Posted on 12/06/2001 6:32:57 AM PST by Weatherman123
Good morning folks. I came up with a new example that I think gives excellent evidence that different writers wrote different parts of the Bible. Tell me what you think. Like I could stop you! :)
Let's talk about just the first two chapters of Genesis, the creation story/myth. Gn 1:1-2:4a versus Gn 2:4b-25. Can you see two distinctly different stories here? Please go read them both. Here's one example:
Gn 1:1-2 In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss, while a mighty wind swept over the waters.
Gn 2:4b-5 At the time when the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, while as yet there was no field shurb on earth and no grass of the field had sprouted, for the LORD God had sent no rain upon the earth...
Was there water in the beginning as the first account says, or no water as the second account says? Was there land as the second account says or just a formeless wasteland covered by water as the first says? Which is it?
If you go and read Gn 1:1-2:4a and then compare it to Gn 2:4b-25, I think you can see they are two totally different creation myths.
---In the first, the human creation is the final act of God. God creates man on the "6th day."
---In the second, the LORD, God, begins his work with man. The garden, trees, rivers and animals follow.
---In the first, God is called "God".
---In the second, God is called "the LORD".
---In the first, creation happens in an orderly fashion, over 7 days. Day 1: light. Day 2: sky. Day 3: earth and vegetation. Day 4: sun, moon and stars. Day 5: birds and fish. Day 6: animals and human. Day 7: God rests.
***Another minor discrepancy: Where did the light come from, created on the first day, if the sun, moon and stars were not created until the 4th day. If you read the Bible literally, how can this make sense?
---In the second, creation has no orderly fashion, but it's a vivid telling of creation, a good story. The LORD has already created the earth and the heavens, but there was no grass or fields, no rain, and his first act is to form man out of clay. Then he plants the garden of Eden, including the tree of knowledge. Then a river rises to water Eden and divides into 4 other rivers. Then the LORD decides it's not good for man to live alone and creates a succession of different creatures and parades them in front of man to name. But none of these animals were a suitable mate so the LORD put man into a deep sleep and built a woman out of one of his ribs.
The depiction of God is completely different in each section. In the first, God is orderly, transcendent, above the fray, able to bring order out of chaos. In the second, God is almost humanlike, forming man out of clay and breathing life into his nostrils, parading animals in front of man to name, reaching into the flesh of man and "building" a woman out of one of his ribs.
The literary style is completely different in each section. The first is an orderly, repetetive account. The second is a vivid story with great imagery.
Both creations myths are divinely inspired and neither can be ignored, nor is one more important than the other. But they were written by different writers.
The Priestly writer is responsible for the first creation myth. P was writing during the time of exile (550 BCE) and his main concern was keeping his people together during this difficult time of dispersion and making sense out their loss of power, land and their temple and ark in which they believed God dwelled. "And let them make me a sanctuary that I may dwell in their midst" (Ex 25:8). The P writer is not a storyteller, he likes lists, order and repetition. Notice how many times you read "Then God said" and "evening came, morning followed" and "God saw how good it was". The Priestly God was one who stood above the people, who was able to bring order out of chaos. This is the God the people in exile needed, one who could bring order back to the chaos of their lives in exile. Additionally, the first mention of Sabbath is in the first creation myth. The Priestly writer was concerned with cultic and priestly matters, such as Sabbath. Sabbath is not mentioned at all in the second account.
The Yahwist writer is responsible for the second creation myth. The Yahwist writer wrote during the time of David and Solomon (950 BCE), the good times when the Israelites had a land, a King, a temple and were a powerful nation. The God that the J (Yahwist) writer knew was a more personal God. His God was called Yahweh and we read that as the LORD in our bibles. Notice how often we see the word LORD in the second account and the fact that the word LORD is not mentioned once in the first account. His idea of God, the LORD, was a very human God, one who got down and molded man out of clay and breathed life into him. God is often represented with human characteristics, such as being a potter (Gn 2:7 The LORD God formed man out of the clay of the ground..)and a gardener (Gn 2:8 Then the LORD God planted a garden in Eden..) The J writer is a vivid story teller and his writting is full of imagery.
Can anyone here see the two different literary styles? The two different theologies of God? The historical context in which the two different creation myths were written?
