Hi e-man. To follow on from my previous post.
Your quote:
The book of Genesis has two different versions of creation, that make no sense, one says annimals were created first and the other says that they were created second?
No, sorry, it doesn't, espescially if you look at the original Hebrew language and read into the actual wording. Take a deep breath and please analyse the following.......
Genesis 2:4 "This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven."
Is this actually the start of a contradictional and different rendering of the first creation account ? A second account ? No, The first account is a definate creation account. The second is not wholey a creation account, but a historical resume'. Its specific...to Adam.
The Hebrew word rendered history at Genesis 2:4 is 'toledot'. Its meaning is the same as found later on in Genesis where it describes the 'generations of '.....lineage. The connotation of this word implies a historical succession of events.
Genesis 2:4 onwards is not a repetititon of a different creation account, but a specific historical account from a different angle, a short step back in time looking at the first man and regarding the uncultivated earth and cultivated land, formation of creatures for him to name, and the preparation of Eden. On these points it recaps on parts of the first creation. For a start the so called second creation account does not have any mention of creation of light, luminaries, sea creatures etc. Its entire concept is different and is intended to be so.
The false idea that there are two creations is based mainly on these scriptures:
First occurence:
Gen. 1:24-5 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good."
Straight forward ... All creatures before man.
Second occurence:
Gen. 2:18-20 "And the God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground 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. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him."
This seems to imply that God had formed the creatures after man, and hence a second obscure creation account.
There are two reasonings given to answer the supposed contradiction......
Should the verb highlighted be rendered in the past tense as 'Formed' ?....The Hebrew verb 'Yatsar' (to form) has more than often been rendered in the past tense as 'formed.' in most bibles. This seems to say that the animals had been formed after Adam, but in relation to the context of the verse and of the obvious creation of other animals before man, found in Genesis 1:24,25......The true sense of utilising 'yatsar' in Genesis 2 :18-20 is to apply this verb as 'had formed' (every beast etc.) It is giving a record of God bringing the animals he had already formed to Adam so that they can be named, and not a rehash of the first creation account.
Yatsar,'to form,' can by the rules of Hebrew to English translation, be transliterated in the pluperfect form 'had formed', so it can grammatically and rightfully reads as.......
"Now God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air."
The second analysis of the verb 'yatsar' is that the past tense 'formed' is used logically, in that it is saying that God prior to making a 'helper' for Adam, would first bring the animals to Adam to name. ...God, without disturbing the animals that he had already created living outside of Eden, with his omnipotent abilities, formed the animals as special direct creations for Adam to name there and then. So the verb ' formed' in this context is sensible, and the Genesis creation account here is proven to be theologically sound, and grammatically correct.
Both reasonings are logical, for the sea creatures are not mentioned at all and show that the second account is not referring to the creation of all animals as mentioned in the true creation account in Genesis 1, but only to the animals that could be put before Adam. This shows that it is indeed an account referring to a historical view specifically surrounding Adam, Eden, and naming the animals etc.
Both ideas dispel any notion of a second creation account.
Your quote:
The bible is not a clearly written book, you would think that if there is a god that promesis to punish you on earth and punish you even after you die unless you comply with the bible, you would think he would want us to understand the bible instead of makeing it out of order and full of nonesensical Verses like :
Genesis 21:15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Genesis 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
I thinketh... Ye have got grate difficulty with a bible that uses oldy worldy Englifh.
Actually its not Genesis, but Exodus.
It is clearer to read it so that we can understand it......
Exodus 21:15 And one who strikes his father and his mother is to be put to death without fail.
Exodus 21:17 And one who calls down evil upon his father and his mother is to be put to death without fail.
I'm not certain what your beef is with these verses, but if its because you wonder why God would have an Israelite put to death for disobedience, only to go to a hell to be punished further, then I see your point, because the bible does not actually teach that there is a hell. This is a translational, and subsequent theological error. eg. the Hebrew word for hell is sheol, and the Greek word is hades. Neither mean a fiery place of torment. Each means a grave. What do the scriptures actually say about death ?...
Ecclesiastes 9:5 "For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten." And does God really torture ?...God is love. Don't only dwell on the assumed negative, check out the other positive attributes about God in the scriptures also, and see what he is really about. He does not wantonly punish, or hand over punishment to Satan to meter out blatant torture. He has laid down laws for our own benefit. The laws of the OT however, were specifically for the nation of Israel.
Laws based on the OT laws..... Love for one another was made to be more profound in the NT on fulfilment of the old covenant, opened up to all of us on the coming of Christ.
Similarly the laws of the road are for our own benefit (exempting speed cameras !) We don't like some of the rules, but chaos would ensue if we each individually made up our own rules on the road, and chaos is what will be the final outcome of our society, as we gradually make up our own rules without considering Gods laws.
The understanding about God won't come by only looking at sites that give a bias anti-God view. God doesn't hand us everything on a silver plate. True the bible is not initially clear, this is deliberate. It becomes clearer when you take in the "accurate knowledge" He tests our faith by making us work at everything, finding out things. We are not a brain in a jar to be waited upon and simply given the knowledge by God. He created us with a working body and inquisitive mind, and attributes to go out and seek, find, experience and learn, and he expects us to make use of what he gave us.
Your quote:
to say that site does not follow the story and order of events, well I would like someone to put these two verses in some kind of context or order that make sense to anyone!!!!
Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of gook and evil,thou shalt not eat of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Genesis 5:5 And all the days that adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years and he died.
( I guess what god ment to say was if you eat from that tree you will surely have childeren and die at a ripe old age of 930 years.)
We need to get an understanding of the word "Day"........"In the day" of Adam is figurative. Day can mean 24 hours, but it also means a period of time.......I assume that you mean that Adam should have died on the solar 24 hour day that he ate the 'forbidden' fruit, because the English translation seems to imply this. Day is translated from the the Hebrew word 'Yohm,' (ium) It is well recognised amongst scholars of Hebrew that 'Yohm' (day) refers to an unspecified period of time, but if the context of the surrounding scriptures and chapters etc. allows it, it can mean a 24 hour period. Our word day does not always mean a straight 24 hours either. Eg......"In the day of your Father." Day....A period of time.
Heres one scriptural meaning of day referring to a time period relating to a person....
Luke 17:26."Moreover, just as it occurred in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of man" ( Period of time.)
Figurative sense:
Zephaniah 1:7..2 "Keep silence before the Sovereign Lord Jehovah; for the day of Jehovah is near, for Jehovah has prepared a sacrifice; he has sanctified his invited ones". (Future 'day'.....Period of time)
And the one that is relevant to the flexible meaning of 'Day' in Genesis....
Genesis 2:4 "This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven".
"In the day" of the history in which Jehovah God made the heavens and the earth. This 'day' is firstly pointing to the time before a 24 hour day even existed, in Genesis 1:1 before light shone through to make the recognised 24 hour day in Genesis 1:3-5. See how day can refer to a period of time. Secondly it is also showing that one day refers to a number of days, or time periods, again showing how the scriptures state that 'the day' (yohm) is flexible and can refer to any length of time.
Now please apply this concept of the Hebrew 'yohm'...day to " In the day that Adam eats"...its not a solar 24 hour day. It is better to render it as 'in the time of' that he eats. Adam was made perfect and was intended to live for eternity. It is showing that it was the beginning of the death of Adam on the actual day that he ate, and sinned, but the 'day' mentioned ..Yohm (time period) stretches on further....930 years in this case.
