Chapter 2 Garden only narrative.

[drich0150]

When I say chapter 2 I mean chapter 2 verse 4 forward because the first 4 verses are literally apart of the seventh day creation in the chapter 1 narrative:

3 And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made.
(end of day seven in the chapter sequence of events.)
(Verse 4 is where chapter two should begin. Remember none of the original manuscripts have book chapter and verse denotations nor do they have punctuation as we understand it in english. The chapter and verse denotations where just a way to quickly identify a segment of the bible for the purpose of internal preistly study of the scripture. the editors/monks who added the book chapter and verse denotations, tried to group or sub divide chapters into complete ideas or thoughts. Here they clearly did not as day seven begins chapter 2 and ends in verse 3. Ideally chapter one would be all seven days which would mean chapter two should start on verse 4:
4 These are the generations (towlĕdah means a list of proceeding events.)of the heavens and of the earth when they were created. (in essence the following is a list of what happened starting in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, (mid day day 2)

5 and before every plant of the field was in the earth, and before every herb of the field grew; for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. (these things happened about mid day, day 3.)

So right here we have a list of thing that happened mid day two to mid day three. At this point it is also important to note that the word Elohyim is a generic term for the word God but often times references the Father. Through out chapter 1 Elohyim is the embodiment of God who is credited for the 7 day over chapter 1 creation of the earth and sky.

Now chapter two also references God but attributes the creation of everything in chapter 2 (the garden and everything in it) to be a YHWH or Yahweh creation. (which the jews also attributed to the father but obviously do not recognise the son.) YHWH is often times referred to as the word. and John 1:1 Identifies the word of God or YHWH as Jesus Christ. So from a christian perspective it is possible for to see the creator of chapter two as Christ. Possible but not important for the sake of this discussion. just an interesting point. The primary take away here is two different aspects of God are being represented in the Father and son or Elohim and Yhwh.

So why is it important to divide the garden narrative from the 7 day creation? Because it solves all of the paradoxical problems with chapter 2 being a retelling of chapter 1. without having to add anything or take anything away or even go outside of these four chapters for answers.
How long did creation take? 1:3-2:3, 2:4
Were plants created before or after humans? 1:11, 2:4-7
From what were the fowls created? 1:20-21, 2:19
From what were the animals created? 1:20, 2:19
Were humans created before or after the other animals? 1:25-26, 2:7, 2:18-22
Not to mention who did adam children marry or where did a city's worth of people come from when cain built the city of enoch? plus 20 very common creation based questions/contradictions a tradition reading creates that this reading of chapter 1 and 2 solves all in one blow. All contained in the same answer. That the garden was created apart from the seven day creation of chapter 1, and it and everything in it was fully complete by the end of day 3. Meaning the event of creation and what was created and what it was made from could very well be different than how it happened outside the garden.
Genesis Contradictions

Why are answering this contradictions so important? because Jesus Himself referenced creation which means He believed in it. John makes him an author of creation and through this seven days gives endowels Jesus with the name of God, which means the 7 days did not happen then it can be argued (with alarming success) that Jesus is not God.

The implications of a chapter 2 separate Garden based narrative:
the primary is the chapter 2 telling was creation of the garden and everything in it between day 2 and day 3
4 These are the generations (towlĕdah means a list of proceeding events.)of the heavens and of the earth when they were created. (in essence the following is a list of what happened starting in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, (mid day day 2)

5 and before every plant of the field was in the earth, and before every herb of the field grew; for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. (these things happened about mid day, day 3.)

This idea also separates the need to maintain a 6000 year old time line for creation, Rather we can say it has been 6000 years since man was exiled from the Garden as the geneologies point out.. why? because we know chapter 3 is not sequential to chapter 2. meaning the events of chapter 3 can't have happened the day after chapter 2 if they would have then the exile from the garden would have happened day 4 of creation. Rather there is no time line between the creation of garden and the fall. This time period could be a week month year 10 year 100 years or 84 trillon years or however long evolution/science needs to account for the fossil record.

 

[Brightmoon]

Well plants evolved long before humans

 

[drich0150]

Indeed.

Plants were day 3 and humans/evolved man were day 6.