Yeah I've pointed that out before to people. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
If I'm not mistaken a few "mothers" were named Maya, Mary(forget what the Hebrew is) or Merte(Egyptian, I believe) There were all kinds of gods running around the Mid East since the Sumerians, and no reason to believe that the Bible's writers didn't copy and edit to their heart's delight from the rich source material. Lets not forget the murder of Hyapatia at the Library of Alexandria by the Bishop of ALexandria and his nutty,wacky followers.
The first creation: God created everything and Lucifer was already given power over the earth. It was his, basically. Then God kicked Lucifer out of heaven and in his anger, Satan ruined the earth and caused the life then existing (dinosaurs, etc.) to die.
Then God re-created the earth. Genesis 2 is the recreation.
There is scripture in Isaiah 45:18 referring to this (such as "For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it and did not create it a waste place, But formed it to be inhabited.") which directly refutes that God had created the earth a waste place. It became that way after Satan wrecked it.
What you said! Just wish I saved all those answers. I'll look for 'em later tonight.
I just wish those raising the questions put as much energy into trying to find the answers, such as learning the culture, context and language.
I'm glad you had the chance to take them! Funny how the classes you dreaded turned out to be the most memorable...seems like the Lord continues to work in mysterious ways! I'm going to try and find that article you mentioned - I'm sure I would enjoy reading it!
It was the presence of God which made the light!
No, I hadn't heard that. Thanks for clearing things up for me.
Where did I claim God made a mistake? I've repeatedly stated that I believe the Bible to be divinely inspired, therefore, any fault in the book is made on the part of the humans who wrote it, not God. Sorry, but I never said mistake or screw up, those are your words, not mine.
Go look up myth in the dictionary. It's primary meaning is NOT a false story. I'm sorry you don't believe I'm a Christian, but that's your problem not mine. As for me and my house, we serve the Lord. I don't have to prove that to you. But thanks for chiming in.
Yes, I sure found that out the hard way, didn't I? Oh well, I've wasted time on less important things than this. I did actually learn a lot from those who were willing to discuss and not insult, so in that sense it was worth it. I think I'll stop reading though, it's like banging my head against a wall.
Cap'n! I wish you had told me this earlier. I forgot I'm not allowed to read the Bible. Please don't tell the Pope! I'll stop reading right now, I promise! :)
Matthew was written by Matthew to all the Jewish people. He used over 65 references to the Old Testament. Only the Jewish people would have understood the references. This Gospel was about the man, Jesus
Mark was written by Mark to the Romans. The Romans believed in might and power. Mark wrote to the new Christians telling of Jesus might and power.
Luke was written by Luke to the Greeks. The Greeks were into the body. Luke, as the physician, was the perfect one to tell the new Christians about the "body" of Christ.
John was written by John to the Jews and the new Christians. It was written to show the deity of Christ.
Yet, throughout the first 3 Gospels, the story of Christ's birth and ministry are similar in many respects. Each gave their view of what they saw Jesus do.
Your musings aren't worth the time it takes to read them more than once.
Pronunciation: 'mith
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek mythos
Date: 1830
1 a : a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon b : PARABLE, ALLEGORY
2 a : a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone; especially : one embodying the ideals and institutions of a society or segment of society b : an unfounded or false notion
3 : a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence
4 : the whole body of myths
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Merriam-Webster Privacy Policy ***
Most people may assume #3 would be the definition you illustrated. Perhaps you could be clear in your initial thoughts next time?
Well, that's an incorrect assumption on their/your part isn't it? I used the most popular, ie #1, definition. I can't help it if people read my post with prejudice and assume I'm using the least popular definition of the word, the definition that suits their purposes.
Perhaps you could be clear in your initial thoughts next time?
Perhaps you could read without bias next time?
I think you are trying to understand GOD...good luck. Explain how he can create an oak tree from a seed, or a human being (with all his complexity) from one cell.
You also ask about the names "God" and "The Lord". God was given hundreds of names by his people. Everytime he showed his people a new miracle, they gave him a new name. I can think of at least twenty names for God without even thinking. Because he has several names doesn't make him less, it shows how little we can comprehend his glory and his power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.