knows how many errors it might contain?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
bob_gray Member (Idle past 5043 days) Posts: 243 From: Virginia Joined: |
If you don't wish to type up the first two chapters as summary you can find a large part of it here:
http://EvC Forum: Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2 -->EvC Forum: Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2 That discussion I think also addressed some of your questions in this thread. I would pay particular attention to Rrhain's posts as he appears very knowledgeable in these matters. Don't let his sarcasm detract from the information in his posts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RustyShackelford  Inactive Member |
Yes, that's exactly the point. The genesis storytellers flubbed the story; introduced mistakes and errors. MISTAKE and ERROR..........SINGULAR.
No. It's more like telling your mom that first you went to the store and then to the barber, and then telling your dad that first you went to the barber and then went to the store. This is true.......and would that little flub have made my account of how my day went invalid?
When your parents compare notes about your story, they're going to have a pretty good argument that you went to neither place at all, and instead, went smoking with your friends behind the liquor store, like they told you not to do. Or maybe I just flubbed a small, unimportant detail, and the account of my day is still very accurate? "Atheists are just like theists; they find it highly disturbing when you try to weaken their faith." Myself, a couple minutes ago I think it's cute that Sidelined changed his quote to be in direct opposition of mine. Internal thought "I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets...I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." The Nicene Creed Winner of the LSS's 2004 Longest Signature Award
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
This is true.......and would that little flub have made my account of how my day went invalid? It certainly makes any claim of your inerrancy or trustworthiness suspect. If you can't get your story straight, you're either lying to your mom, lying to your dad, or both.
Or maybe I just flubbed a small, unimportant detail, and the account of my day is still very accurate? Chronology is a significant detail. It's the difference between a story that accurately reflects reality, and a story that is a lie. Don't you ever watch cop shows on TV? Half of the time they catch murderers because they messed up the order of their story. It's an easy thing to do if the whole story is a lie, but it's something that someone telling a true story would never do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RustyShackelford  Inactive Member |
It certainly makes any claim of your inerrancy or trustworthiness suspect. Flubbing a minor detail makes me a liar or a moron who can't even recall the events of the day correctly, huh? Hyperbole. And I never CLAIMED to be inerrant.......just like I don't CLAIM that the Bible, after years of translation, et al. is inerrant in its current form.
Don't you ever watch cop shows on TV? Half of the time they catch murderers because they messed up the order of their story. If it's a SIGNIFICANT detail, yes.......whether or not God created animals for man AFTER or BEFORE he actually created man is not........
but it's something that someone telling a true story would never do. You mean to tell me you've never flubbed a small detail while telling a story? That's straight BS. "Atheists are just like theists; they find it highly disturbing when you try to weaken their faith." Myself, a couple minutes ago I think it's cute that Sidelined changed his quote to be in direct opposition of mine. Internal thought "I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets...I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." The Nicene Creed Winner of the LSS's 2004 Longest Signature Award
|
|||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2794 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
Greetings Prattie,
Welcome to the forum. What I will share with you here is a personal opinion, an educated guess for which I offer supporting evidence. As far as I know, this is my own hypothesis, and it is not yet ready for prime time. I am happy to share it with you here, because in my attempt to show you why I believe it, I will be forced to research the text for specific evidences and will be challenged to respond to your objections, if any. And now, here's the dirty little secret:
