|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Contradictions between Genesis 1-2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPhat Inactive Member |
Just to keep this thread on topic, allow me to repost the first message:
I'd like to discuss the contradictions between Genesis 1 and 2. I have listed a few contradictions below (not in order): 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. (refuted) post 160. 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). (refuted) post 160. *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. Not a contradiction just an interesting point. 3) The overall order of creation in Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3 is different than in Genesis 2:4-25. *Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3 the creation story seems to be more sophisticated than the creation story in Genesis 2:4-25. Not a contradiction just an interesting point. 4) 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. 5) Genesis 1:26 because there seems to be more than God creating but in Genesis 2:4-25 there is only LORD God creating. 6) Genesis 1:29 because all plants are available for eating but in Genesis 2:16-17 some plants are off limits to eat. 7) Genesis 1:28 because humans subdue the earth but in Genesis 2:15 humans serve the earth. 8) Genesis 1:21-22 because the purpose for animals is not related to humans but in Genesis 2:18-19 the purpose for animals is related to humans. Here are some links to Genesis chapters 1 and 2.Genesis 1 (KJV) - In the beginning God created Genesis 2 (KJV) - Thus the heavens and the You may also take your argument here and get feedback from other administrators. Usually, we leave topic promotion to the first administrator that responds, unless that administrator invites others to comment. ************************************ "DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU" AdminPhat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Force Inactive Member |
...bump
Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
I can't respond concerning an OP other than the one presented for this thread in Message 1.
quote:Which doesn't tell me how I'm viewing "support" incorrectly. We were talking about the list. quote:I'm not asking you why there is a contradiction, I asked you to give evidence that supports why you feel there is a contradiction between the two stories. IOW, support your claim that the list in the stories must be exactly the same or else they are contradictions. Now that I've seen your explanation, I can see why this thread has no focus.
quote:So you are not taking the stories at face value, but have imposed your own criteria that they must meet. Neither story is bearing witness to anything, since the authors weren't present at creation. Not even Moses claims to be present at creation. Why do you not allow God to inspire an entertaining and creative story?
quote:Witnessing God's power and writing an inspired story are two very different things. I don't think anyone has denied differences in the stories, but are they truly contradictions? Are the stories really contrary to each other? From Message 1 quote:Both stories say that God created man, woman, plants, and animals. The final information received is the same. Why must the order be exactly the same, since the stories have different purposes? quote:One story presents a finished product, the other adds character to the process. Again different purposes, but does that really make the stories contrary to each other? quote:Again different perspective on the story. Gen 1 gives the bigger picture, Gen 2 deals with Adam and Eve. They only deal with God. Gen 1 doesn't reveal that "the others" interacted with mankind during creation. quote:The plants that were off limit were in the Garden of Eden. Gen 1 doesn't address the garden. Once man got thrown out of the garden there weren't any limits on the plants he could eat. Again, Gen 1 gave the end product. quote:You do realize that cultivating land is subduing it. The "dress it and to keep it" part deals with the Garden of Eden. Once man was expelled, he had to subdue the land to survive.
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. Easily missed when one doesn't take into account the whole story.
quote:The purpose of animals is not stated in Gen 1. How can there be a contradiction from lack of statement. Gen 1 did not address why God created the animals. Again, we're getting the end product, not necessarily a detailed explanation. By saying end product and detailed explanation, I'm not saying that the Adam and Eve story is a detailed account of any day in Gen 1. I'm pointing out a difference in the writing styles. Overall the complete stories are not contrary to each other. There are differences in the stories. These differences lead us to investigate and better understand the origins of the stories. Each story has its own purpose, whether one feels it was written by one author, by Moses, or by several authors. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
purpledawn writes: I don't think anyone has denied differences in the stories, but are they truly contradictions? I'll remind you again that "contradiction" is the word insisted on by Admin, not tthzr3.
Why must the order be exactly the same, since the stories have different purposes? A better question would be: Why would the orders be different? How is a different order necessary to reflect the different purposes?
One story presents a finished product, the other adds character to the process. Where's your support for that conclusion? Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Force Inactive Member |
Purpledawn,
Your interpretation is obviosly based on a personal agenda but however the stories in the Bible are "accounts" written by prophets and deciples of God hence they must be interpreted literally. I have supplied the evidence for that but however you have not refuted it with any countering evidence except a personal opinion. REF:http://EvC Forum: Contradictions between Genesis 1-2 -->EvC Forum: Contradictions between Genesis 1-2 http://EvC Forum: Contradictions between Genesis 1-2 -->EvC Forum: Contradictions between Genesis 1-2 Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2765 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
purpledawn writes: You would need to show that what took place in the Adam and Eve story between the creation of man and woman took more than one day. Does the story really validate that idea? Yes Dawn, I believe it does. We may not be able to prove that "the day" of creation (2:4) was actually more than one day but we can make a case for its likelihood. By the same token: we may not be able to prove that more than one day elapsed between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve, but we can make a case for its likelihood. One argument in favor of the idea that the story of the creation of Adam and Eve covers more than one day is the argument mentioned above: that "the day" in which the LORD God created, should be understood as a figure of speech and that the events which follow likely required more than a single day. Why should it be important that "the day" (2:4), be more than one day in the context of verse four and less than one day in the context of verses 5-23? In the chapter two narrative, sandwiched between the creations of Adam and Eve, is a retelling, however scrambled, of events identified with days 3 and 5 and 6 (chapter one). The notion that chapter two is an expansion of what happened on day six, places an artificial time constraint on the events delineated in chapter two, forcing them to transpire in the space of a day which we have already agreed is not a "day." Can one have it both ways? Have "the day" of chapter two to be the week of chapter one, AND AT THE SAME TIME have virtually all of chapter two crammed into Day 6? First "the day" wants to be a week and then the week wants to be a day. Is that insane? But I digress.
After Clay Man becomes animated, Yahweh’s work continues:
It seems to me that in order for the two versions to be coherent, the second should do no violence to the first.
Please notice that Adam was not taken from the good soil of the garden but rather from the ground outside the garden, which is where he ended up when the LORD tossed him on his ear. 3:23 Theology is the science of Dominion. - - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:No you have provided your own conclusions based on your own opinion. Since no one alive today was there at the writing, any thoughts concerning the issue are going to be personal opinion. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:But tthzr3 is using it beyond the OP in his arguments. I can only respond to what he is saying, not what would be saying if Admin hadn't asked him to use a different word. quote:The order difference is not necessary to the purpose, the purpose allows the difference. Creative license so to speak if one is going to consider them written by the same person. One story concerns creation of the world, the other concerns mankind. If you're comparing them as written by two different authors. One is an ancient tribal story and one is written centuries later by a priest. The priestly order may be more of an update in how they view the universe at the time and not necessarily a contradiction.
quote:Finished product means the minimum necessary and adding character means more details included. It is an attempt to get people to read the Bible the same way we do anything else and not put unreasonable expectations on the writings. My reasoning is based on the documentary hypothesis and Richard Elliott Friedman's book "Who Wrote the Bible?" and looking at the style of the stories in relation to what was stated in #4 of the OP.
tthzr3 writes: 4) 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. Telling people I put quilling on a gourd and saw that it was good, does not contradict any earlier or later statements where I elaborate on the trial and errors I went through to get to the finished product. IOW, the lack of mentioning trials and errors, doesn't mean the stories contradict each other. For all we know the priestly writer could have had space limitations. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Force Inactive Member |
purpledawn,
When I first read Genesis, as a Christian, I interpreted Genesis 1-2 to have only one creation story which was written in Genesis 1,2:1-3. However, I have adopted many interpretations of Genesis 1-3, since all the confusion, I have determined that Genesis 1-3 are not actually creation accounts but mere creation stories. The only point of this thread, originally, was to discuss the indications that Genesis 1-3 has two creation stories. The indications I came across were the contradictions between Genesis 1-2 that can be found by simply reading the verses and doing a contrast comparison of order of events and purpose for those events. I have also realized other points that are less significant such as the writing styles and sophistication of the stories. You have asked many times that there must be a reason behind my madness, of this thread, and there is no reason other than to discuss the contradictions of Genesis 1-2. The word "support" in my previous responses was taken out of context by you when you seemed to think that I was claiming that the creation stories can't be "a whole" and contradict each other when that is a not true. The creation stories can be "a whole" and contain contradictory information. So, there is contradictions in Genesis 1-2 and they do not support each other in the sense that they do not congrue that the order of Creation was this way or that way. The order of creation is different in Genesis 1 than in Genesis 2 and as such they do not support each other unless you can accept that the creation stories do not describe creation, literally, the way that it happened. However, since the creation stories do not support each other then it must be plausible that there is actually two creation stories in Genesis 1-3. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : change response Thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Force Inactive Member |
bump refer to my last post...
Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : change response Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
I was really trying to get tthzr3 to provide reasoning for his statements. He keeps claiming he has validated, but he hasn't really said anything.
Since the Adam and Eve story probably came first, it wouldn't be elaborating on anything in Gen 1. Needless to say that I agree that the Adam and Eve story is not an elaboration of day six in Gen 1. The priestly writing probably reflects the change in how they viewed the world at the time it was written.
quote:The first actually being the Adam and Eve story. The big thing is that the Adam and Eve story has a talking snake in it. It is a creative story a foundational myth. A local news station followed a little girl around all day long and video taped her day. They made two shorts from it. Depending on how they edited the video, the girl looked like a very good little girl or a very bad little girl. We could say that one video contradicted the other, but in actuality both showed what the girl did that day. Writer's include the information necessary to make their point. Unfortunately we don't truly know the authors' purpose or their audience. We can only guess what an author had in his mind over 2500 years ago. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2765 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
Thank you for responding, although I had wished for a bit more engagement.
Seems to me the latter version presents an aloof, non judgmental deity whereas the prior paints him in clearly human terms, giving rise to the darker side of Christian dogma: original sin, blood sacrifice, eternal damnation . Do you not see these stories conflicting in terms of their theology? Are you not aware of the hostility inspired in believers by the mere mention of two different stories here? Whenever I make make the slightest suggestion that these two are different stories, I must face the knee jerk, quick draw, bloody sword reaction of any and every Fundie I know, including my immediate family. I am irrevocably classed with Satan's minions because I happen to know the Bible better than they; and am at the very least pitied for the horrible fate which awaits me when Jesus comes out of the sky to smack me down; Me and everyone else who dares to disagree with King James. Theology is the science of Dominion. - - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4190 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
The priestly writing probably reflects the change in how they viewed the world at the time it was written. This is the most logical reason for the difference that I have ever heard. The Yahvist source (Gen1) is much older than the the priestly source of Gen2. It would seem logical that the beliefs at different times would differ.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Force Inactive Member |
purpledawn,
PD writes: Writer's include the information necessary to make their point. Unfortunately we don't truly know the authors' purpose or their audience. We can only guess what an author had in his mind over 2500 years ago.
The reasons are found in the stories, to teach morality and purpose, to those who can't figure it out for them self.
PD writes: I was really trying to get tthzr3 to provide reasoning for his statements. He keeps claiming he has validated, but he hasn't really said anything. The results for both stories in Genesis 1-3 are different, the writing styles are different, the names of the Deities are different, and there are verses that contradict each other. p.s. refer to post 234... Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Thank you
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
imageinvisible Member (Idle past 5919 days) Posts: 132 From: Arlington, Texas, US Joined: |
I checked out the thread, it seems to me as it most of the arguements are centered around a discusion of 'creation ex nilo' and the jury is still out.
Ringo writes: If all the talk about creating/forming doesn't establish it as a creation story, what would? The word creation in chapter 2 rather than the word formed. The author is CLEARLY making a distinction here. The secound chapter lacks the depth of chronology that is ilustrated in chapter one, which suggests the the author had no reason to include it, since it was covered in the previous chapter. Chapter one is a day by day acount, where as chapter two is clearly focused on the happenings of one day in perticular. The structure of chapter one vs. chapter two are comletly different. Chapter one served it's purpose, which was to tell the reader on what day God created what. Chapter two has an entirely different structure, and has it's own purpose (which is clearly diffrent from chapter ones purpose) Which was to introduce the whos' (characters) and establish thier roles throughout the rest of the book (the whole book/Bible). Everything from the syntax to the focal points was written down to illistrate that God is the creator of ALL and that man is the focus of Gods creation. Here is a little test to prove mt theory: Try this, take out chapter 2. Read chapter one and then skip to chapter 3 and see if you can follow what's going on. Cause if chapter 2 really is another creation story then it is redundant and unecessary. A person should be able to read and understand EVERYTHING that is going on in chapter 3 without reading chapter 2.
Who is this God the serpent is talking about? Who is Adam? What is the tree of knowledge of good and evil? When did God tell them not to eat of it? What is the garden of eden? Where did it come from? Why is God so worried about this tree of life? What is the tree of life? etc. etc. etc. Edited by imageinvisible, : more in qs box
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024