|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Junior Member (Idle past 5015 days) Posts: 14 From: Lebanon Township, New Jersey, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Joseppi writes:
Of course you can. If there's no clear indication otherwise, the narration is assumed to be in chronological order. That's the way it's always done. It is the rule whether you like it or not. YOU CAN NOT ESTABLISH ANY CHRONOLOGY THROUGHOUT CHAPTER TWO. When you read Treasure Island, you assume that they went to the island after Jim found the map. There's no need for the text to say "and then" something else happened. Sensible people follow the narrative if there are no other signs.
Joseppi writes:
You're assuming that the two accounts "must" coincide, aren't you? You're looking for ways to reconcile the two accounts, aren't you? I didn't shoehorn anything. Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
But, the first verse of Genesis says...In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Therefore, only God can be the narrator. Nonsense. If I write "in the Opening Post Hepteract said..." it is not Hepteract narrating. The narrator is the one recounting the fable. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4943 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Assumption of chronology in chapter one was never assumed by any rational person. It is defined by the terms used not by the whim of the reader.
When one reads the second chapter one easily notes that there is no assigned chronology. Instead, the subject of the generations is presented and the things important to understanding how and why are provided. Once again I note that you provide no evidence of any correctness to your assumption. And, the notion that assumptions are to be assumed is, of course, ludicrous. So, you and your assumed rule is for your buds alone. Me, I assume nothing. Your Treasure Island contrast is an example of what I already informed you of...in case some didn't know..which is as it appeared from my reading of this thread...that is, that there is a contextual context forced by the context.Your notion that the whole chapter has such a contextual force is not evident in the chapter at all. Which is why you don't present them, I suppose. I don't assume anything.The context of the narrative changed and the narrator told you what the new subject was. Disregarding what the text told you about the change in subject is what causes such simplistic errors in comprehension. I am not looking for any reconciliationa at all. I am pointing out that the notion of a need for reconciliation is merely a not very well disguised red herring. The whole argument is bogus. As with lawyers, when biased folks don't like what the truth is they start inventing things and hoping no one notices.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4943 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Jar,
What you call nonsense is what you can't refute and so you assume an air of some kind of...superiority? I'm not impressed. I view you as incapable of dealing with the task at hand and therefore, in being surrounded by your friends who have apparently allowed you to think you're something special your reasoning powers have devolved into pontification of your assumptions. So, with the supposition that none of you have any actual logic or evidence to support your notions, but only some measure of vitriol, I will return tomorro to see if anyone has responded rationally. And by rational I don't mean off topic opinions by certified opinionators.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I beg your pardon?
Here is the content you are replying to.
jar writes: Joseppi writes: But, the first verse of Genesis says...In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.Therefore, only God can be the narrator. Nonsense. If I write "in the Opening Post Hepteract said..." it is not Hepteract narrating. The narrator is the one recounting the fable. The narrator of something is the person telling the story. Genesis 1 was not written in the first person. God is not the narrator. It does not say "In the beginning I created the heaven and the earth..." Here is Genesis 1.
quote: Note that it is not written as though God were the narrator. This really is basic reading comprehension stuff. God is NOT the narrator. Edited by jar, : fix sub-title Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Joseppi writes:
Exactly. In chapter one, the chronology is laid out by the numbers. Assumption of chronology in chapter one was never assumed by any rational person. It is defined by the terms used not by the whim of the reader. But in chapter two, there is no assigned chronology. Everybody has to make assumptions about the chronology. I'm saying that the most reasonable first assumption is that the events happened in the order that they were narrated.
Joseppi writes:
You assume that I disagree with you. I don't assume anything. If you read the thread, I think you'll find that I haven't taken a position. I'm telling you that your approach is wrong. I don't particularly care about your conclusion. In fact, I tend to agree with you that chronology is a poor argument for a contradiction between chapter one and chapter two. I think you've accidentally arrived at the right conclusion by the wrong reasoning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi ERIC,
Sorry about that first quote.
hERICtic writes: I'm sorry, I'm just not following you. Every day has a morning and evening. Every day has a light period and a dark one. Its a perfect description of a typical day. I asked all those questions which you didnt respond to, but every time an evening and morning are used in scripture, it refers to a 24 hour day. Every time "yom" is used with a number, it also refers to a 24 hour day. To suggest the author is not refering to a 24 hour day is twisting and/or ignoring what Genesis states. According to God every day has a light period and a dark period. According to your interpertation the first day which started with the evening in Genesis 1:2 and ended with the morning of the light period of day 2 would only contain 12 hours. But God declared the light period (DAY) in which God created the Heaven and the Earth combined with the dark period that ended with the light period of day two as day one.
Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, The Heaven and the Earth existed at Genesis 1:2 as the land mass was covered with water. Genesis 2:4 says the Heaven and the Earth was created in the day that the LORD God made the Earth and the Heavens. So the Heaven and the Earth had to be created in the light period that ended with evening found in Genesis 1:2.
Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. From Gods declaration of day one in Genesis 1:5 all days were made of a light period that ended with evening and a dark period that ended with the light period of the following day which lasted almost 24 hours.
hERICtic writes: What exactly is your stance? Is it a 6-24 hour day creation or not? The first day in Genesis 1:5 that starts with evening and ends with morning was only 12 hours unless you add the light period that Genesis 1:1 took place in. All other days from then until now has been almost 24 hours. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Hi PD,
Purple Dawn writes: Show evidence that the 7th day hasn't ended for God. Genesis 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. The Hebrew word kalah which means,1) to accomplish, cease, consume, determine, end, fail, finish, be complete, be accomplished, be ended, be at an end, be finished, be spent. I can find no verse in the Bible that states God has resumed His creation work. Therefore He is still resting from His work.
Purple Dawn writes: Show evidence that there has always been light where God "is." John writes: 1John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. John writes: Revelation 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. These texts declare God is light. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3457 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
ICANT writes: Message 62 On day seven God ceases His creation work and is still ceased from His creation work so for God that day has not ended yet. Our system of keeping time has no effect on God as there has always been light where He is. Just on great big eternal light period with a little space marked off with time in it for us humans. quote:You're assuming that he wishes to continue creating. The story has already made it clear the length of time a day takes. The story doesn't tell us that the 7th day is any longer. The story isn't about what God does after the 7th day, the story is about the first seven. There is no information in the story to support your contention that the seventh day has not ended yet. quote:Light represents what is good and true, while darkness represents what is evil and false. See John 3:19-21. The verse isn't speaking of the common meaning of the word light. The verse in revelation is a vision. Notice it says the glory of God will lighten it, not God. Glory does not provide luminescence. What you've shown is creative writing, not the common meaning of light. Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it. -- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4943 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Jar,
Narrator was a bad choice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4943 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Ringo,
When I read chapter I find some chronology.But, in many parts I find that only information is added so as to enhance the understanding of why God did as he did. I can see why you think I assumed to disagree with you. However, I would put that I misunderstood your meaning.It appeared to me that you were simply saying that chapter two must be assumed to be chronological. What I don't think is right is, to not let the text speak for itself and/or to apply any bias to it. Sorry, if I misunderstood your point. Edited by Joseppi, : Better wording. I hope.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4943 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
ICANT,
You quoted this...Genesis 2:4 says the Heaven and the Earth was created in the day that the LORD God made the Earth and the Heavens.And said.... quote: In my understanding the phrase "in the day" refers to the whole time period thus far presented.One evidence of this is that verse one says God created the heaven and the earth. And in that verse heaven is singular. And in verse eight the firmament is named Heaven. So at that point the there arises the plurality of heavens. I consider that Heaven to be the atmosphere of the earth. Whereas, in verse fourteen of chapter one it says that... Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, for days, and for years.... So, this other lower case heaven in verse fourteen is the next heaven beyond the atmosphere.Again there is now a plurality of heavens brought about by the creation of firmament. You proposed that Genesis 1-2 is part of one of the days of creation.My understanding is that Genesis 1-2 is of unknown length in which no marking of time is denoted. And that in the process of time God's Spirit moved on the face of the waters. And after that time God turned on the light in the deep where the earth was under many waters not yet divided by firmament, and thus a part of the original heaven noted in verse one. That the turning on of the light was the beginning of the first day. I consider the days of creation week to be 24 hour periods since, they are limited by use of the common man's understanding of an "evening and a morning".But, that this measure of time was not manifested till there were the firmament lights with which to do so. I see no problem with God using the measure of a common twenty four hour day before there were lights available, because as with any designer the goal is in mind long before the design is seen by all. I consider Heaven in verse eight to be capitalized to indicate that this earth is the ordained place where God is to dwell.The capitalization denoting ownership. Edited by Joseppi, : No reason given. Edited by Joseppi, : Clarity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 735 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
I consider Heaven in verse eight to be capitalized to indicate that this earth is the ordained place where God is to dwell. The capitalization denoting ownership. Ancient Hebrew didn't have capital letters. Well, or capitals were all they had....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Joseppi writes:
That's what I'm saying. You're not letting the text speak for itself. There is an implied chronology in chapter two that you're just handwaving away. It appeared to me that you were simply saying that chapter two must be assumed to be chronological.What I don't think is right is, to not let the text speak for itself and/or to apply any bias to it. You seem to be thinking that you can just use the chronology from chapter one. I'm saying that you should respect the text and accept the implied chronology in the narrative. The question isn't whether or not the two chronologies disagree. It's why they disagree. Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joseppi Member (Idle past 4943 days) Posts: 50 From: New Albany, In, USA Joined: |
Coragyps,
Then they had another means I would suspect.Regardless, I don't read Hebrew and am not retranslating.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024