Genesis Redux

Forums: Spirituality And Religion
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I'm confused about the order of things in Genesis. In Genesis 1:1 - 1:31 God creates everything including Man and Women, who He creates together in the image of the Gods:

Gen 1:26 wrote:

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

This states that man and women were created together, in the image of their creators, before the seventh day. There is no mention of the rib of Adam, or Eve being created for man.

So the Bible continues to the seventh day,upon which God rested:

Gen 2:2 wrote:

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

Now either a day passes or a thousand years, depending on how you interpret Biblical time. But then Genesis 2:5 says that there was no man to till the ground:

Gen 2:5 wrote:

[...]for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth and there was not a man to till the ground.

Didn't God create man and Women on the sixth day? Here we are on the eighth day and now there are no people? Anyway, God creates a Man out of the dust this time:

Gen 2:7 wrote:

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed life into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Were the people created in Genesis 1:26 not humanity, but only an image of God? God did not breath life into their nostrils and give them a soul it seems. If this is so, where are these people now? Why were they not tilling the soil (were they the politicians)? If they were humanity, then what is Genesis 2:5 talking about?

The man in Genesis 2:7 is placed in Eden. The people of Genesis 1:26 do not seem to be placed in Eden.

Then there is some serious deja vu when in Genesis 2:19 God creates every creature of the earth again:

Gen 2:19 wrote:

And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

At this point we have a named man, Adam, in Eden. This all seems to be happening on the eighth day, but the Bible is not mentioning time anymore. We then get to the creation of Women from the well known rib of Adam:

Gen 2:22 wrote:

And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a women, and brought her unto the man.

So the women of Genesis 1:26 was created in God's image together with man. The women of Genesis 2:22 was made from Adam's rib.

What is the significants of all this to christian creation theory? How does all this get reconciled?

Kind Regards

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 7,031 • Replies: 189

No top replies

jstark,

Here is a link that may answer your questions. It's too long of an explanation to post here. I find this site extremely helpful and credible in answering many questions about the Bible. I hope it helps.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Genesis-days.html

0 Replies

So from gotquestions.org I fond the following explanation for the two accounts of creation:

gotquestions.org wrote:

Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" Later, in Genesis 2:4, it seems that a second, different story of Creation begins. However, close examination of the text will show that what is recorded in 1:1-2:3 is an introductory summary of the events of creation, and that what begins with verse 2:4 is a more detailed account of the Creation of mankind. There is nothing in the two Creation accounts that contradicts. Genesis 2:4-25 should be understand as a further explanation of what happened in Genesis 1:26-31. It is comparable to taking a magnifying glass to Genesis 1:26-31 to take a closer look at the Creation of mankind.

So the first account is the general discription of creation, the second account is the detailed description of the creation of man, according to gotquestions.

That is almost OK, except that gotquestions does gloss over some glaring inconsistencies which seems at least intellectualy dishonest and makes me suspect them as an authoritative source on these matters.

For example, in the Genesis 1 account of creation God creates all the animals first, then creates man and women. In the Genesis 2 account, God creates man first, then the animals, then women. That something as simple as this would go unanswered by gotquestions is suspicious.

It seems an oversight on the general account given in Genesis 1 to omit a mention of the creation of the Garden of Eden as well. Thats certainly a "highlight" of God's creation.

Kind Regards

0 Replies

jstark,

You might find some insight into supposed contradictions of the Bible here:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-errors.html

I don't think any one person or any one place will ever be able to explain these questions to everyone's satisfaction. I can only point you to where I believe you can find some explanation.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

jstark,

You might find some insight into supposed contradictions of the Bible here:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-errors.html

I don't think any one person or any one place will ever be able to explain these questions to everyone's satisfaction. I can only point you to where I believe you can find some explanation.

My point was that gotquestions.org was glossing over the issue. Their idea that the two stories are an overview and a detailed account are quite novel in that nowhere else in the Bible is such a format used. But if this is what your telling me you believe, thats fine.

My suspicion is that back in ancient days two tribes were merging into one and each had a slightly different account of creation. Much arguing ensued among the priests (and possibly priestesses) and both accounts were stitched together. One tribe seems to have been more patriarchal, while the other more egalitarian. These tribes would have been proto-Jewish, of course.

But I don't need to post on these boards to find out what I think. Smile

Kind Regards

0 Replies

And there is that other recent a2k thread, still in process, which is devoted to proving that the Koran is error- and contradiction-free, the only true word of god, and completely 100% correct. And the two views of Jesus, among other things, certainly aren't intercompatible. Be interesting to get the two different inerrancy crowds, the Biblical and the Koranic, together and let them duke it out.

0 Replies

username wrote:

And there is that other recent a2k thread, still in process, which is devoted to proving that the Koran is error- and contradiction-free, the only true word of god, and completely 100% correct.

