What Genesis Two Says

Supposedly doesn't cut it, Trixie.
If you itemize all of the work you did each day in your work week, beginning with day one you would have a sequential list of events which you did.One through six = sequentialThen If you referred to certain aspects of what you did on day three and then something about day two and perhaps then something on your Friday, that would not be sequential.Three, two, six = non-sequential. Savvy?That's what you have regarding Genesis one and Genesis two. It's as that regarding animals/man etcSo far as detail, Detail was the purpose of Genesis two, detailing certain aspects pertaining to the weeks aggregate work, etc. .

The Genesis 1 story has absolutely nothing to do with the Genesis 2 story and was actually written much latter in an entirely different context and theology.The issue is "What does Genesis 2 say?"There are no days in the Genesis 2 story.Genesis 2 is NOT about the sacred week.

Yes it does. Here's the deal about translators. Too many of them take it upon themselves to interpret what was written in the oldest manuscripts from which they translated rather than to do their rightful job of translating what was written in those manuscripts.Back when the NIV was being translated, one of the NIV translator spoke in our SS class in Southern Ca. He said something that roused me and I told him so afterward. He said something like, "we are not so interested in publishing the letter of the text as we are the message of the text. Essentially what he was saying is "we will interpret for you what we think the text means. Thus, the NIV is not reliable so far as literacy.For example, most other OT translators, including the KJV and the NIV people took it upon themselves to remove YHWH/Yahweh/Jehovah, adoni/lord/master, removing the actual proper name of the Biblical god Jehovah over 6000 times in the OT.That name was not in the Biblical text in Genesis, however until a later time when men began calling on the name of God etc.I use the old 1901 ASV because it is the most literal of all translations to the oldest (Alexandrian) manuscripts, some of which did not exist until 1901. Nevertheless, the KJV which was from the Nestles or Received text also removes Gods proper name.Genesis, as I understand was not a Hebrew Text which is, perhaps God's proper name was not in the chapters at hand.IMO, all of this fuss by Biblical skeptics is strainings of gnats and swallowings of camels as Jesus charged the nit picking Pharasees and Saducees: anything in the futile attempt to discredit the Biblical record but in his case, to discredit him.It's as simple as one, two three/three, one, two: sequential/non-sequential.So on and on will this thread will likely go, debating the straining of Biblical gnats, all the while rejecting the important recorded cache of pertinent data such as the fulfilled prophecies, archeological discoveries, etc, etc..However, this thread will be most interesting if we can hone in on certain aspects and implications of what Genesis one and Genesis two do state. Some of that is coming up in posts posted and I hope to respond to as many as I can. My time on the computer is limited, so please bear with me, as I plan to address pertinent points posted. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, but in this case "supposedly" does cut it. The language around the account in Gen 1 makes it clear that it is supposedly sequential - i.e., that's what it purports to be. The language around the account in Gen 2 makes it clear it is supposedly sequential.The reason that "supposedly" does cut it is that both can't be right and yet the language of both make it clear that the story is being told sequentially. So which one is is right out of the two supposedly sequential stories?

So here is the ASV version of Genesis 2.

quote:

---

Genesis 2

​

1 And the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

​

2 And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

​

3 And God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it; because that in it he rested from all his work which God had created and made.

​

4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.

​

5 And no plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up; for Jehovah God had not caused it to rain upon the earth: and there was not a man to till the ground;

​

6 but there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

​

7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

​

8 And Jehovah God planted a garden eastward, in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

​

9 And out of the ground made Jehovah God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

​

10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became four heads.

​

11 The name of the first is Pishon: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;

​

12 and the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

​

13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Cush.

​

14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth in front of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

​

15 And Jehovah God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

​

16 And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

​

17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

​

18 And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.

​

19 And out of the ground Jehovah God formed every beast of the field, and every bird of the heavens; and brought them unto the man to see what he would call them: and whatsoever the man called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

​

20 And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; but for man there was not found a help meet for him.

​

21 And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof:

​

22 and the rib, which Jehovah God had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

​

23 And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

​

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

​

25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

---

Still sequential, step by step, the god character creates man, then plants, then animals then woman.

Jar you just don't get it. You and some others totally miss the purpose of this thread.Percy, et al alleges contradition relative to Genesis one and two. because he and they think Genesis two should have the same data and sequence as Genesis one in order to be compatible.Buzsaw explains that the only actual sequence of God's work as to which day of the Genesis week each thing was created in only in Genesis one. Water covered cold planet gets heated up and atmosphere is created etc. No detail given pertaing to any given day in Genesis one. Oceans and dry land emerge on surface, plants come up, sun, moon becomes source of light replacing what God's Spirit provided, animals and man etc. That's the six day prolog of creation events. .Genesis two is as I explained to Trixie. It is not an actual secquence of the creation days so it is not sequential to the actual days each thing was created. It was articulating various aspects of this and that day's event.As I explained to Trixie, just because she might add things about one day or the other after the week was over does not mean that comments made relative to the seqence of events must be in the same order or the same brevity of the events prologed in Genesis one. And to think: In POM Percy alleges it's Buzsaw who can't comprehend. Sigh!