The second chapter of Genesis (beginning at verse four) is not about creation of the universe but rather a poetic legend regarding the origin of the Hebrew race, beginning with its earliest ancestor (circa 2400 BC): a Sumerian plantation worker and his sister/wife. The events described in the story predate the Hebrew race. The story doubtless began as an oral tradition and underwent many changes before being committed to writing. After that we may safely assume it continued to evolve. We cannot say how many times the text was revised and edited but we know that it has been retouched. As is, it contains so many idioms, obscure terms, and figures of speech that it may, for practical purposes, be indecipherable. The most dramatic changes in the story have occured during translation. The only way to even begin understanding it, is to familiarize oneself with the 'science,' technology, religion, law, and customs of ancient civilization. That said, I will address your specific question regarding Cain and Wife. This is what I think I know. Nod is Hebrew for 'wandering.' Thus: Cain went to live in the land of wandering. As I write, it occurs to me that this may suggest a nomadic lifestyle. That seems to be supported by the rest of the story. He was condemned, by the LORD, to be "a fugitive and a vagabond." Sounds a bit like a gypsy doesn't it? But Cain isn't satisfied with nomadic life. He eventually builds a city which he names after his first-born son: Enoch. (Gen. 4:12-16) I would not suggest that incest didn't occur. That it did is plentifully evident. But it is not necessary to imply incest in this case. There were lots of other people around. In fact, civilization was already well established when Adam and Eve went to work on the LORD's plantation. db
Edited to delete blooper. This message has been edited by doctrbill, 11-07-2004 03:56 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Flubbing a minor detail makes me a liar or a moron who can't even recall the events of the day correctly, huh? If you can't recall the events of the day correctly, then by definition, you're someone who can't recall the events of the day correctly. Are you asking me if telling a lie makes you a liar? Yes, it does, obviously. We're not talking about a mistake, here. We're talking about one of the most crucial details of the story - when things happened. How can you argue that the exact order of events, in a story that is about the order of events, is insignificant?
And I never CLAIMED to be inerrant.......just like I don't CLAIM that the Bible, after years of translation, et al. is inerrant in its current form. I never said you did. But that's the context of the discussion. Get over yourself. Sometimes I'm talking to people who are not you, you know?
You mean to tell me you've never flubbed a small detail while telling a story? That's straight BS. I've never gotten the order of events completely backwards, especially when that's the crux of the story.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2794 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
Genisis 2, ... doesn't even give an ACCOUNT of the creation of Earth. "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth ..." Genesis 2:4,5 KJV ... the only way you atheists can get the Bible to contradict itself is by reading a lot into it. Are you suggesting that you aren't reading a lot into it?
... it said "there was no herb of the field", or something to that extent, It said: "every plant of the field before it was in the earth" vs. 5
... something about a "mist that the Lord sent up from the ground"........ It said: "a mist went up from the earth" vs. 6 You are reading the Lord into it. I'd call that reading a lot into it.
quote: What role? "Go forth and multiply"? I see that besides reading a lot into it, you are also reading a lot out of it. For the benefit of those who don't have a Bible at hand (are you one of them?): Here is what it says (RSV),
"Let them have dominion ... over all the earth. ...
The point being that in the first scenario humans rule. They dominate. They are lords of the earth, not cotton-pickers on someone else's plantation.
Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion ... over every living thing that moves upon the earth." Just goes to show your level of Biblical knowledge..... I'm more interested in yours at the moment. db
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RustyShackelford  Inactive Member |
"These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth ..." Genesis 2:4,5 KJV THAT is an account for the creation of the heavens and the earth as much as Genisis 1:1 is.........
It said: "every plant of the field before it was in the earth" vs. 5 And it's clear from context that "field" refers to man tilled ground.
It said: "a mist went up from the earth" vs. 6 You are reading the Lord into it. I'd call that reading a lot into it. Riiiiight, God created the heavens, the earth.......but MIST, he couldn't handle THAT shit........
"Let them have dominion ... over all the earth. ... Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion ... over every living thing that moves upon the earth." The point being that in the first scenario humans rule. They dominate. They are lords of the earth, not cotton-pickers on someone else's plantation. Let me get this straight.......in Genisis 1, man was given dominion over every thing on the earth and commanded to multiply......in Genisis 2, every thing on the earth is created for him, and he's commanded to multiply....... HUGE difference. "Atheists are just like theists; they find it highly disturbing when you try to weaken their faith." Myself, a couple minutes ago I think it's cute that Sidelined changed his quote to be in direct opposition of mine. Internal thought "I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets...I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." The Nicene Creed Winner of the LSS's 2004 Longest Signature Award
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024