Do you have a link to that thread?

It's interesting when people take something as mysterious as the issues pondered within a religion and then claim them as fact for everyone. I am very curious about what it is in human nature that makes this such a strong compulsion. It might be humorous but it seems that life is always on the line one way or another.

Kind Regards

0 Replies

no link, unfortunately. I was just browsing the new posts, read the posts on the thread, and went on by. It's probably somewhere in Spirituality and Religion, title is something like "I'll answer any questions you have about Islam", as I remember it.

0 Replies

jstark Wrote:

Quote:

It's interesting when people take something as mysterious as the issues pondered within a religion and then claim them as fact for everyone. I am very curious about what it is in human nature that makes this such a strong compulsion. It might be humorous but it seems that life is always on the line one way or another.

Have I in any place said that I claimed this as fact for you or anyone else? I tell you what I believe. You tell me what you believe. How is that claiming that as fact for you?

I would imagine that what you perceive as being claimed as fact for you is just a very strong belief system. What good is God or a belief system if you do not have faith in it? It would be worthless to me. Yes, I believe what the Bible says is true. I believe Jesus Christ died for everyone in the world. But, it's your choice to accept that or believe it or not. Entirely your choice.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Have I in any place said that I claimed this as fact for you or anyone else? I tell you what I believe. You tell me what you believe. How is that claiming that as fact for you?

I was not referring to you in that post. I was commenting on the thread that username was referencing. It is a common thread in life, not just on these boards. I am interested in why people feel that it is necessary to extend their own beliefs in religion to the rest of humanity though. Christianity does have a long history of missionaries, evangelism and conversion efforts. Not all Christians are like that however, which is curious in it's own right.

Anyway, don't take the post personally. I was speaking in general.

Kind Regards

0 Replies

Understood jstark. I guess that's just why it is so important (IMO) to make sure when I do or don't mean someone specifically, I put it in there. It's very easy to get confused! Especially at my age! LOL

0 Replies

Re: Genesis Redux

jstark wrote:

At this point we have a named man, Adam, in Eden. This all seems to be happening on the eighth day, but the Bible is not mentioning time anymore. ..........

I think this is the point you should remember concerning these two passages.

Chapter 1 is referencing chronology and hence a specific order of events.

Chapter 2 is not. Events are recapped and referred back to, but not necessarily mentioned in the order that they first took place, since that was already done in chapter 1, there is no need to do it again.

0 Replies

Re: Genesis Redux

real life wrote:

jstark wrote:

At this point we have a named man, Adam, in Eden. This all seems to be happening on the eighth day, but the Bible is not mentioning time anymore. ..........

I think this is the point you should remember concerning these two passages.

Chapter 1 is referencing chronology and hence a specific order of events.

Chapter 2 is not. Events are recapped and referred back to, but not necessarily mentioned in the order that they first took place, since that was already done in chapter 1, there is no need to do it again.

Right, I mentioned that in a previous post up top. My Remaining questions are:

1. Why do Gen 1 & 2 differ in the order God created things (Gen 1: Creepy crawlies, man and women together; Gen 2: Man, creepy crawlies, women)? I would expect the overview to agree with the details.

2. Why would the "overview" omit the creation of Eden?

3. This "overview/details" format is not used anywhere else in the Bible, why only in Genesis? Does this hint that maybe there is something else going on here, other than the overview/details interpretation?

Kind Regards

0 Replies

jstark, here's a summary of how biblical scholars explain the interweaving of the various traditions in the bible.

There are repetitions (doublets) in some of the stories of the Pentateuch (or Torah), the first five books of the old testament or Jewish bible. Some of the stories refer to God with the sacred Hebrew name, YHWH- Yahweh, or Jehovah. The other set uses a more generic term for God, Elohim (a feminine plural of collective, equivalent to the Latin divinita, "the divine". Biblical scholars call these strands of tradition J and E.

Also within the E traditions there are other doublets, and a distinct set of stories concerned with priestly matters of worship, purity, ritual, and laws. They call these traditions by the letter P. The fifth book, Dueteronomy, and those immediately following share a distinctive style and share a similar theology where God acts to reward just and faithful rulers and to bring down the unfaithful. This tradition is called D.

The different strands of the traditions seem to come into existence at key historical moments. The J tradtions seem concerned with Judah and may have been first collected and written in the era of Solomon, in the 900s BCE. The E traditions develop in the north, perhaps around the sanctuary of Shiloh. This is when the stories would have been written, not when they supposedly took place.

The different strands also have a different emphasis. Scholars believe the J and E strands were rewoven after the fall of the northern kingdom when many of it's survivors combined forces with the kingdom of Judah in the south sometime after 722 BCE.

If you're interested in further reading, there is an excellent book by John Buehrens titled, "Understanding the Bible, an Introduction for Skeptics, Seekers, and Religious Liberals"

0 Replies

Re: Genesis Redux

jstark wrote:

real life wrote:
jstark wrote:

At this point we have a named man, Adam, in Eden. This all seems to be happening on the eighth day, but the Bible is not mentioning time anymore. ..........

I think this is the point you should remember concerning these two passages.

Chapter 1 is referencing chronology and hence a specific order of events.

Chapter 2 is not. Events are recapped and referred back to, but not necessarily mentioned in the order that they first took place, since that was already done in chapter 1, there is no need to do it again.

Right, I mentioned that in a previous post up top. My Remaining questions are:

1. Why do Gen 1 & 2 differ in the order God created things (Gen 1: Creepy crawlies, man and women together; Gen 2: Man, creepy crawlies, women)? I would expect the overview to agree with the details.

2. Why would the "overview" omit the creation of Eden?

3. This "overview/details" format is not used anywhere else in the Bible, why only in Genesis? Does this hint that maybe there is something else going on here, other than the overview/details interpretation?

Kind Regards

The overview in chap 2 agrees completely with the details in chap 1. Again, chap 2 does not need to list things in any specific order because it is not necessary to repeat chap 1.

For instance when chap 2 recaps that 'God (had) created the animals' and it is listed after mentioning the creation of man, it is not implying that God created Man first and animals after.

The Bible is actually replete with examples of events that are covered in more than one passage without every single detail being repeated in each.

Compare the four Gospels.

Compare the books of Samuel and Kings with the Chronicles.

Compare the OT prophets with the OT historical books.

Compare Acts with the Epistles.

Many times this has been seized upon as supposed evidence of contradictions in the Bible. However further study reveals that the answer usually is found in becoming better acquainted with the language, lands, customs, etc of the period which is being dealt with.

My favorite is Jesus' healing of the blind man in the Gospels. Did Jesus heal him on the way into Jericho..... or on the way out of Jericho? Read it and see what you think.

0 Replies

From Buehren's book,

Quote:

...the Bible has not one, but two, stories of creation - one about the creation of the cosmos and the creatures on earth, another about the creation of human beings. They come from different strands of tradition (P and J respectively) and do not entirely agree.

...Some people think of "the beginning", creation, as an event in time. And they want to make the first chapter of Genesis a literal account of its stages. But it isn't. Nor is it a theologians's creatio ex nihilo, a creation out of nothing.

...Carefully read, Genesis 1 begins with matter already in existence. "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." But before the beginning it goes on to say, "The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters."
Never mind the inconsistency. The first chapter of Genesis is not a treatise in natural history. It is a poetic prologue to a sacred history in the form of a hymn, a liturgical poem exalting God for creating order out of primal chaos. Its six stanza each begin with the words, "And God said..." ".. Let there be light," for example, or "Let the waters bring forth.... Each then repeats the comment, "And God saw that it was good," and ends with the refrain, "And there was evening and there was morning, a new day."

0 Replies

Thanks J_B,

I am somewhat familiar with the scholarly historical analysis of Biblical texts and the various redactions that have taken place throughout history. I have not read the book you mentioned though and will check it out. Thanks.

What I have not been able to understand from studying the history is how Christians, Jews & Muslims take all that work and derive a religion from it that commands such importance in their lives ("the chosen people", "only through Christ", "no god but Allah", etc.). hat is a personal decision that each person must make at some point. In order to understand that you need to go to the source.

So I ask questions and see what the answers are. Sometimes I will ask a question that I know the answer to from a certain perspective in order to see what the other perspectives are. For example, I had never heard the overview/details explanation of Gen 1 and 2 before. Looking into it further it seems to be a well spread defensive Christian position on the matter. At least on the websites loaded with Christian debate ammo. I've seen one other reference mention what you said about Hebrew texts using that format sometimes. Although, I do not know of the Bible using that format anywhere else.

Kind Regards

0 Replies

jstark Wrote:

Quote:

What I have not been able to understand from studying the history is how Christians, Jews & Muslims take all that work and derive a religion from it that commands such importance in their lives ("the chosen people", "only through Christ", "no god but Allah", etc.). hat is a personal decision that each person must make at some point. In order to understand that you need to go to the source.

Well jstark, the Bible says we are to love the Lord God with all our hearts, all our soul, and all our minds. To me that commands quite a bit of importance in my life.

0 Replies

jstark wrote:

Do you have a link to that thread?

I think this is probably the one referred to.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1641090#1641090

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Well jstark, the Bible says we are to love the Lord God with all our hearts, all our soul, and all our minds. To me that commands quite a bit of importance in my life.

If you follow what it commands, yes it would. Thats what interests me, that people would follow the Bibles commands as opposed to anything else.

Kind Regards

0 Replies

Genesis Redux

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know