Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Contradictions between Genesis 1-2
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 31 of 308 (437979)
12-02-2007 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by purpledawn
12-02-2007 7:12 AM


Not just Authors
We need to remember that for almost all of the period covered by the Old Testament there was no single unified Hebrew nation, no one people. There were the Tribes, independent clan organizations, then later under the Kings there was Israel in the north and Judah in the south.
In each of these various sub-grouping, different cultures and tradition arose. What's more, there was often warfare between clans and later between Kingdoms. These differences are reflected in the different sources, the J (and E) source(s) being the Judaic traditions while the P source reflects the Israeli traditions and tales.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by purpledawn, posted 12-02-2007 7:12 AM purpledawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Granny Magda, posted 12-02-2007 3:44 PM jar has replied

Creationist
Member (Idle past 5645 days)
Posts: 95
Joined: 10-19-2007


Message 32 of 308 (438043)
12-02-2007 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Force
11-27-2007 8:56 PM


quote:
1) Genesis 1:31 because everything God created was complete after 6 days but in Genesis 2:4 LORD God created the heavens and earth in a day.
The word day, of course, can be used to mean different time periods. Just like todays use of our English word day. There is no contradiction here. If a grandfather was to tell his grandson, "In my day, we used to walk to school up hill barefoot in the snow." He would be referring to a specific time period. Verse four in Chapter 2 of Genesis is doing the same thing. So the question now becomes how do we know which day is being used in Genesis 1. Well, it can get a little complicated but to make a long story short, it is because of the use of the words "morning and evening" and a number. Such as first, second, third, etc. Whenever yom is used in this way it almost always denotes a regular 24 hour day.
quote:
2) Genesis 1:27 because God created male and female at the same time but according to Genesis 2:5-20 LORD God created male and then created female later(2:20).
Genesis 1:27 does not say he created male and female at the same time, only that He created both male and female people.
quote:
3) The word God/Elohim is used in Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3 but in Genesis 2:4-25 LORD God/YHWH Elohim is used.
Elohim is used in Genesis one because it denotes an all powerful God above His creation and all things created. YHWH is used in Genesis two because it denotes God's personal relationship with man.
quote:
4) The overall order of creation in Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3 is different than in Genesis 2:4-25.
Geneis 2 is not the creation account. Genesis one is. Genesis two is a more detailed account of Day six in Genesis one. So it is not meant to be in any particular order.
quote:
5) Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3 the creation story seems to be more sophisticated than the creation story in Genesis 2:4-25.
Only if you consider Genesis two a creation story, which, of course, it isn't. But even if it were, would that constitute a contradiction? I don't think so.
quote:
6) Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3 each thing created was considered good but in Genesis 2:5-20 it seems creation was a process of trial and error.
Don't understand what you mean by this. What trial and error?
quote:
7) Genesis 1:26 because there seems to be more than God creating but in Genesis 2:4-25 there is only LORD God creating.
Genesis 1:26 is a reference to the Trinity. God, Son, and Holy Spirit. Check out John 1:1-3 where John is clearly referring to Jesus, yet says Jesus created all things.
quote:
8) Genesis 1:29 because all plants are available for eating but in Genesis 2:16-17 some plants are off limits to eat.
In the beginning all things were vegetarian. Man, and animals. There was only one tree that was off limits to man, and that was the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil." All other trees were fair game, including the tree of "Life".
quote:
9) Genesis 1:28 because humans subdue the earth but in Genesis 2:15 humans serve the earth.
This is one of the things that is most often misunderstood. By subdue, God was placing men as stewards over His creation. The word subdue here does not mean that man was to misuse the world, but be in dominion over it and to be good stewards over it.
quote:
10) Genesis 1:21-22 because the purpose for animals is not related to humans but in Genesis 2:18-19 the purpoose for animals is related to humans.
The purpose of Genesis 2:18-19 was to show Adam, and you and me, that animals and man are different. We didn't evolve from an animal, because we were different from the beginning.
Hope this helps you.
Edited by Creationist, : No reason given.
Edited by Creationist, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Force, posted 11-27-2007 8:56 PM Force has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by iceage, posted 12-02-2007 3:56 PM Creationist has replied
 Message 39 by Force, posted 12-02-2007 4:48 PM Creationist has replied

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 33 of 308 (438044)
12-02-2007 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by jar
12-02-2007 10:29 AM


Re: Not just Authors
I think that this is an important point. One of the motives of the redactors was surely to unite these disparate tribal groups under one religious banner. This could have been achieved by combining different texts (with different groups of adherents) into one text, agreeable to wider audience. This would have been all the more important if there was open conflict between groups with different scriptural allegiances. These problems could be avoided by highlighting the religious similarities to create a stronger and more stable grouping.
It's not a dissimilar idea to the later assimilation of pagan cultures by Christianity; much better to stress the similarities than fight over differences.

Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 12-02-2007 10:29 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 12-02-2007 4:28 PM Granny Magda has not replied

iceage 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 1024
From: Pacific Northwest
Joined: 09-08-2003


Message 34 of 308 (438047)
12-02-2007 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Creationist
12-02-2007 3:39 PM


Man is an Animal.
creationist writes:
The purpose of Genesis 2:18-19 was to show Adam, and you and me, that animals and man are different. We didn't evolve from an animal, because we were different from the beginning.
Then why are we so similar? Why do Chimpanzees and other primates share a significant percentage of DNA? Why do we have similar non-transcribed DNA (such as endogenous retrovirus remnants) as other primates in a manner that _strongly_ suggests a common heritage and an hierarchical order. Why is our chromosomes structure so similar?
Why would god make us so close to other primates if he wanted to demonstrate that we are somehow different. Did god also have a fondness for monkeys?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Creationist, posted 12-02-2007 3:39 PM Creationist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Creationist, posted 12-02-2007 4:29 PM iceage has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 35 of 308 (438049)
12-02-2007 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Granny Magda
12-02-2007 3:44 PM


Timing and purpose
Exactly. It's likely that the Torah first began to take form after the return from Exile, possibly around the time of and maybe under the guidance of Ezra. What was needed was something to try to bring together people from vastly different traditions that had been living for generations in exile, and to do it in a politically correct and culturally sensitive way. The idea was to move from many different traditions to one tradition that could be supported by all.
Just as the King James Version of the Bible was created much later to be a politically correct and non-offensive document, the Torah was designed to try to unite the returning Jews.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Granny Magda, posted 12-02-2007 3:44 PM Granny Magda has not replied

Creationist
Member (Idle past 5645 days)
Posts: 95
Joined: 10-19-2007


Message 36 of 308 (438050)
12-02-2007 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by iceage
12-02-2007 3:56 PM


Re: Man is an Animal.
quote:
Why do Chimpanzees and other primates share a significant percentage of DNA?
By share, I assume you mean similar DNA? Well, to begin with, this could just as easily point to a common designer as common ancestor. Cars all share similar parts, yet a Mac Truck did not evolve from a Volkswagon. They are finding out all the time that human and chimp DNA are not all that similar after all, I believe the latest count is that they are only 95% identical. Of course, a 2% difference is very huge when considering DNA.
quote:
Why do we have similar non-transcribed DNA (such as endogenous retrovirus remnants) as other primates in a manner that _strongly_ suggests a common heritage and an hierarchical order.
I'm not real familiar with this, but could you list what retovirus remnants we share with chimps?
quote:
Why is our chromosomes structure so similar?
Again, this is not any more proof of comman ancestry than it is of common designer.
quote:
Why would god make us so close to other primates if he wanted to demonstrate that we are somehow different. Did god also have a fondness for monkeys?
Why use something different when what is being use works so well?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by iceage, posted 12-02-2007 3:56 PM iceage has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2007 4:36 PM Creationist has replied
 Message 38 by Chiroptera, posted 12-02-2007 4:39 PM Creationist has replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 37 of 308 (438052)
12-02-2007 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Creationist
12-02-2007 4:29 PM


Re: Man is an Animal.
Why use something different when what is being use works so well?
So god is incapable of coming up with entirely novel designs for organisms? or is he just lazy?

Live every week like it's Shark Week!
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Creationist, posted 12-02-2007 4:29 PM Creationist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by jar, posted 12-02-2007 4:54 PM DrJones* has not replied
 Message 42 by Creationist, posted 12-03-2007 10:41 AM DrJones* has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 308 (438056)
12-02-2007 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Creationist
12-02-2007 4:29 PM


Re: Man is an Animal.
Why use something different when what is being use works so well?
Because it is too difficult, time consuming, and expensive to come up with new designs when old ones will suffice. It is very smart and economical for a designer to reuse designs when his creativity and powers are limited. Since designers cannot just invent new designs on a whim nor collect the necessary resources for new product design and development, reusing old designs is a necessity.
But I agree. There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that the creator had unlimited intelligence or unlimited power, so it is very likely that such a creator would be forced by necessity to reuse designs to meet its 6 day deadline.

Progress in human affairs has come mainly through the bold readiness of human beings not to confine themselves to seeking piecemeal improvements in the way things are done, but to present fundamental challenges in the name of reason to the current way of doing things and to the avowed or hidden assumptions on which it rests. -- E. H. Carr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Creationist, posted 12-02-2007 4:29 PM Creationist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by jar, posted 12-02-2007 4:54 PM Chiroptera has not replied
 Message 43 by Creationist, posted 12-03-2007 10:48 AM Chiroptera has not replied

Force
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 308 (438061)
12-02-2007 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Creationist
12-02-2007 3:39 PM


Creationist,
I have realized that everything you posted in response to OP1 is an interpretation that is based on sources that contradict each other. So, I am not going to accept your information on this topic as plausible because it has no evidence.
Edited by tthzr3, : clarity

Thank you

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Creationist, posted 12-02-2007 3:39 PM Creationist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Creationist, posted 12-03-2007 10:52 AM Force has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 40 of 308 (438063)
12-02-2007 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by DrJones*
12-02-2007 4:36 PM


Re: Man is an Animal.
Topic folk. Let's not let the new kid lead us astray.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2007 4:36 PM DrJones* has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 41 of 308 (438064)
12-02-2007 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Chiroptera
12-02-2007 4:39 PM


Re: Man is an Animal.
Topic folk. Let's not let the new kid lead us astray.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Chiroptera, posted 12-02-2007 4:39 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Creationist
Member (Idle past 5645 days)
Posts: 95
Joined: 10-19-2007


Message 42 of 308 (438198)
12-03-2007 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by DrJones*
12-02-2007 4:36 PM


Re: Man is an Animal.
So god is incapable of coming up with entirely novel designs for organisms
Obviously not, since all organisms are entirely novel designs. Even though the DNA of monkeys and humans may be similar, there is enough difference, obviously, for them to be two different organisms. Just like the Mac Truck and the Volkswagon.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by DrJones*, posted 12-02-2007 4:36 PM DrJones* has not replied

Creationist
Member (Idle past 5645 days)
Posts: 95
Joined: 10-19-2007


Message 43 of 308 (438201)
12-03-2007 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Chiroptera
12-02-2007 4:39 PM


Re: Man is an Animal.
But I agree. There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that the creator had unlimited intelligence or unlimited power, so it is very likely that such a creator would be forced by necessity to reuse designs to meet its 6 day deadline.
Ge:18:14: Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.
Jer:32:17: Ah Lord GOD! behold, thou hast made the heaven and the earth by thy great power and stretched out arm, and there is nothing too hard for thee:
Jer:32:27: Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?
It is not that He could not do it, or wasn't smart enough to do it, it is that He CHOSE to do it this way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Chiroptera, posted 12-02-2007 4:39 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Creationist
Member (Idle past 5645 days)
Posts: 95
Joined: 10-19-2007


Message 44 of 308 (438202)
12-03-2007 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Force
12-02-2007 4:48 PM


tthzr3
I have realized that everything you posted in response to OP1 is an interpretation that is based on sources that contradict each other. So, I am not going to accept your information on this topic as plausible because it has no evidence.
And I realize that all of your so called contradictions are based on faulty interpretations due to lack of understanding. So, I will not accept any of them as evidence for contradictions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Force, posted 12-02-2007 4:48 PM Force has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by jar, posted 12-03-2007 11:07 AM Creationist has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 45 of 308 (438203)
12-03-2007 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Creationist
12-03-2007 10:52 AM


On text
And I realize that all of your so called contradictions are based on faulty interpretations due to lack of understanding.
Not exactly. The facts are, that's what the tales say. It is not a matter of interpretation, it is a matter of honesty and admitting what is actually written.
So, I will not accept any of them as evidence for contradictions.
It does not much matter what you accept, denial of reality and truth is still denial of reality and truth. To not accept the contradictions is to be willfully ignorant.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Creationist, posted 12-03-2007 10:52 AM Creationist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Creationist, posted 12-03-2007 11:47 AM jar has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024