peacefulpete:
Perhaps I am reading too much into it.
I am not too sure what you are talking about and why. I am sure you have your reasons and that they are all good.
I was merely mentioning how the two stories are presented in Torah (chapters 1 and then 2-3) as a foreword or introduction to the Torah--like when you go to a musical and you sit down and before the curtain rises you hear the orchestra play a bunch of the tunes of the songs that are going to play throughout the show jumbled together in a fancy introduction called the "Overture."
That is how it is presented when it is taught in Hebrew School from a theological perspective: i.e., Why does the Book of Jewish Law begin with Stories instead of Laws? Answer: It is a demonstration and an explanation all-in-one on the importance of obeying the Law and why we often do not .
As Jeffro and I cleared up among one another, I was not talking about where the story actually came from. I was talking about what the story was about.
I don't comment with others regarding the Document Hypothesis because most people here use the older form that Wellhausen invented.
Because I use the updated form, I only use R (Redactor) and D (Deuteronomist) and sometimes J (which now stands for Judean and not Jawist). *
I know this is not what you mean when you write things such as:
The J story, whether you accept Freidman's belief that it was the backbone of the Pentateuch or not, betrays a nuanced talent...
So I avoid it as we are not talking about the same "J" here.
I adopted the updated form to keep up with the standards my school and synagogue required several years ago.
___
*--Jawist had been combined with Elohist as it is now believed to be the same redactor and has been given the tag JE.