cpickett

Exactly my point, Genesis 2 is third person, it is not Adam's perspective.

I am guessing that you think that Moses wrote the first 5 books, then how do you explain this in Deuteronomy?

So Moses the servant of Jehovah died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of Jehovah. 34:6 And he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab over against Beth-peor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day. 34:7 And Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated. 34:8 And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days: so the days of weeping in the mourning for Moses were ended.

Impressive presence of mind for a dead guy.

This is getting off topic though, I look forward to seeing your rebuttal of the SAB.

Magus55

Deuturonomy is book number 5, and Moses didn't finish it. He wrote Genesis, Exodus, Levictus, Numbers, and part of Deuteronomy up until his death. Another author finished it.

Mageth

Magus: you said -

Again, its from Adam's perspective, He didn't know how many days God took to create. He was there, He saw the Heavens and the Earth and plants, and knew that God made him but He had no clue how long ago. So he said, in the day that God made [everything that He could see before Him], He created man [me(Adam)]. Its the brief history of creation from Adam's perspective, its not a contradiction so can we move on already?

And then you said:

And what do you mean Adam's perspective is third person? Adam didn't write Genesis, Moses did, and God dictated it to him.

So, if Moses wrote chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis, then he knew how many days god took to create, and on what day Adam and everything else was created. So why did Moses introduce the apparent discrepancies in Ch. 2? And how can you claim it's written from Adam's perspective if Moses wrote what God dictated? It's more like it's from God's perspective.

Mageth

As far as claim to Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, I would have to say that was definitely a disputed fact; many scholars think it is a combination of four sources from different authors. I know the bible, in various places, attributes authorship to Moses, but the one place where such attribution is not really made is in the books of the Pentateuch themselves.

Then you have these verses:

Numbers 12:3
Now the man Moses was very meek more than all men that were on the face of the earth.

Why would the meekest man on earth call attention to the fact that he was the meekest man on earth?

And, keeping the above verse in mind, consider these two verses:

Exodus 11:3 - Moreover, the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt.

Deuteronomy 34:10 - And there had not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses…

Odd claims from someone who claims to be the meekest man on earth! (your "someone finished Deuteronomy" explanation may work for the second one).

mike_decock

There's a good article on Documentary Hypothesis on the Religious Tolerance website explaining the reasons for attributing different portions to different authors.

-Mike...

BadBadBad

"It's from Adam's perspective." That's a nice assertion, but what is that based upon? It doesn't say anything in these passages about this being from Adam's perspective. It appears to be written from exactly the same perspective as chapter one. That is supposedly the perspective of Moses' view of creation. What is the basis for concluding that this is from Adam's view?

You and I both know what it is. Chapter 1 and 2 contradict, and this is a supposedly favorable interpretation that "eliminates" the contradiction. Genesis must be true, therefore, this must be the explanation. Unfortunately, we need a little more evidence. We're talking about a supernatural God creating the universe. This is the crux of christianity. If Genesis falls, so does christianity. Unfortunately for you, this story contradicts itself, it contradicts science, and it contradicts common sense.

Without any evidence, we at best fall back to the legend that it's written by Moses from the perspective of Moses' understanding of creation, hence the legitimate identification of contradiction on SAB. Perhaps a more simple assertion than your Adam's perspective nonsense is that chapters one and two are not written by the same author, hence the contradictions and difference of opinion about the cronology of creation. In other words, I have a more simple explanation of the contradiction. The story is fable and mythology.

Let's even give you the Adam's perspective assertion for the moment. It still doesn't hold up. How does this eliminate the contradiction? Adam is put onto an Earth into the garden God planted in Eden. He's standing in a field of dirt or sand for as far as he can see. While he's standing there,

2:9
And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

2:19
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.

He's standing there and from his unique perspective on the world, he sees God form plants and animals out of the ground. Genesis 2: Man first, then plants and animals, then woman. Genesis 1: plants, animals, man/woman simulaneously. Adam's perspective also contradicts with Genesis 1.

Oh, and in exactly which verse does Genesis stop being written from Adam's perspective? Do we go back to Moses' perspective in 3:1?

Let's not move on until you explain the contradiction. In fact, let's not move on until you've explained all the contradictions noted by SAB with respect to Genesis 1 and 2.

cpickett

OK, it's obvious he doesn't have an answer, so we'll move on to keep the thread from stagnating:

SAB: 1
Magus55: 0

1:3-5 God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). And how could there be "the evening and the morning" on the first day if there was no sun to mark them?

While not really a contradiction, it is an interesting question, how was there light without objects that produce light? And how did we have evening and morning before God has "divided the night and the day"?

Jack the Bodiless

It's also worth noting that this shoots down the Old-Earth Creationist "day-age" translation. They claim that there is an ambiguity in the Hebrew word translated as "day": if so, then the specific references to evenings and mornings seems to be an attempt by the authors to say "yes, we really mean DAYS here, folks".

Magus55

First of all, SAB didn't win. I explained to you what Gen 1 and Gen 2 mean, its not my fault if you don't accept it or can't grasp the concept. Gen 2, is a brief summary of Gen 1. Animals are mentioned afterward, because there were no animals within sight of Adam when He was created, therefore there was no need to mention them until after adam was created and saw them. Don't like that explanation, all well - doesn't mean SAB won whatsoever - grow up.

And to your second point - what do you think lights Heaven? Does an omnipotent God have to create an artificial sun to keep from sitting in the dark? God emimates his own light. His Holiness makes Him glow, which is what lights Heaven.

God's own personal light shone on the Earth and he divided it into light and dark. Once he finished with establishing light and dark, the morning and the night - He created a sun to maintain it and set the yearly revolution.

Mageth

And to your second point - what do you think lights Heaven? Does an omnipotent God have to create an artificial sun to keep from sitting in the dark? God emimates his own light. His Holiness makes Him glow, which is what lights Heaven.

I don't know about anyone else, but I find this rather amusing; comical, really. Glowing God. The Great Pumpkin, lit by his internal candle of holiness.

What use would a spiritual omnimax god have for light in a spiritual world, Magus? How could spiritual light illuminate a physical universe? If god's emitting photons, then god would appear to be made of matter/energy just like the universe.

Just how do you know this astounding fact, Magus? Been there?