What's Best Reconciliation of Gen 1 and 2 You've Heard?

IMO, Genesis 1 and 2 are not meant to be reconciled.Genesis 2 is starting at 2:4b is considered to be written first, probably by a priest from Judah.Genesis 1 which ends at 2:3 is considered to be written much later after the fall of the Northern Kingdom.Genesis 1 was written as an alternative to Genesis 2 as a creation story. The Priest took out the magic parts. Bare bones creation and it brought in the reason for the Sabbath..Genesis 1 is the product of a different cultural timeframe than Genesis 2 and not meant to reside together.

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

quote:

---

genesis 1 actually ends at 2:4 also. the split is right down the middle of the verse:

---

The first part of verse 4 (4a) is considered to be written by the redactor. 4b(second half of the verse) starts the J text.I am working from the book "Who Wrote the Bible" by Richard Elliott Friedman.Genesis 1 is considered to be more precisely the Priestly writer. It has the E reference to God, but was probably written after the fall of the Northern Kingdom.The priest took out the talking animals and such. He also included a reason for the Sabbath.His book is very interesting. It's only about 250 pages. How fast can you read.

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

The part with IMO is my opinion.The rest comes from the Documentary Hypothesis.The Book "Who Wrote the Bible" by Richard Elliott Friedman goes a bit further than some concerning the Documentary Hypothesis.I got into a little more with Arach in my previous post.We will probably get into more as this discussion progresses.But IMO, trying to reconcile two different authors, from different eras, with different agendas gives one a headache and is a disservice to the authors.

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

What Friedman lists as written by the Redactor (R) tends to be phrases used to tie together separate writings and they are concerned with age, descendants.He has all of Genesis 5 as written by R.Genesis 7:6 Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters came on the earth.Genesis 9:28-29 After the flood Noah lived three hundred fifty years. All the days of Noah were nine hundred fifty years; and he died.Genesis 10:1a These are the descendants of Noah's sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth;It is interesting where they fall. Used to tie in or clear up info.

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

quote:

---

So, what are we talking about now? Are we trying to figure out where Gen 1 really ends and Gen 2 really begins?

---

I was presenting Friedman's separations of the P, R, and J parts of the Creation stories.What Friedman presents is that the J author, who was probably from Judah, and the E author, who was probably from Israel were combined before the Priestly author wrote his works.P had access to a combined J & E work. J & E being combined as the refugees fled south as the Northen Kingdom began to fall.Once the Northern Kingdom fell, the Priestly writer was essentially writing a new Torah. He was writing his own version of the JE stories.P has a creation story, a flood story, a Lot story, a Moses and the Rock story, etc.These are the types of things among others that lead me to believe that Moses is not the author of the first five books or that it was written by a single person.I haven't read a document written by a single author that presents this type of layout.

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

You heard me.Genesis 5 lists the descendants of Adam. Supposedly the JE stories are not concerned with timelines like R and P are. IMO, R and P are trying to make the stories more realistic and work them into reality.Do you have anything that breaks down the verses for you concerning the documentary hypothesis?I think Friedman has gone a little further than some I've seen.I will read the section on the R author again to maybe give you an idea of his reasoning.

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

quote:

---

as far as i know, genesis 5 is generally considered a priestly work, as are all genealogical listings in the torah. i mean, i could be wrong -- the contention is tha the priests who wrote that source had a je document, into which they worked their own text. in some respects, p is also part of r.

---

I went back and reviewed the info on the redactor.Friedman agrees that both P and R are priestly, but not necessarily the same person. He does consider R to be an Aaronid priest. His theory is that Ezra is the redactor and the author of P is from King Hezekiah's court.

Let's see if I can get this right. These are his premises and I find them compelling.R is from the 2nd Temple days.R added Numbers 15 a chapter of laws that is separated from the other priestly laws. Inserted in an odd place. Repeating things that have already been said, but Numbers 15 does not mention the Tabernacle. P emphasizes the Tabernacle supposedly.The holiday called "Booths" in Leviticus 23:4-37, is not something that was familiar to the people when Ezra read the Torah to the people.Ezra had the power and the backing of the emperor. Two people in the Bible are considered lawgivers. Moses and Ezra.The following verses supposedly shows what documents Ezra was intersted in. The emperor also authorized Ezra to teach and enforce Excerpt from book He also mentions an ancient tradition (mentioned I think in the Fourth Book of Ezra, a pseudepigrapha) concerning Ezra and the Torah. Apparently the original scroll was burned up in the fire that destroyed the first Temple. But apparently Ezra was able to restore it by a revelation.Have you heard the burning tradition before or something else?

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

So what are the differences in the Catholic Bible that supposedly allow a reasonable reconcilliation of Genesis 1 and 2?

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

Thanks,
I've got a Catholic Bible, I just don't see that it is considerably different concerning content than any other translation as Jacob intimates. I guess we wait for Jacob to return and show us his point.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

So do we know when Genesis was written?

---

Are you familiar with the Documentary Hypothesis?My statements are based on the information found in the book: Who Wrote The Bible? by Richard Elliott Friedman.According to the documentary hypothesis, Genesis was composed over a period of years by various participants.Genesis 1 is considered to be a priestly writing which may have been written as an alternative to the combined JE texts. It is considered to have been written sometime after the fall of the northern kingdom and after the JE texts were combined. Friedman considers it written after 722BC and before 609BC.Genesis 2 from 4b on is considered a J writing. Genesis 2:1-3 is considered the end of the priestly Genesis 1 and 2:4a is considered a redactor's (R) hand.J (Southern Kingdom) and E (Northern Kingdom) are considered to have developed when the kingdoms were divided and so were probably written after 930BC.The two writings weren't written to compliment each other from what I can tell.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz