Genesis

[cmotherofpirl]

bump

[Circle_Master]

No that is not what I mean.

Remember the early OT is a blend of oral traditions what were eventually written down.

Israel was divided into tribes, and eventually kingdoms and when the sacred writer/editor combined the stories, he kept the dialect differences intact.

hm.... when Moses wrote Genesis - he was on his way to Israel. There were tribes - no kingdoms. He wrote it down because God commanded him to - not in an attempt to fuse history together.

YTHe beginnings of Genesis  is a combination of two such traditions.

Genesis 1:1- 2:4a talks about the transcendance of God and uses the name Elohim (master of the universe)  and is very stylized and beautiful. Genesis 1:31 to 2:4a is the conclusion of the first story. What's interesting here is the seventh in hebrew is the same word as oath or covanant , so the seventh day is also the covanant day when God finished creating the world and saw it was very good.

THe second story of Genesis uses the word Yahweh (Lord God) for God throughout and it a different tradition. It actual starts at Genesis 2:verse 4b and is the older of the stories. It has a far different style than Genesis 1 and is a definite teaching story of God's first covanant and how it was broken and sin and death enterd the world.  It also shows how much God valued free will.

How much God valued free will? Which is why He wasn't surprised when Adam and Eve fell? Or which is why He already made it possible to reproduce ahead of time knowing they would fall. Or which is why He made the world outside of the garden of Eden even though they were confined in Eden? Or which is why He made the tree at all? God wasn't surprised by their fall - it was planned.

I wouldn't say they are traditions either. Elohim means - The Goddest - or The highest God. It is really just a majestic form of God. YHVH is the personal name of God and that alone. Lord God is always Adonai Elohim - LORD God is YHVH Elohim. Seventh in hebrew is 'shevee-ee', Covenant is 'bereth' always. You were told some wrong stuff there.

[cmotherofpirl]

The Pentateuch is attributed to Moses, to show its great authority.

THe books themselves were written somewhere around the time of the Exile.

[Circle_Master]

The Pentateuch is attributed to Moses, to show its great authority.

THe books themselves were written somewhere around the time of the Exile.

So you believe Scripture isn't inerrant when it says Moses wrote down the first five books. You do submit to the Pope don't you?

[cmotherofpirl]

So you believe Scripture isn't inerrant when it says Moses wrote down the first five books. You do submit to the Pope don't you?

Do you believe Jesus was a door when he said he was?

Do you believe Jesus when he said the smallest seed was the mustard seed?

Do you believe Moses sat down one day and God dictated the Pentatech to him?

Do you believe everything is simple as it was first explained to you?

God worked thru many people over a long period of time who compiled all the oral traditions of their people into a massive work called the pentateuch. Some of it is contradictory, some is it is redundant and repeats intself. THat does not make it any less inspired by God. God worked thru people, not dictation machines.

THere are many excellent protestant authors I can refer you to.

[Circle_Master]

Do you believe Jesus was a door when he said he was?

nope. You however believe He is a hunk of bread when He said He was.

Do you believe Jesus when he said the smallest seed was the mustard seed?

given the culture, and the time - yep!

Do you believe Moses sat down one day and God dictated the Pentatech to him?

Nope, I believe like it happened. God told him to record it, and he did. And somehow through the Holy Spirit's work he had a completely accurate copy of history.

God worked thru many people over a  long period of time who compiled all the oral traditions of their people into a massive work called the pentateuch.  Some of it is contradictory, some is it is redundant and repeats intself.  THat does not make it any less inspired by God. God worked thru people, not dictation machines.

Nothing in it is contradictory. And Moses says he wrote it. I believe that - the bible is inerrant. To say otherwise is to buy into Liberal hoey.

THere are many excellent protestant authors I can refer you to.

Go ahead. Find 1 that is conservative - good luck.

[cmotherofpirl]

Actually there a contradictory spots in the Bible in the history sections. Many parts of Leviticus and Deuteronomy repeat each other.

Do you dismiss all protestant biblical scholarship?

My OT book fell apart, but how about Understanding the New Testament by Kee, Young, and Froehlich?

Do I sound like a liberal to you?

[Circle_Master]

can't say I've heard of them.

I believe my bible to be inerrant and free from errors in the hagiograph, and so does the CC supposedly.

There cannot be errors. And I don't believe any to exist

-prove it.

and I don't know those names - so can't help ya on that one

Edited January 8, 2004 by Circle_Master

[cmotherofpirl]

can't say I've heard of them.

I believe my bible to be inerrant and free from errors in the hagiograph, and so does the CC supposedly.

There cannot be errors. And I don't believe any to exist

-prove it.

and I don't know those names - so can't help ya on that one

THe bible is free from theological error and is inspired.

Do you really think that inerrancy is extended to all the history, geography, science and every other ology connected with the Bible?

[Circle_Master]

I believe the inerrancy extends to the history and geography. science .. what is science anyway. Would I derive PI based on the wheel measurements given on the egyptian chariots? no. Why? Because that is not the purpose of the text. Many parts of the text are for the purpose of history and geography. I don't see error as existing in that. The Bible is also culturally true - so sometimes may sound contradictory but in actuality to the correct audience are not at all.

btw - the circular measurements ( i believe there are two) given in the bible do correspond perfectly to pi (given the level of precision as well)

Edited January 8, 2004 by Circle_Master

[cmotherofpirl]

I think the Bible can be correct in history, geography and science if it were intended as a history ( as we know it) geography or science book.

It is not. It is a collection of many things: religious truths, poetry, wisdom literature, prophecy, rules and regulations, letter, and good news written over a thousand year span by many people all inpired by God.

I t think it important to see the Bible as what it is, and what it is not.

[Circle_Master]

I think the Bible can be correct in history, geography and science if it were intended as a history ( as we know it) geography or science book.

It is not. It is a collection of many things: religious truths, poetry, wisdom literature, prophecy, rules and regulations, letter, and good news written over a thousand year span by many people all inpired by God.

I t think it important to see the Bible as what it is, and what it is not.

don't forget it is a collection of historical records as well. such as .. chronicles.

and don't forget the entire book of Genesis is based around the statement "The is the account of...."

[cmotherofpirl]

don't forget it is a collection of historical records as well.  such as .. chronicles.

and don't forget the entire book of Genesis is based around the statement "The is the account of...."

Yes there are historical records, but remember they are there for a theological reason.: so we know that God is on the side of Israel.

Genesis is really a two-part book. THe beginning are stories that teach religious truths, and then with Abraham the history of the chosen people begins. Genesis is really a long prologue to the most important event in Jewish history - the Exodus.

Edited January 8, 2004 by cmotherofpirl