Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | facts about genesis ? | Genesis | kalos | 55870 | ||
'Don't Gen. 1 and 2 present contradictory creation accounts? 'Genesis 1 '- Day one - heavens and earth are created. "Let there be light." Day and Night. - Day two - Atmospheric waters separated from earth waters. - Day three - Land appears separating the seas. Vegetation is made. - Day four - Sun, moon, stars are made. - Day five - Sea life and birds are made. - Day six - Land animals, creeping things, and man (male and female) are made. 'Genesis 2 'States heaven and earth were created. No plant yet on earth, no rain yet, no man. But, a mist rose watering the surface of the ground. Then the Lord formed man from dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Then God made Eve. 'There is no contradiction between Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 1 is a detailed explanation of the six days of creation, day by day. Genesis two is a recap and a more detailed explanation of the sixth day, the day that Adam and Eve were made. The recap is stated in Gen. 2:4, "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven." Then, Moses goes on to detail the creation of Adam and Eve as is seen in verses 7 thru 24 of Gen. 2. Proof that it is not a creative account is found in the fact that animals aren't even mentioned until after the creation of Adam. Why? Probably because their purpose was designated by Adam. They didn't need to be mentioned until after Adam was created' (http://www.carm.org/diff/Gen_1.htm). ************* 'The inspiration of Genesis and its character as a divine revelation are authenticated by the testimony of Jesus Christ (Mt 19:4-6; 24:37-39; Mk 10:4-9; Lk 11:49-51; 17:26-29, 32; Jn 7:21-23; 8:44,56) and supplemented by the testimony of history.' Matthew 19:4 Footnote. 'Observe in vv. 4-6 Jesus' confirmation of the Genesis narrative of the creation.' (New Scofield Reference Bible, Oxford, 1967) |
||||||
2 | facts about genesis ? | Genesis | Treadway | 55893 | ||
'Don't Gen. 1 and 2 present contradictory creation accounts? Hello Kalos: you wrote: - Day five - Sea life and birds are made. -------------------------------------------------------------------”Genesis 1:20…let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly….Genesis 1:24…”Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, etc… ”verses Genesis 2:19….”And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air…”------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Seems to me that in one version, birds are formed out of the “waters”; and the beasts are formed out of the ground. They don’t’ seem to have been created together. In the second version, birds and beasts are formed from the ground, created at the same time. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- you wrote: Day six - Land animals, creeping things, and man (male and female) are made. 'Genesis 2 Then the Lord formed man from dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Then God made Eve. 'There is no contradiction between Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 1 is a detailed explanation of the six days of creation, day by day ----------------------- Genesis 1: 26…”Let us make man in our image…..and let them have dominion over (all life)…..27…”…male and female created he them… ”verses Genesis 2: 20…”…but for Adam there was not found an help mate for him…22…”made he a woman, and brought her unto the man…”----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In the first version, male and female, in context, are made at the same time in the “image of “us”, a plural reference. In the second version, man is given a name, Adam, and created by a singular reference; the animals, in context, are made after Adam was created. In context, the female, Eve was not made at the same time as part of the overall plan of making male and female in the “image” of “us”. She came as a “help-mate”, made from a part of the man. These are clearly differences, clearly distinct.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Genesis 1: 29….God tells man and woman, together, that they may eat any herb, every fruit, etc, for their “meat”. There is nothing forbidden. In context, man and woman are both the recipients of this information. Genesis 2: 17 In the second version, God tells Adam—there is no Eve at this time—not to eat of the fruit from the tree of Knowledge. Another distinction between the two versions.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Too tired to continue on this….but there’s enough smoke created that a person would be remiss not to see if there’s a fire. If not two versions, then at the very least, it’s a rather awkward way to present one story. ……………….good thoughts, Treadway |
||||||
3 | facts about genesis ? | Genesis | srbaegon | 55909 | ||
Hello Treadway "If not two versions, then at the very least, it’s a rather awkward way to present one story" Only if we try to read it as contemporary Western literature. As Genesis is read, there is a recurring pattern of Summary-Detail-Summary-Detail-etc. Contemporary Western culture does just the opposite (D-S-D-S). Gen 1:1 gives an opening summary statement followed by the detail of the statement (actually going through Gen 2:3). Gen 2:4 then circles back to give increasing detail of the sixth day. It takes a little adjustment, but it's not insurmountable. Steve |
||||||
4 | facts about genesis ? | Genesis | Treadway | 55915 | ||
Hello Steve: You wrote: Gen 1:1 gives an opening summary statement followed by the detail of the statement (actually going through Gen 2:3). Gen 2:4 then circles back to give increasing detail of the sixth day. It takes a little adjustment, but it's not insurmountable. ---------------------------------------- I do understand that's the "intent". I guess I don't really like to have to "insert" or "bend" when I read Scripture. If read literally, and that's the way this should have been written, also, then I shouldn't have to wonder what is going on. It is a problem. As you say, maybe not insurmountable, but there might never be a consensus. It's disheartening that so much needs explaining, and then it can get into the gray area of "explaining away." And just the examples I gave, are not that easy to explain away. Many scholars have deduced that there must have been two versions at work. I'd sure like it more definite......but who wouldn't? :) Treadway |
||||||