| 2 years ago :: Sep 26, 2011 - 9:30AM #1 | |
|
The first two chapters of Genesis provide two very different accounts of Creation. Firstly, they are contradictory. The sequence of Genesis 1:1 – 2:3 is plants, animals, then man and woman, whereas the sequence of Genesis 2:4 – 25 is man, plants, animals, then woman. Secondly, in the account at Genesis 1, the name of God is “Elohim”(35 times), whereas in the second account the word “God” never appears, but rather “Yahweh” is used (11 times). There is nothing unusual about this if we understand the entire Bible. The harmony is obvious. Scripture abounds with multiple prophetic scenarios so why be surprised with two distinct accounts of creation? It's an undeniable fact that the book of Daniel weaves together two distinct prophecies, the first one is written in Aramaic and anticipates the world as coming to an end in the days of a divided fourth kingdom (the Roman Empire) and the second scenario, written in Hebrew, envisions the world ending in the period of the divided Greek kingdom. And the book of Revelation foretells of the world possibly ending in the first century (the seals), then in 1844 (the trumpets). But those conclusions are cancelled with the introduction of a third and final scenario in Revelation 12, which extends to an even more distant future.
Moderated by
Stardove
on Mar 25, 2012 - 06:54PM
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 2 years ago :: Sep 27, 2011 - 10:07AM #2 | |
|
This is the end of the first creation account: Genesis 2 The second creation account begins as follows: Genesis 2 In regard to multiple scenarios in Bible prophecy, note the similarity between the seven trumpet judgments and the seven last plagues. The inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the chart, i.e., that the traditional Adventist interpretation of the trumpets being ancient history and the seven last plagues being real plagues, is that the orthodox Adventist view of prophecy is completely irrational and indefensible.
Moderated by
Stardove
on Mar 25, 2012 - 06:53PM
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 2 years ago :: Sep 28, 2011 - 3:46PM #3 | |
|
One more argument that supports multiple scenarios is the New Testament expectation that the end of the world was to be in the lifetime of the Apostles.
Moderated by
Stardove
on Mar 25, 2012 - 06:53PM
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 2 years ago :: Sep 28, 2011 - 11:25PM #4 | |
|
Two stories or one? Until the latter half of the 19th century, Genesis 1 and 2 were seen as one continuous, uniform story with Genesis 1:1–2:6 outlining the world's origin, and 2:7–2:25 carefully painting a more detailed picture of the creation of humanity. Modern scholarship, citing (1) the use of two different names for God, (2) two different emphases (physical vs. moral issues), and (3) a different order of creation (plants before humans vs. plants after humans), believes that these are two distinct scriptures written many years apart by two different sources, chapter 1 by the Priestly source and chapter 2 by the Jahwist, with the bridge the work of a "redactor", or editor. - Metzger, Bruce M.; Murphy, Roland E., eds (1991). "Annotation to Genesis 2:4b". The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha (Revised edition ed.). USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 2048. ISBN 0195283562. - Metzger, Bruce M.; Coogan, Michael D., eds (1993). The Oxford Companion to the Bible (First Printing ed.). Oxford University Press,. pp. 932. ISBN 0195046455. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 2 years ago :: Oct 01, 2011 - 11:04PM #5 | |
|
The Genesis account of creation contains no contradictory accounts of the creative process. The account of creation in Genesis 1 provides the sequence of the creative process for each day, but provides very little explanation as to procedures and/or details. The account in Genesis 2 provides an explanation of the creative process by providing a more detailed exegesis of creation events, but not necessarily in the sequential order of creation. The fact that they are not sequential as is Genesis 1, neither chapter provides evidence that they are directly in contravention to each other, nor are they supposed to be parallel in a sequential explanation of the creative process. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|