Genesis 1: Schematic?

There are many other questions a curious person might ask about the quoted passages from Genesis. For example, if the reason for the moon's creation was to provide light in nighttime for the inhabitants of the earth, why had God also created multiple moons of the uninhabited planets like Jupiter, Saturn, and others? Of course, the existence of those moons was unknown at the time when the Book of Genesis was written. If the writers of the Bible had known about those moons, would they still insist that the Moon was created "to rule the night" on the earth? Moreover, the alleged "rule" of the night by the moon seems rather poorly designed. On some nights the full moon is bright, but on others it decreases to a narrow sickle barely noticeable in the sky. On some nights it appears early in the evening, when it is not yet needed but on some others it shows up only toward dawn, leaving most of the night which it supposedly "rules" in complete darkness. Its rule is not strong enough to overcome the screening effect of clouds.As for the sun which, according to the quoted verses, was created "to rule the day," its rule also leaves much to be desired. It makes life unbearable in some areas, like the Gobi desert, where immense heat really "rules the day." In some other areas it barely shows up for a few hours, or not at all for six months in a row. If the purpose of the sun was to provide light in the daytime, why was its light designed to shine so unevenly?According to scientific data, stars existed long before the Earth came into existence, while verses from Genesis asserts that stars were created after the Earth.Contrary to the quoted verses, we know that the moon is not a source of light but only reflects the light of the sun, hence listing the sun and the moon in the same category of "greater and lesser lights" betrays ignorance of the author of the quoted verses.The story told in Genesis is not based on any factual evidence and requires to be accepted via blind faith. Therefore it is not any more plausible than all different stories told in the multitude of other religions.[This message has been edited by JIM, 11-23-2003]

Aha! I just found an essay written by Sol Abrams from the Internet Infidels archive that compares and contrasts the differences between data of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 schematic accounts.

quote:

---

Genesis 1 (Elohist): Order of creation in the first account.

​

1. The heaven and light were made (vs:1-5).

​

2. The firmament was constructed and the waters divided (vs:6-8).

​

3. The waters gathered into seas-- and then dry land, grass, herbs, and fruit trees created (vs:9-13).

​

4. The sun and moon created and the stars made also (vs:14-17).

​

5. Fishes, fowls, and great whales created (vs:20- 23).

​

6. Beasts, cattle, every creeping thing, man and woman created (vs:24-27).

​

Summary: Heaven and earth were created before the sun; all animals created, and then man and woman (both sexes) were created simultaneously.

​

Genesis 2 (Yahwist): Order of creation in the second account.

​

1. The heavens and the earth created (v:4).

​

2. A mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground (vs:5-6).

​

3. Man (male only) made out of dust and named Adam (v:7).

​

4. A garden planted eastward in Eden and man put into it (vs:8-17) .

​

5. Beasts and fowls created (vs:18-20).

​

6. Woman created from one of the man's ribs (vs: 21-24).

​

Summary: The man (male only) was created, then all the plants, beasts, and fowls, and finally the woman.

​

Conclusion: The two creation accounts are in obvious conflict, and the different names by which God was called in the two accounts indicate separate authorships.

---

Obviously in this day of biblical scholarship people who still think the bible is "infallible" or "reliable" or "without error" have been misinformed and should read the bible carefully for themselves.[This message has been edited by JIM, 11-23-2003]