02-05-2007, 04:19 PM | #1 |
Charon
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo)
Posts: 9,564
|
Dual Creation Stories in Genesis
I found some interesting stuff in the Oxford NSRV bible yesterday. I was reading the introduction to the Pentateuch and there was a discussion on whether or not Moses was actually the author, as opposed to it being a collection of writings from various authors (including Moses perhaps). One of the points discussed was the fact there are actually two different accounts of the creation in Genesis, making it appear that accounts from two authors were combined into one. In spite of having read Genesis countless times, I never noticed this before. But sure enough, it is right there, plain as day. The first story is found in:
Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 In this account, God created the world by word ("Let there be ...") and it was over the six-day period we are familiar with. Man was created last, on the sixth day, and it explicitly says that both "male and female" are created (1:27-28). By 2:3, everything is wrapped up and God rests from His labors. Then in Genesis 2:4, a second account begins. In this case, the earth is created first, then Adam, then plants, then animals, then Eve. This is the story where Satan gets involved. Anyway, I had never noticed the dual account angle before. I simply merged both stories into one. Of course, I may be last one in this crowd learn this. But I thought it was pretty fascinating.
__________________
"... the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King, Jr. Last edited by Jeff Lebowski; 02-05-2007 at 04:46 PM. |
02-05-2007, 04:26 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 533
|
I have always viewed this as an expounding of what was stated previously. Not two seperate accounts. Just a further explanation of what/how it happened.
__________________
Hello......helloo.......HELLLOOO! |
02-05-2007, 04:30 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 7,157
|
That's what I've tried to think too, but I don't know if it's accurate or not. I think my resistance to the dual stories is due to the fact that I learned of them from a whacked-out atheist liberal feminist literature professor. Guilt by association.
|
02-05-2007, 04:39 PM | #4 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 216
|
Quote:
I guess whacked out theoreticians can be right too :-). Last edited by Chapel-Hill-Coug; 02-05-2007 at 04:41 PM. Reason: grammar |
|
02-05-2007, 04:45 PM | #5 | |
Charon
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo)
Posts: 9,564
|
Quote:
__________________
"... the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King, Jr. |
|
02-05-2007, 04:48 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 7,157
|
|
02-05-2007, 04:49 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
|
I think the PofGP and temple accounts provide enough clarification on the order of things.
|
02-05-2007, 04:52 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Bluth Home
Posts: 3,877
|
Thank goodness someone pointed that out. Nothing left to discuss.
__________________
The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. -Galileo |
02-05-2007, 05:10 PM | #9 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 216
|
This is a tautology. How can accounts relying on base text X clarify the accuracy of what is in base text X, let alone clarify source-critical issues surrounding the text? This is what drives me nuts about non-critical thinking. You make a theological assertion, and you don't even seem to be aware of the underlying assumptions already inherent in your assertion (assuming that inspired material must adhere to post-enlightenment concerns). People do the same thing even now with the JST supposedly being restoration of text, and this was debunked by faithful scholars long ago. All the temple account and PofGP do is magnify 18th century texts which were meaningful at the time. It says nothing about sources of the Pentateuch which were CLEARLY written by different authors at different times. If it had to be an either or proposition, than many LDS scholars who have accepted the obvious would have dismissed the PoGP already. Fortunately, there is the possibility that God doesn't care about the sources of Genesis. He just wants to inspire people, right? So the KJV, as inaccurate as it is, would be just fine to base these inspired texts on, wouldn't it? If you're going to stick with pre-enlightenment thinking, don't apply it uncritically to post-enlightenment categories [*edit* I mean to say Enlightenment categories].
Last edited by Chapel-Hill-Coug; 02-05-2007 at 05:11 PM. Reason: clarification |
02-05-2007, 05:50 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
|
Quote:
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|