quote:
I am saying what any O.T. hebrew commentary will tell you, which is that the original hebrew for Gen. 1:1 has "Gods", plural, despite the singular found in most translations.
This is coming from a Discovery Channel program I watched a while ago, so please let me know if anything is incorrect.
There were two names of God given in Genesis 1 and 2, Elohim and Yahweh (or was it Adonai?). The two inter-related but different creation stories in Gen. 1 and 2 seems to support the theory that there were two camps in early Judaism: the polytheist and monotheist camps. The same can be seen in the depiction of the Noachian flood, two different but related tellings of the global flood reflecting two camps within Judaism.
My feeling is that if the Genesis accounts of both creation and the Noachian flood can be told in different ways to reflect different theologies (with Elohim and Yahweh being used separately in each version), then why should either be taken as literal fact. That is, the creation and global flood myth are not being stressed as literal fact, but rather a lens through which we can understand the nature of God(s). My contention is that the myths in Genesis are not supposed to be taken literally, but rather figuratively. It is a theological lesson, not a scientific lesson.