Genisis

by Paradise Found 24 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    Your arguments are all apologetic nonsense. You simply cannot reconcile the first few chapters of Genesis with each other as they contradict themselves. All your attempts at accurate exegesis fail.

    ???? I don't think you really read my post. There is nothing "apologetic" about my post. I'm describing the story in the context of ANE creation myths. It's a myth. See my comparisons in this thread to the Phoenician myth, the Enuma Elish, the Abzu, etc. How is approaching the story as a myth "apologetic"? And I wasn't at all reconciling the first two chapters of Genesis. I said nothing of the sort. Of course, the two stories contract each other, they come from different literary sources (P and J). I was disagreeing with your reading of the P story, which I felt did not represent what the text actually said. That's all. Otherwise I totally agree with you.

    Genesis is a fairy tale. Get used to it.

    You're preaching to the choir. My posts regularly show how things in the OT derive from ANE mythology.

    Furthermore, if you have to resort to idioms in translation, you must admit to a fatal problem: "God cannot protect his own book: some versions are better than others." Why is God so pathetic that he cannot protect the very book he inspired through holy whatever to be inspired? If he cared to much to have such a book written, why did he not care so much to protect its integrity? I need an good answer for this. I mean a GOOD answer for this. Excusogetics, don't count. If Bible God wants me to again become a True Believer(tm), then he'd better well give me a reason to be so. Blind and uninformed Faith(tm) don't work for me anymore, and any God worth his salt would appreciate this and do better than Bible-God(tm) has done so far.

    Again, same thing. You have misconstrued the purpose of my last post. If you read my post history, you see that I reguarly post on such inconsistencies, textual problems, and the use of legend, myth, and fable in the OT, as well as mythological motifs in the NT.

  • Gozz
    Gozz

    Leolaia, insightful, as usual.

    Farkel, c'mon, you've written that drivel a zillion times; now just make way for some scholarship; you're way out of your depths here.

    And, Leolaia, these ANE myths, you've got accessible references?

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Sorry to say Doug, but you've shot without asking questions again. Leo has been consistent in her approach of deconstructing scripture and showing parallel mythologies, as anyone who has been reading her work on this board, knows.

    Now might be a good time, to wipe the spittle of your screen, and apologise to the good lady...

    Leo:I'd still dispute your interpretation of v2, as I think it lends itself better to "chaos" than "uncreated".
    The same verse seems to indicate that "the deep" pre-exists, and so I feel that we aren't talking about "God" creating out of nothing, but rather shaping that which already exists. But what do I know?
    Do you feel there is room for that alternative, in your analysis?
    Good work, as usual...

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    I'd still dispute your interpretation of v2, as I think it lends itself better to "chaos" than "uncreated".
    The same verse seems to indicate that "the deep" pre-exists, and so I feel that we aren't talking about "God" creating out of nothing, but rather shaping that which already exists.

    LittleToe....No, that's actually what I'm claiming too! As I said in my above posts on this thread: "Darkness and the watery deep are the two features of chaos that preceded the described creative acts.... In ANE creation myths, creation is usually regarded as an ordering of chaos, not the fashioning of things out of nothingness.... The LXX translates as "invisible and not yet in order" which suggests a confused mingling of disordered and unformed elements in darkness in a state of chaos.... it was the earth (h'rts), or specifically the "dry land" of Genesis 1:10 that did not yet exist, or was in a state of non-existence. Since the land is what was left when the water was extracted in v. 9-10, the primeval thwm "watery deep" would have included what later became "dry land" and "seas" (ymym) in a comingled state.... Genesis 1:2 clearly states what did exist: darkness, the watery deep, and wind". So we are in agreement.

    And, Leolaia, these ANE myths, you've got accessible references?

    I was mainly using Westerman and other commentaries on Genesis, but Philo of Byblos can be found in any good work on Eusebius, and I have seen it online as well....Hesiod is also online, and as far as the Egyptian and Babylonian myths or concerned check out ANET (Ancient Near Eastern Texts) or the more recent COS (Context of Scripture).

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Ah, I'm much clearer on your position, now. Sorry for misrepresenting you.
    It's like a detective novel, extraordinaire, huh?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit