Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2

Actually, I was not only giving my opinion, but that of much of the Christian Faith as well. For example, Episcopla Bishop Sims of the Atlanta Diocese said in his Pastorl letter on Evolution It is two different and mutually exclusive statements. Chapter 1 and 2 tell totally different stories.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Of course he could be wrong.But Genesis 1&2 still give two totally different stories, in how things were done, when things were done and what things were done at each step. I just don't see anyway around it and the issue has not been a big thing for a long time in theology. Even way back in the 50's when I was studying it no one had any problems accepting that it is not to be read literally. The two tales appear to have been from two entirely different sources, two different periods. I don't know of any source that does not accept that interpretation.Basically, GOD is saying, "Look folk, this is not a book that you should take literally. To get that point across here are two different stories in Chapters 1 & 2. I can't make it any plainer for you so here it is right up front. Read the book but don't try to make it something it isn't. The book is about WHY, it's not a history, it's not a science text, it's a religious book"

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

It's not interpretation, it's what was written. It gives me a better understanding of the Bible and what its purpose is.What purpose would I have in trying to falsify the Bible to make all the parts fit?The Bible was written by plain old humans, very much of their era, to be read by people of the era. It is idiomatic, has been edited and modified for cultural and political purposes and is a compendium of writings. It is a composite of many cultures, many traditions, many oral histories. It borrowed freely (as did Christianity later) from all of the cultures, societies, religions and traditions that surrounded the authors.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sheep were close though.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I think we also need to remember that the people writing these tales had a different idea of what accurate meant than we might apply from a 21^st century scientific perspective. This was not unusual and actually continued well into what we might consider modern times.For them, there was an underlying TRUTH. And facts, history, as we might see it simply did not play a part. This continued and can be seen in the Aurthurian legends where Arthur is said to have taken part in battles long after he would have been a dottering old man.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Common courtesy sugests that you follow forum guidelines. Successful communication requires that you present information in a form that the reader or listener can use. Good sense says fear the "Venus" of Willendorf.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion