This is for Peter's benefit only, I've already put this into the
forum:
Leading scholars generally agree that Genesis chapter one
was written by a different author than chapter two. The
first chapter I believe is far more authentic as possibly being the
word of Almighty God than two, which appears to be a
forgery and written by Adam.
Problems with chapter two appear in many places, for example,
are we really supposed to believe that God who created all
of this intelligent design and many species with both a male and female
kind would not have created a woman from the beginning or not have the
foresight to notice that beasts of the field were not suitable partners
for Adam? (Genesis 2:18-20) This story is quite simply preposterous
and in total disharmony with chapter one, which quite simply
states that God made both man and woman from the beginning. (Genesis
1:27). The KJV in this instance uses the word “man” for “humankind”.
The reality of course, is that we have both man and woman created from
the outset, both equal but with different qualities and
perspectives. My apologies to those truly orthodox among you if this is
all a bit of a surprise, but I'm very thankful God has
opened my eyes on this issue, because I stupidly believed at one time
in mans superiority over the woman, and I suppose much of this view
could have been fueled by the very devious and misogynistic
ramblings of none other than Paul (or Saul of Tarsus).
Incidentally, most Christians conveniently forget some
of those “harder to in-force” nonsense rules
governing the church laid down by him. (1 Cor 11:7, 14:34 to
name but two).
In conclusion, I've shown that chapter one clearly
records both men and woman being created at the same time,
and that God was also fully aware (of course)
of what was being created. Man and woman, created for the glory of God
or God's good pleasure as with the entire creation, having together
different aspects of the divine. Not woman for the man, not
man for the woman, but unity. Amen.
Warmest Wishes,
Steven.
PETER CHARLTON wrote:
Thats a very good point Nevillle,
though doubtless you, as well as I, have wondered what the meaning of
verses 3,4 & % are where they say "
3 And God
proceeded to say: “Let light come to be.” Then there came to be light.
4 After that God
saw that the light was good, and God brought about a division between
the light and the darkness. 5 And God began calling
the light Day, but the darkness he called Night. And there came to be
evening and there came to be morning, a first day.
And yet the
great luminaries, the sun and the moon, where only created on the 4th
day, so I wonder what the light and dark of the first day was and
wiether it could support plant life of the 3rd day?
But maybe
another point against a 24 hour day is what happened on day 6,
we had the
creation of Adam, enough time for God to see Adam didnt do well on his
own, (though doubtless God allready knew this, but wanted Adam to
realise it for himself in view of the trouble women do bring to the
lives of men!), even more time for God to let Adam meet, name, live
with?, and find out all of creation wasnt a suitable partner, so, God
then created Eve after putting Adam to sleep.
Maybe rather a
lot for Adam to cope with in one 24 hour day?
Pete
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Saturday, November 03, 2007 8:04 PM
Subject:
[geocentrism] Re: Adam and Eve
Okay, I see that you are trying to explore the idea that "day"
does not mean 24 hours in Genesis 1, but can be taken as an extended
time period.
There is a limit, however, to how much you can extend it by. For
instance, if you take a pot plant and place it in a dark cupboard, then
it will look decidedly sick at the end of one week. In other words, the
vegetation created on day 3 could not survive very long without the
Sun, created on day 4. Seven thousand years per "day" is definitely
out, in my opinion.
I also prefer the simple, childlike "day" = 24 hours approach. Besides,
secular science will laugh just as loud at a 48,000-year-old universe
as it does at a 6,000 - 10,000-year-old universe.
Neville
The point Iam making is about
multiplying, so even if God made a 1000 swallows, it would take each
pair longer than 24 hours to multiply.
Especially regarding Humans, I
dont think God would have made more than 1 Adam and Eve, that would
create divisions between the offspring of the differant men God
created, its bad enough with the racism demonstrated between the
differant sons of Noah!, in fact, this is why God made Eve from Adam in
order that we can see both man and woman are the same, (though even
dispite this the battle of the sexes is bad enough!).
Also, Imagine if God had made
Adam, and another fella, lets call him Brian, Adam disobeyed God, was
evicted from Eden and inherited death, now what if Brian though, hadnt
eaten from the tree?, would we have two differant groups of humans
walking around, sinners like ourselves and perfect immortal sons of
Brian?
Adam is our father and Jesus is
called the last Adam as we are invited to replace our fleshly father
Adam, with our Spiritual father, Jesus, and therefore avoid the
sentence of death given to Adam and his offspring.
Pete
----- Original Message -----
Are you really saying that God only made two swallows, two
rhinos, two tigers, two people, one apple tree, one oak tree, two blue
whales, two dolphins, two bees, ... ?
Why did God not create loads of them? That would explain race and
language, for example, and do away with the often mooted criticism of
incestuous relations between Adam and Eve's children.
Neville
|