I see my jeer stalker, Theodoric tabbed his usual jeer to my message.Hey Theodoric, pray tell, what, pertaining to my message, do you find problematic? Perhaps you can enlighten me, as to where I err.ABE: Oh yea, I forgot; Subbie. Subbie, What about you? Any enlightment from you? Inquiring minds need to know.Yes!!. The site's top troll weighs in. Between the three of you, perhaps I will receive some enlightment!! Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

It was the gratuitous snark at the end that got me, Buz old bean. I wasn't going to say anything until that part. The irony of you criticizing someone for pointing out you don't understand anything was too much to let pass by.And I never would have posted this bit if you hadn't asked.

Hi, Paul. Is NIV known for doing that? I don't know much about it, to be honest.

Buzsaw,Any fool can see that Chapter 2 does not discuss creation days. Nobody is making an argument based on that point.When the verses say that God did x, then y, that is an explicit statement that x came before y. I would expect that at least some literalists would insist on that such an ordering not be ignored. If you aren't such a literalist, perhaps we can just note that point and move on.In this case the text, at least in the translations cited in this thread, says that Adam had no help meet. God made some animals, but there was still no help meet for Adam. Then God made a help meet.Regardless of on which one of the 7 creation days the above occurred, the text clearly describes an order of creation that is man, at least some of the animals, and then woman.Yes it is true that Chapter 2 silent about a lot of other things that are described in Chapter 1. But if we are only looking for contradictions, we need not look at the things that are not described both in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2.If you disagree, it would be helpful if you made your point by referring to the text rather than tossing around gratuitous slams and accusations that others cannot read.Please leave the testy shtick to me. You cannot pull it off.

I've certainly seen it said (and this particular verse is put forward as an example).

quote:

---

Yes it does. Here's the deal about translators. Too many of them take it upon themselves to interpret what was written in the oldest manuscripts from which they translated rather than to do their rightful job of translating what was written in those manuscripts.

---

Which is pretty much the attitude that you are taking here. Only you have even less justification than the translators - who can at least argue that idiom requires interpretation and that non-literal translation of it is a better way of conveying the message to people who are not educated in the history and society of the Bible authors. (Although in this particular case the NIV doesn't have that justification)Your interpret Genesis 2 as being non-sequential BECAUSE it contradicts Genesis 1. You have no justification in the text of Genesis 2 - which clearly resists such an interpretation as I and others have pointed out. Thus your argument begs the question, and is contrary to the actual text of the Bible.

quote:

---

Genesis, as I understand was not a Hebrew Text which is, perhaps God's proper name was not in the chapters at hand.

---

Yet another case where your understanding fails you.

Buz, you should be dealing with the argument I made that the language of Gen 1 and Gen 2 make both accounts sequential and therefore contradictory. Instead, all you've done is say "You're wrong, Gen 2 is not sequential." We already know you think that, so repeating it doesn't really help.You need to deal with statements which describe a situation which God notices, doesn't like and then goes about sorting. That is, by necessity, sequential. It makes no sense to claim that God made animals then made man then saw man was alone so made animals. If animals were the solution to the alone problem, there couldn't already be animals, otherwise there would be no alone problem.So yes, while Gen 2 doesn't list what was done on what day as Gen 1 does, the language used demands a sequential understanding. Can you explain to me how in this description the first happening is "Joe painted it green". "Joe X painted X pink then Joe noticed X was too pink so Joe says X is too pink I will paint it green then Joe painted it green"That statemet doesn't have a list of time points when each thing happened, yet it's clearly sequential based on the language used. If he'd made it green as an initial starting point, he'd never have "noticed" it was too pink, he'd never have stated it was "too pink" and he wouldn't have had to paint it green to solve the pinkness problem. You seem to be suggesting that it isn't sequential, therefore the first happening could be that Joe painted X green. That is completely illogical, ignores the grammar, the context and what the words actually say.The reason we are "straining at these gnats" is because it's the subject of the thread. Fulfiled prophesies and archaelogical evidence are not the topic of this thread, as you should know, since you started it and gave it the title "What Genesis Two Says". So deal with the content of my post instead of just parroting that "it's not sequential" when it clearly is, or complaining that we're not dealing with off-topic material.

You dare complain about snark and criticism and you osted that crap?Your cluelessness knows no bounds.95% of your posts have NO substance.ABE
Freaking hilarious. You criticize people for jeering you, but look at all the jeers you have given on this thread alone. Truly you are a Poe.Edited by Theodoric, : Buz's overwhelming hypocrisyEdited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

I posted all of Genesis 2 from the version of the Bible you claim to have read, and it is filled with sequential events; the god character does this and then the god character does that.Remember, the story found in Genesis 2 was written hundreds, maybe even thousands of years before the story found in Genesis 1.And yes, the two stories do contradict each other; they describe two different gods, different orders of creation, different methods of creation; the two stories even have entirely different purposes and creation is nothing but a plot device in either of them.