But also on day three Apart from the 7 day creation according to genesis 2 God/Christ created the garden and everything in it in a finished state. meaning the garden and everything in it was a picture of the outside world 6000 years ago.

Nothing says the 6 day creation was anything like the finished world today. Nor does the bible say how long ago this creation process started.

 

[Brightmoon]

Most Grasses evolved around the same time that the non avian dinosaurs went extinct around 65 million years ago .

I honestly don’t see why you have to try to shoehorn a well understood geological stratification layers with very well understood organism life sequence over time , into a bible story . I never understood the point of doing that or of changing a timeline. Even without understanding radio dating or even leaving it out completely, the earth was understood to be very very old by the time the USA was started in the mid 1700s

 

[drich0150]

Most Grasses evolved around the same time that the non avian dinosaurs went extinct around 65 million years ago .

I honestly don’t see why you have to try to shoehorn a well understood geological stratification layers with very well understood organism life sequence over time , into a bible story . I never understood the point of doing that or of changing a timeline. Even without understanding radio dating or even leaving it out completely, the earth was understood to be very very old by the time the USA was started in the mid 1700s

Here's the thing brother.. Nothing has changed in the scripture. As there is no time line there is no set dates.

The only thing that changes is a specific telling or interpretation of the scripture. but the scripture itself does not change.

I have only pointed out facts like the lack of a time line allows for a literal seven day creation and a complete garden narrative that can assimilate any time line science wants to lay down. and still maintain an intact 7 days.

Why? because Christ believed in the 7 day creation. And It is how John the apostle identifies Christ or assigned Christ deity in John 1:1 forward.
If Christ is wrong about the seven day creation many argument can and have been made about the deity of Christ.

This way the bible narrative stays intact, and so does anything science needs to say concerning times and evolutionary processes. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Again the time lines the church put on the genesis narrative are not scripturally founded. If chapter 2 is a separate garden narrative then chapter 1 events do not have to yield a completed earth at the end of seven days. If you need 65 million years between plants and man the idea of seeding can be used here. God modified geo formed the earth and seeded it in seven days. which gives room for you to grow into whatever you like. (not critical for this interpretation though) Everything that shows completion is found in chapter two which again is shown to be seperate from chapter one events. And because there is no stated time line between chapter 2 and 3... Science can take as much time as it need to evolve back around to a literal 7 day creation as the BIBLE tells it (even if it is a little different than how the church understands it)

 

[Brightmoon]

I’m a sister for one . I still think shoehorning bible verses into a confirmed geological and evolutionary timeline is pointless. Genesis is told in the form of a story . It uses numerology especially with the numbers 1,2,3&6 . The 6 days of creation divided into 3 days of separating things and 3 days of adding things to the creation . 1x2x3 = 6 And these are all prime numbers and they’re sequential. The ancients thought that was somehow important and they put it into the story of creation . I have never seen this as a literal history ( even before I understood what my church taught) and my church doesn’t teach this as a literal history anyway.

 

[drich0150]

I’m a sister for one . I still think shoehorning bible verses into a confirmed geological and evolutionary timeline is pointless.

sorry sister..
If it is pointless to you then fine. This view is not for you.
My primary ministry is with atheist and young people who left the nest and is in collage. where many if not most where not given the allegorical treatment to genesis. Many if not most of christianity understand genesis to be literal enough for Jesus to acknowledge it. Which professors and the like use this argument to break the faiths of most of the kids we sent to collage. (80% of kids who go into collage drop their faith by the end of collage, 70% by the end of their second year)
I have been working with those who struggle with this for some time. I have also worked with those who use this point as a seed of doubt that breaks faiths.

My theory here allows for one to maintain the ability to choose to either keep their faith or let it go. Because as a matter of logic If Jesus did not know creation is not an evolutionary process then he could not be God. But if creation is plausible with in the frame work of anything science has to say.. then nothing demands God must be a fallacy.

Genesis is told in the form of a story

So was revelation. it was man's interpretation of what he saw. which again is why there is freedom in the narrative without changing a word of it.

. It uses numerology especially with the numbers 1,2,3&6 . The 6 days of creation divided into 3 days of separating things and 3 days of adding things to the creation . 1x2x3 = 6 And these are all prime numbers and they’re sequential. The ancients thought that was somehow important and they put it into the story of creation . I have never seen this as a literal history ( even before I understood what my church taught) and my church doesn’t teach this as a literal history anyway.

but do you understand many do? and those kids are being lost because they can nt reconcile what is literal and what is not?

So again, now it is plausible for both to work together without changing scripture.

 

[Brightmoon]

Ive got a biology degree. I never thought of genesis as other than an allegory . Ive met plenty of young and old earth creationists who understood very well that what they were told has no evidence to support it. It’s devastating for them . learning the truth about nature is not the problem, it’s understanding that a lot of what you’ve been told about your religion isn’t true . I was never told a creationist narrative as a young woman or as a child and nor was I subjected to emotional abuse ( you’re gonna go to hell) if I didn’t believe it. I was actually shocked that creationists still existed

 

[drich0150]

Ive got a biology degree.

Congratulations. That must have take time and hard work.
However, it is so hard for you to imagine that not all, dare I say most in the church do not have a biology degree? Is there no room in your heart for those who do not or can not think as you do?

Again I work with collage age kids and most do not pursue a degree in biology. And yet it seems some of their professors go out of their way/off topic almost to mortally wound the faith of those who are not necessarily YEC but simply believe in creation in one form or another. When confronted they have no other training or recourse because like here many simply do not want to talk about it. So these kids go off and are consumed by the process of higher learning/indoctrination.

I never thought of genesis as other than an allegory .

Again a very popular argument being used right now to break our children of their faith Has nothing to do with genesis being taught as an allegory. It centers around the fact that John of John 1:1. the apostle in his gospel spends his first chapter tying Jesus to the literal seven day creation. So again despite what you believe John the disciple Jesus loved, one of the top 12 who happens to be Jesus' primary tie to God, through the claim that Jesus had a literal hand the 7 day creation was real and the same guy in his gospel!

Now on top of that Jesus is quoted in every single gospel as referencing the 7 day creation more specifically the creation of Males and Females for the purpose of marriage. So again despite what you think of the subject the faith breaking argument focuses on what Jesus thought and taught. it also focuses on what the guy who claim Christ is the God of creation taught and thought.

Meaning if Jesus was wrong or if John is also wrong then Jesus can not be God. Do you see the demilia being created for these young folks? do you see the problem created for anyone who seriously considers or wants to logically think out their religious beliefs? Not everyone can simply pretend this is just some stick subject that if you ignore it it will go away. That if you believe XYZ this fundamental/foundational ABC does not need to be addressed.

(I say that because I mentioned this a coupe of times now and rather than address the argument you simple circle around to what you believe.) again not everyone can to this. especially young people being taught how to logically think things through. this is one of the reason why we loose 80% of our christian kids to the universities.

It starts with destroying the foundation the creation narrative lays out. take this away and everyone else in the bible who quotes or uses this has become invalidated as any kind of authority let alone God.

That is the problem, not whether or not you see an allegory or not.

Ive met plenty of young and old earth creationists who understood very well that what they were told has no evidence to support it. It’s devastating for them

Now imagine if they learned how to assimilate everything science currently says or will augment in the future with an untouched 7 day creation and garden narrative? Again this allow for full scientific corporation as well as full faith in God.

How is this a bad thing? why do you feel these two thing must be mutually exclusive? (Either or, not both?)

. learning the truth about nature is not the problem, it’s understanding that a lot of what you’ve been told about your religion isn’t true .

I agree but I also do not assume that because one religious interpretation is wrong, there is no truth to be found in the bible. In fact I have found it. I do so by separating the creation narrative from the garden narrative and I simply remove the time lines. Which again the idea of a whole complete world comes from chapter 2. which if you look at it, is only speaking of the garden. The only thing you need understand here is that God built the garden in a fraction of the time he built everything else to reflect the world as it was 6000 years ago. Why 6000 years ago? because that is when the exile from the garden took place. the YEC's have that correct in that the genealogies push that far back. they only over assume the rest of creation took place the week before. Again nothing in the bible says this. that is religious teaching. So again the time between chapter 2 and 3 could be that 84 billion years you need for everything to evolve.

I was never told a creationist narrative as a young woman or as a child and nor was I subjected to emotional abuse ( you’re gonna go to hell) if I didn’t believe it. I was actually shocked that creationists still existed

So what are you saying everyone who did not grow up as you did should be thrown away just so you can maintain your scientific understanding that God and biology can not coexist?

What if your idea that biology can not incorporate God is as wrong as the idea God can not incorporate biology? Are you willing anyone should perish because you want this to be true?

 

[Brightmoon]

Congratulations. That must have take time and hard work.
However, it is so hard for you to imagine that not all, dare I say most in the church do not have a biology degree? Is there no room in your heart for those who do not or can not think as you do?

Again I work with collage age kids and most do not pursue a degree in biology. And yet it seems some of their professors go out of their way/off topic almost to mortally wound the faith of those who are not necessarily YEC but simply believe in creation in one form or another. When confronted they have no other training or recourse because like here many simply do not want to talk about it. So these kids go off and are consumed by the process of higher learning/indoctrination.
Again a very popular argument being used right now to break our children of their faith Has nothing to do with genesis being taught as an allegory. It centers around the fact that John of John 1:1. the apostle in his gospel spends his first chapter tying Jesus to the literal seven day creation. So again despite what you believe John the disciple Jesus loved, one of the top 12 who happens to be Jesus' primary tie to God, through the claim that Jesus had a literal hand the 7 day creation was real and the same guy in his gospel!

Now on top of that Jesus is quoted in every single gospel as referencing the 7 day creation more specifically the creation of Males and Females for the purpose of marriage. So again despite what you think of the subject the faith breaking argument focuses on what Jesus thought and taught. it also focuses on what the guy who claim Christ is the God of creation taught and thought.

Meaning if Jesus was wrong or if John is also wrong then Jesus can not be God. Do you see the demilia being created for these young folks? do you see the problem created for anyone who seriously considers or wants to logically think out their religious beliefs? Not everyone can simply pretend this is just some stick subject that if you ignore it it will go away. That if you believe XYZ this fundamental/foundational ABC does not need to be addressed.

(I say that because I mentioned this a coupe of times now and rather than address the argument you simple circle around to what you believe.) again not everyone can to this. especially young people being taught how to logically think things through. this is one of the reason why we loose 80% of our christian kids to the universities.

It starts with destroying the foundation the creation narrative lays out. take this away and everyone else in the bible who quotes or uses this has become invalidated as any kind of authority let alone God.

That is the problem, not whether or not you see an allegory or not.

Now imagine if they learned how to assimilate everything science currently says or will augment in the future with an untouched 7 day creation and garden narrative? Again this allow for full scientific corporation as well as full faith in God.

How is this a bad thing? why do you feel these two thing must be mutually exclusive? (Either or, not both?)
I agree but I also do not assume that because one religious interpretation is wrong, there is no truth to be found in the bible. In fact I have found it. I do so by separating the creation narrative from the garden narrative and I simply remove the time lines. Which again the idea of a whole complete world comes from chapter 2. which if you look at it, is only speaking of the garden. The only thing you need understand here is that God built the garden in a fraction of the time he built everything else to reflect the world as it was 6000 years ago. Why 6000 years ago? because that is when the exile from the garden took place. the YEC's have that correct in that the genealogies push that far back. they only over assume the rest of creation took place the week before. Again nothing in the bible says this. that is religious teaching. So again the time between chapter 2 and 3 could be that 84 billion years you need for everything to evolve.

So what are you saying everyone who did not grow up as you did should be thrown away just so you can maintain your scientific understanding that God and biology can not coexist?

What if your idea that biology can not incorporate God is as wrong as the idea God can not incorporate biology? Are you willing anyone should perish because you want this to be true?

. The creation narrative doesn’t match well with any version of Genesis . And there is verified evidence that refutes a lot of the claims of so called creation “scientists”. Since scientists have to have evidence before they make claims, I trust them over mere unverified assertions made by a religious leader or by a book that asserts its God’s Word. ( as a Christian I shouldn’t say that, but as someone scientifically literate that’s what it is) Science has strict standards for accepting evidence and mere assertions are ignored as well they should be . The scientifically literate CFers here summarize what is literally volumes of research, in a few sentences . Your mischaracterization of evolution shows us only that YOU don’t understand it.

