Conflicting creation myths

'Cause it was probably written by lots and lots of different people, at different times. Chances are that it was all cobbled together in order to bring in a number of different people to one central faith. You know, if your Cousin Susie brings the potatoes and Uncle Lou brings the carrots, and Mom brings the chicken, it's nice to make a stew together. That way everyone is contributing and no one feels left out.

Same concept, but less tasty.

It's sorta like incorporating pagan rituals into Christian ones during Paul's mission. Sometime you just have to compromise to make the deal. Three Hebrew sources (Yahwist, Elohist, and Priestly) dating to the tenth, eighth, and sixth centuries B.C.E respectively were seamed together by a later editor who incorporated the two creation traditions (Y and E) into one.

Here's a link to the introduction of the Harper Collins Study Bible which has an objective review of the writing of the Bible on page xiv.

http://browseinside.harpercollins.com/index.aspx?isbn13=9780060786847

The introduction to Genesis (not available online that I can find) describes the early Hebrew traditions and the development of that text. You could take a quick read at a bookstore or public library.

The OT as we have it is a sort of a Reader's Digest compendium of the full body of antique Jewish literature which Jews call "Midrashim". It is basically laconic and leaves details out. Other than that, the universe at large is basically eternal like God and the spirit world, and the creation stories you read in antique literature generally refer to the creation of our own local environment and not the entire universe. The "Big Bang" idea, like evolution, is junk science.

Lot's of tiny frightened pathetic minds, desperately trying to find a place in the universe. Belief in a omnipotent creator is the ultimate manifestation of fear and weakness.

No. No-one can objectively tell you why.

We can all have a good subjective guess though. Mine is... "delusions" went by many other names back in the day.

Yes, I can tell you why; those authors of the books of the bible did not have the scientific knowledge to understand their environment called earth and its place in the universe.

But, as somebody said, it's a conglomeration of different authors who had different recipes based on Jewish history and myths. They didn't have the wherewithal to check their facts and figures, so we now find all the errors and omissions that have been identified by contemporary investigators included in the "bible."

One of the bible's claim is the young earth concept; it's no more than 7,000 years old, but in fact it's over 4.5 billion years old. There's no way to deny this fact without some convolution of the word of god.

c.i. wrote :



how come we didn't meet 4.5 billion years ago ?
i kept looking and looking - no c.i. to be found !
hbg <GRINNING>



get that fire going if you want dino-stew for supper !

Ah, but we did! Our ancestors from Africa made sure of that.

It all started as oral tradition. Someone would hear the story and tell it to others. Of course, some details would get altered as the tales passed from person to person. Eventually, when writing came into use, all these stories were written down and translated into different languages - which further fudged the story lines.

And more creativity went into the writing without any regard for what the other "authors" were writing.

Their logistics were sort of a handicap too, because they didn't have airplanes to hop from one place to the next.

Because of the limited opportunity to travel, only Jews, Romans, and Arabs are the subject of the bible. No Asians and Indians in the Americas.

Modern scholars mostly believe that the creation story in the first chapter of Genesis originated in a group of Jewish theologians known as the "P" (priestly) writers which would make it one of the latest writings found in the Old Testament even though editors would later place it first. These writings occurred some time after the 6th Century BC diaspora (When King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon conquered Israel and drove the Jews out of Jerusalem into surrounding nations/areas.) The writing is part of a number of authoritative doctrinal statements setting down what orthodox Jews were to believe. These writings were an effort to keep the traditions pure and the story alive during a time when the Jews were scattered among many lands. The first chapter of Genesis underscores the Jewish belief that all that has ever existed, exists, or will exist comes from God.

The second creation story (Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden) is generally attributed to a group of writers known as the "E" writers or those who used "Elohim" as the divine name for God. These were among the earliest manuscripts found in the Old Testament. The E writers were more interested in accounts of how "God" did things or how things came about and they probably originated the Jewish tradition of teaching via allegory, metaphor, and/or parables using real life or symbolic figures. The story of Adam and Eve and their progeny is the first description of the reoccuring Old Testament motif of creation, sin (spoiling God's creation), judgment (consequences of sin), redemption (salvaging sinful humankind and setting it forth again in the story of the People of God.)

The stories are inconsistent because they were written by different people who lived as much as 1000 years apart and who were writing from entirely differenent perspectives for different reasons. I believe both were intended to be read as symoblic or allegory rather than literally, but there are many who would disagree with me about that.

Multiple inaccurate retellings of the story followed by multiple inaccurate translations of the written text.

The only reason it's even coherent at all is probably because every generation imparts a bit of its own spin on it to help it make sense to the local culture.

Really? After a lifetime of reading, I find that the scientists are starting all over and really don't know what the Universe is like. Do you?

Here's something for you to chew on. It sounds like you know it all.

Scientific American

"Forget the big bang: Now it's the big bounce--Quantum gravity theory predicts the UNIVERSE WILL NEVER DIE"

And that's got some connection to the existence of magic fairies how? I see another loser of the spendi variety.

Try using an older translation. It isn't worded quite the same.