Creation accounts

[Guest aereo]

I have a personal problem with the bible being the inspired word of God when contradictions seem to prove it otherwise. The verses I have a particular problem with are found in the first two chapters of Genesis.

 

Chapter one of Genesis sets out an order of creation that has light (v3), Water (v6), Land (v9), Plants and trees (v11), sun and moon (v14) and animals (v24) being created in that order. Only after God has created all of these does he decide to create "man in our image"(v26).

Straight away in chapter 2 verses 4-5 we have another creation account that contradicts what we have just read. It seems that "no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up...." and then he creates Man. So in what order were things created in?

 

Also, why are man and woman created by "God" , together, in chapter 1 v 27 and man and woman are created separately by "Lord God" in chapter 2 verse 7 (for the man) and verses 21-22 (for the woman).

 

Why are there even two creation accounts in the first place, one after another?

 

Any replies on the topic would be gratefully received

[Ouroboros]

Okay, here a couple of explanations:

 

The natural explanation is that they represent two different oral traditions of the Creation, that were brought together when the book was written. (Mythra or MrGrinch probably know when it happened)

 

The other, and religious, explanation is that the first chapter is the "sequence" in how God created everything, while the second chapter is ordered by "importance" (or something like that). Or a re-telling the story in a different manner because the chapter is supposed to give another angle to the whole concept.

 

Or another explanation is that the author screwed up, suffering from severe dementia, he wrote one story one night, and forgot about it when he wrote the second one the next night.

 

Or maybe God created two worlds...

[Checkmate]

Before a Christian™ chimes in with their "version" of the Truth™, I'll give the most obvious and honest answer.

 

There were TWO seperate WRITERS for Genesis. (And Moses weren't either one of them, in my opinion.)

 

In chapter one through 2:3 "God" is utilized. In the Hebrew this word is Elohim. (This author is referred to as "E".)

 

From 2:4 onward the new writer for the fable prefers "Lord God". Jehovah Elohim. (This author is known as "J".)

 

Two different accounts because of TWO different authors. Real simple.

[Checkmate]

Okay, here a couple of explanations:

 

The natural explanation is that they represent two different oral traditions of the Creation, that were brought together when the book was written. (Mythra or MrGrinch probably know when it happened)

..............

103235[/snapback]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Hans, but I don't know about the WHEN portion. (I MIGHT be able to research and find out if it's important.)

 

And yes, I forgot to add that not only were there TWO writers, known as "J" and "E", but there is presumed to be some sort of "editor" who collated the entire mish-mash. Which explains the confusion and blending.

 

Christians despise this "explanation" of ours, prefering to stick with "inspiration". But if THIS is "inspired" then "god" needs to go back to college for some much needed learnin'!

[Checkmate]

More info.

 

Words in [brackets] are mine, added for clarity.

 

The Bible makes it clear that the people we know as the ancient Israelites were a confederation of ethnic groups, bound together principally by their loyalty to Yahweh, the God of Moses.  The biblical account was written down centuries later, however, in about the eighth century BCE [before common era], though it certainly drew on earlier narrative sources.

 

During the nineteenth century, some German biblical scholars developed a critical method which discerned four different sources in the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.  These were later collated into the final text of what we know as the Pentateuch during the fifth century BCE.  This form of criticism has come in for a good deal of harsh treatment, but nobody has yet come up with a more satisfactory theory which explains why there are two quite different accounts of key biblical events, such as the Creation and the Flood, and why the Bible sometimes contradicts itself. 

 

The two earliest biblical authors, whose work is found in Genesis and Exodus, were probably writing during the eighth century [bCE], though some would give them an earlier date.  One is known as “J” because he calls his God “Yahweh,” [JHWH] the other “E” since he prefers to use the more formal divine title “Elohim.”  By the eighth century[bCE], the Israelites had divided Canaan into two separate kingdoms.  J was writing in the southern kingdom of Judah, while E came from the northern kingdom of Israel.

 

The other two sources for the Pentateuch are known as Deuteronomist (D) and Priestly (P).

[Checkmate]

It appears that I'm just talking to myself here, but I don't care. I love this subject.

 

HOW PATHETIC IS THIS?

 

Fundamentalist Baptist and biblical inerrantist, David Cloud defends the “Moses” scholarship of the Pentateuch.

 

Source: Way of Life

 

The critical approach to the Old Testament has become prevalent among Bible commentators, even among many who claim to be Evangelicals. They deny, for example, that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, and claim that the first five books of the Bible were not fashioned into their present condition until centuries later the death of Moses. Consider the following example [of biblical criticism] --

 

    "The Old Testament may be described as the literary expression of the religious life of ancient Israel. ... Probably as early as the time of David and Solomon, out of a matrix of myth, legend, and history, there had appeared the earliest written form of the story of the saving acts of God from Creation to the conquest of the Promised Land, an account which later in modified form became a part of Scripture. But it was to be a long time before the idea of Scripture arose and the Old Testament took its present form. ... The process by which the Jews became 'the people of the Book' was gradual, and the development is shrouded in the mists of history and tradition. ... The date of the final compilation of the Pentateuch or Law, which was the first corpus or larger body of literature that came to be regarded by the Jews as authoritative Scripture, is uncertain, although some have conservatively dated it at the time of the Exile in the sixth century" (The New Oxford Annotated Bible RSV, 1973, Edited by Bruce Metzger and Herbert May, "Introduction to the Old Testament").

 

According to the editors of the New Oxford Annotated Bible, the Pentateuch was formed "out of a matrix of myth, legend, and history" and was not completed until the sixth century before Christ--hundreds of years after Moses. This is a humanistic view of Scripture which denies what it says about itself.

 

For the following three reasons we [Christians] can be certain that the historical Moses wrote the Pentateuch:

 

  1. The books themselves claim to have been written by Moses (Ex. 24:4,7; 34:27-28; Nu. 33:2; De. 1:1-5; 4:4-5; 31:9,24-26).

  2. Other O.T. books claim Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Jos. 1:7; 8:32-35; Jud. 3:4; 1 Kings 2:3; Ezra 2:6; Neh. 9:14; Mal. 4:4).

  3. The N.T. claims Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Mk. 12:26; Lk. 16:29-31; Jn. 1:17; 5:45-47; 8:5; Ac. 15:21; 2 Co. 3:15).

 

In the face of these plain Scriptures, we reject every Bible teacher who claims that Moses did not write the Pentateuch. Regardless of what label such a teacher wears, whether Evangelical or Baptist or Fundamentalist, we reject him as a false teacher and an apostate. We believe that the exhortation in Jude 3 to "earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints" requires this action.

 

In summary Mr. Cloud’s “argument” is, “Moses wrote it, because the bible says Moses wrote it.” Na-nana-boo-boo! This, as you know, is known as “circular reasoning.” A logical fallacy.

 

Another similar logical fallacy is termed circulus in demonstrando, otherwise known as circular reasoning. Here’s a painfully common example: “The Bible is the word of God. Since God wrote the Bible, we know that it contains only truthful accounts. Since the truthful accounts are inspired by God, we know that the Bible is God’s word.” In other words, the Bible is the word of God because the Bible says so. If you can’t spot the enormous gaping hole in this argument, I’m afraid that I’m not doing you much help. The Qur’an says Muhammad is Allah’s prophet, but that doesn’t make it a fact. There must be good evidence to support these claims.

 

I cannot believe that David Cloud (and his Christian community) considers himself to be a man of intelligence. In reality he is a foolish man, and an exceedingly piss poor scholar, who resorts to worn out and ridiculous, fallacious arguments to bolster his failing religious positions.

 

When I first found this article, I fully expected to read some long, multi-paged, well-written and cogent treatise to consider the proof for Moses’ authorship of the Pentateuch. Instead what I got was a terse sound byte of bible quotes that can be only be described as immature, illogical playground braggadocio. Anyone relying upon such “wisdom” and arguments as this should rightly be dismissed as a gullible twit.

 

Unfortunately for Christians, David Cloud’s argument represents the PINNACLE of bible defenses. Pretty damn sorry.

[Vigile]

Chapter one of Genesis sets out an order of creation that has light (v3), Water (v6), Land (v9), Plants and trees (v11), sun and moon (v14) and animals (v24) being created in that order.

103228[/snapback]

 

It's also interesting to note that he/they(?) created light before the sun and moon.

[Checkmate]

Chapter one of Genesis sets out an order of creation that has light (v3), Water (v6), Land (v9), Plants and trees (v11), sun and moon (v14) and animals (v24) being created in that order.

103228[/snapback]

 

It's also interesting to note that he/they(?) created light before the sun and moon.

104096[/snapback]

Ah yes, but dontchaknow that the Charismatics have an explanation for this? This "light" that preceded the sun's creation is none other than the "Shekinah glory of gawd"!

 

 

 

These people slay me!

[Vigile]

Ah yes, but dontchaknow that the Charismatics have an explanation for this?  This "light" that preceded the sun's creation is none other than the "Shekinah glory of gawd"! 

 

 

 

These people slay me!

104118[/snapback]

 

That one is easy to get around. God is supposedly the great "I Am," therefore he and all his glory have always been. Hence, no creation of the light of glory would have been necessary on the first day.

[Ouroboros]

It appears that I'm just talking to myself here, but I don't care.  I love this subject.

 

HOW PATHETIC IS THIS?

104090[/snapback]

Isn't that what the Grinch did all the time? I think you're taking on and imitating your Avatar.

[Guest aereo]

Thanks all. I had a wee look around the world wide internet web (as the kids are calling it these days) and found an argument claiming that the first account is about the earth in general while the second account is specifically about the creation of the garden of Eden.

 

I still don't think this holds up since the second description of creation is set out in verses 4-7 and then only in verse 8 does he start to talk of Eden, quite seperately from what has been talked about before. God also places Man into Eden so Man must have been created outside of Eden, during the first description of creation.

 

A "piss poor" argument methinks.

[Kuroikaze]

I have a personal problem with the bible being the inspired word of God when contradictions seem to prove it otherwise. The verses I have a particular problem with are found in the first two chapters of Genesis.

 

Chapter one of Genesis sets out an order of creation that has light (v3), Water (v6), Land (v9), Plants and trees (v11), sun and moon (v14) and animals (v24) being created in that order. Only after God has created all of these does he decide to create "man in our image"(v26).

Straight away in chapter 2 verses 4-5 we have another creation account that contradicts what we have just read. It seems that "no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up...." and then he creates Man. So in what order were things created in?

 

Also, why are man and woman created by "God" , together, in chapter 1 v 27 and man and woman are created separately by "Lord God" in chapter 2 verse 7 (for the man) and verses 21-22 (for the woman).

 

Why are there even two creation accounts in the first place, one after another?

 

Any replies on the topic would be gratefully received

103228[/snapback]

 

Acctually if you study jewish mythology you will find that these stories are part of a bigger creation legend. Adam had a wife before Eve named Lilith. She left Adam...I think she became the consort to satan or something in some of the later myths but I might be wrong on that.

 

This was why God used a rib to make Eve. So she would be "made from his flesh" and woudn't leave him.

[Kuroikaze]

Before a Christian chimes in with their "version" of the Truth, I'll give the most obvious and honest answer.

 

There were TWO seperate WRITERS for Genesis.  (And Moses weren't either one of them, in my opinion.)

 

In chapter one through 2:3 "God" is utilized.  In the Hebrew this word is Elohim.  (This author is referred to as "E".)

 

From 2:4 onward the new writer for the fable prefers "Lord God".  Jehovah Elohim.  (This author is known as "J".)

 

Two different accounts because of TWO different authors.  Real simple.

103236[/snapback]

 

yeah your right, there were at least 2 and probably 3 authors of the Torah (first 5 books)

 

Its probable that they were written without any knowladge of each other and then complied at a later date but someone else. As I noted in my other post in many sources of Jewish mythology Adam had a first wife...why the person who compiled Genesis decided not to include that, but still include part of the lilith story....well I doubt we'll ever know

 

 

Ahh yes E and J sources. I remember studying that in my religion classes. At the time in my fundy fog I thought they were crazy for believing that. Then I went back and looked at it again after I started having doubts and said "hey this makes a lot of sense."

[Skankboy]

I think she became the consort to satan or something in some of the later myths but I might be wrong on that.

 

I believe I had heard it was Cain she hooked up with and together they founded the first city. But, I'm not positive.

 

One of the things I always like about Whitewolf's Vamipire: the Masquerade was their treatment of Lilith and Cain. An interesting treatment of christian mythology.

[Kuroikaze]

I think she became the consort to satan or something in some of the later myths but I might be wrong on that.

 

I believe I had heard it was Cain she hooked up with and together they founded the first city. But, I'm not positive.

 

One of the things I always like about Whitewolf's Vamipire: the Masquerade was their treatment of Lilith and Cain. An interesting treatment of christian mythology.

104365[/snapback]

yeah Cain sounds familiar, I think your right....been a few years since I studies those other myths for my Hebrew scriptures class