 

[JackRT]

We must first of all realize that the Seven Day Creation Account and the Garden of Eden Account were written some 400 years apart. The second account is actually the earliest (~950 BC) while the second was likely during the Babylonian Exile. Attempts to harmonize the two are ultimately futile.

 

[drich0150]

. The creation narrative doesn’t match well with any version of Genesis . And there is verified evidence that refutes a lot of the claims of so called creation “scientists”. Since scientists have to have evidence before they make claims, I trust them over mere unverified assertions made by a religious leader or by a book that asserts its God’s Word. ( as a Christian I shouldn’t say that, but as someone scientifically literate that’s what it is) Science has strict standards for accepting evidence and mere assertions are ignored as well they should be . The scientifically literate CFers here summarize what is literally volumes of research, in a few sentences . Your mischaracterization of evolution shows us only that YOU don’t understand it.

So.. you say.. I've been debating students and professors on this subject for almost 10 years now. and I know the logical fallacy tactic you used here well. Are you familiar with the term Argumentum ad lapidem? It is what you did here in your last statement. You want to dismiss what I said as absurd but gave no evidence that anything I said was.. you claim I miscatorgrized evolution without any proof that I did. Not once have you even given any indication you even understand my argument. In fact many of the things you say like my argument conflicts with evolution indicates you have not even read it.
So before you get to turn this into a yahuh nut huh type of argument I ask you do two things.
Explain what my argument is, and then explain how have i miscatorgrized evolution.

I honestly think you do not even understand this is NOT a YEC discussion. That I am saying the earth is as old as science would have us believe as of this last modification to the original theory.

but we will see.

Then I would like you to take and answer my last post to you. I described an emergency in the church as a whole. Something you claim to have navigated, a problem 80% of our collage kids are failing.

I ask that you do this before you conjure up another harsh charge against my intelligence. perhaps you could help with all the knowledge you have been blessed with.

 

[drich0150]

We must first of all realize that the Seven Day Creation Account and the Garden of Eden Account were written some 400 years apart. The second account is actually the earliest (~950 BC) while the second was likely during the Babylonian Exile. Attempts to harmonize the two are ultimately futile.

I am aware of the argument. I know why people say it was written by two different authors. One continuity is misaligned. (chapter 2 events are different than chapter 1) two two different deity titles are used in the two chapters. 1 Chapter 1 Elohiym is identified (God the Father) Chapter two YHWH is the Deity named.

But again. even if you believe this, in the OP I left a list of 20 or more inconsistencies two different creation narratives would leave.

Which is why I showed if Chapter 2 started verse four it would redirect and explain not only the 20 objections and contradictions Atheist point out. it also solves the reason christians sometimes believe chapter two was written by a different author. TO BE HONEST.. My theory does not care if chapter 2 was written by a different guy or not as it still can be used in the exact same way. However I tend to believe this is evidence of one guy's writting because he is telling a out line of a story and then with in the out line is telling a sub plot. Or again a second guy could be telling the very same sub plot as it makes not one bit of difference to me.

In that It starts out: 4 This is the story about the creation of the sky and the earth. This is what happened when the Lord God made the earth and the sky. 5 This was before there were plants on the earth. Nothing was growing in the fields because the Lord God had not yet made it rain on the earth, and there was no one to care for the plants.

So God in chapter 1 creates the earth and sky on day 2. Verse four says the following is what happens when God created the earth and sky.. but before the rain on day 3. Meaning the entire chapter following was created apart from the main chapter 1 story and set between the earth and sky of day to but before the rain on day3

Meaning what chapter two is taking about is being created by YHWH starting on day two and ending on day three, was an independent event, apart from the Father's 7 day chapter 1 work.. which accounts for the order in which things where made. IE Adam man with a soul was created first where as Chapter 1 say light and dark was created first.

Chapter 2 is the creation of the garden account and everything in it only. Chapter 2 verse 8 explains this. 8 Then the Lord God planted a garden in the East, in a place named Eden. He put the man he made in that garden. 9 Then the Lord God caused all the beautiful trees that were good for food to grow in the garden. In the middle of the garden, he put the tree of life and the tree that gives knowledge about good and evil.

So clearly chapter 2 is garden only. which allows for things to be created differently than what is going on outside the garden. (Which is all the chapter 1 stuff)