Help me with Genesis Please

[HAL]

Somebody please straighten me out. I was looking in Genesis and I wanted to make a point to rockv12, and I am just completely confused at what I'm reading. It regards Mankind - men and women.

First I read this -

Genesis 1

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

It clearly claims that god created mankind - male and female, in his own image. Right - so we have men and women running around ... or do we not?

Proceeding along

Genesis 2

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

...

18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.

20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.
   
21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs[g] and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

What the Hell am I reading here? I thought before that biblegod created mankind, men and women (Genesis 1:27). But now it says god created a man (again?). Then to top it off, he calls a bunch of animals together to see what the man would name them, and no helper was found for the man. Why not? Where are all the women that were created in Genesis 1:27?

Thanks.

[Jason]

Nice one.  Never caught that before. 

[Tero]

The Bible is just cut and paste. Or copy and paste. The rabbi, or leader told someone to save these documents and put these together in some  order. And the copyist did.

Some covered the same themes and stories so mostly they picked one of multiple legends collected.

[Chronos]

I think Genesis 1 can be viewed as a sort of Cliff Notes for Genesis 2. Not that my intention is to defend anything written in either. Similar to the style of writing in which news reports are given, summarized "facts" are given at first, then reiterated later with more details. It's prose, not a technical guide. While it is certainly inconsistent, I wouldn't get hung up on it.

It doesn't mention dinosaurs, the incredible distances between objects in the universe, quantum theory, the speed of sound or even gravity -- I would think those topics would be appropriate to the Ultimate Book of Genesis, which of course it isn't ...

[Historicity]

I am leary of the "authorities" who claim they can detect a style and prove an authorship of this or that.

Given that, please note there are no excess words in chapter 1.  It is beautifully written.  Great prose poem.

Chapter 2 has pointless belle lettres stuff like:

Gen 2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;  And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

This doesn't advance the story or give moral advice or inform the reader.  It's just pretty, pretty.  This is inferior writing.

[screwtape]

HAL,

There is a school of thought about the OT that says it was written by at least four  people and edited by another.  It is called the [wiki]Documentary Hypothesis[/wiki].  In it the writers are dubbed J for the Jahwist and E for the Elohist.  They are called this because each author refers to god exclusively by those names.  J was from the southern kingdom of Judah, E was from the northern kingdom of Israel.

When Israel was destroyed its people moved south and they were similar enough in culture and religion that the two peoples merged.   For the people to successfully merge, they had to combine their stories, religions and weave them into a single national myth. However, their stories were not merged perfectly and some differences and contradictions remain.  What you are seeing in genesis are the two peoples different versions of a very similar story.  It exists throughout the first five books of the OT.

For more, I suggest you check out an excellent book - Who Wrote the Bible, by Richard Elliot Freedman.  He talks about the Documentary Hypothesis and who J, E, the priestly writer, the Deuteronomist and the Redactor might have been. I recommend buying it.

There is a free pdf version somewhere on the internet.  Try here:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=who%20wrote%20the%20bible%20by%20friedman%20pdf&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.control-z.com%2Fstorage%2FFriedman_Who%2520Wrote%2520the%2520Bible.pdf&ei=Blp2T9LLGKHY0QGwwdCeDQ&usg=AFQjCNHx1EsaR2SwEE3OlcUG7rvLLLlxGg&cad=rja

[HAL]

Well it certainly sounds like some kind of contradiction to me. I wonder how the godbotherers explain it. I mean they must have invented an explanation, the Bible must be explained at all costs.

[Add Homonym]

Well it certainly sounds like some kind of contradiction to me. I wonder how the godbotherers explain it. I mean they must have invented an explanation, the Bible must be explained at all costs.

God botherers pretend that Gen 2 is an expanded version of Gen 1, but it has animals created after man.

[ungod]

in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

OK, i give up....where are the female Gods that provided the image to create women from?

[HAL]

in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

OK, i give up....where are the female Gods that provided the image to create women from?

Right! See what I mean. How do the godbotherers explain these statements?

[Add Homonym]

Right! See what I mean. How do the godbotherers explain these statements?

Either god has two arms and legs and a head, or he only created our soul in his image. Because, as you know, the Bible totally explains what a soul is, and that is also explained by Genesis, if you read between the lines. You have to read between a lot of lines.

Example: Noah didn't put all the world's animals onto the ark, even though God told him to, twice. Therefore you have to invent a bit, where God told Noah it was OK not to go to Australia and America.

ED: And Gen 7:8 actually says he did it.
ED: And again at 7:14, 7:15, 7:16,

[Historicity]

I am leary of the "authorities" who claim they can detect a style and prove an authorship of this or that.

LEERY, not leary.

http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/leery
leer?y informal
careful in the way that you deal with something or someone because you do not trust them [= wary]

damn

[Samothec]

HAL,
There are two different schools of thought about this.
The usual Xian version is that the second account is merely a retelling of the first account.
IIRC the usual (?) Jewish version is that the first account is about Adam and Lilith. But Lilith was naughty (mother to demons and such) so she was banished and the second account relates how god made Eve for Adam to replace Lilith. IIRC there are Jewish texts that Xians do not recognize which give a more detailed account regarding Lilith - telling about her naughty deeds and motherhood.

[atheola]

I think its just the story someone told the ancient cops and cops being cops ain't the brightest pennies in the bank decided to go bust this guy jesus who was just hanging out with the ho's and leppers so there was a cover up, the scibes paid off and there ya go.. A typical case of blind justice and the judge wasn't gonna look at the 27 8x10 color painted images so jesus had topay 50 shekles and pick up the garbage in the snow...

[screwtape]

OK, i give up....where are the female Gods that provided the image to create women from?

Right! See what I mean. How do the godbotherers explain these statements?

"when it says 'in god's image' it means they were spiritual, had a soul, like god"

They redefine words, reinterpret meanings, deny, deny deny.  Anything to avoid not believing.  Because they believe in belief.

[atheola]

Mittens wants to restore our future.  He's glimpsed ahead for us skipping A&E to armagedon (sp) so he can zoom back in time using his magic presidential underwear to put A&E on a new reality show so we can all see how god pulled the trick off. 

[Eddie Schultz]

He's glimpsed ahead for us skipping A&E to armagedon (sp)

Just needs another "d" for correc t spelling. I wish more members would take the time to spell things correctly, because it makes us look like we actually take the time to make sure what we post is correct, (spelling, literature, facts, etc...)

Anyway, I'm going to send this to my christian brother and see if he has an answer for us. I doubt he will, or will just say it's all how it's "interpreted". Go figure.

Any of the christians on the forum have an answer that is satisfactory to all us non believers?

[atheola]

I'm an old fart with a cell phone and don't have Mr. Webster as a dinner guest. 

[Poseidon]

Hal get a grip. You know, perfectly well,  that the KJV is not a perfectly authentic recital of the history of the earth.  So don't sweat the twisted chronology. We can find much more signifigant flaws to pick on.

That said, I will continue the critique as follows.  Vel and Sam and other bright women on this forum might be justifiably pissed at the use of the word ;helper, in 2-18 and 2-20.  Women, although subjugated through much of history, have persevered in the face of religious chavinism and contributed mightily to the general welfare of the world. Helper ....in a pigs ass, they have done indescribably more than merely carrying the water.

There are plenty of questionable words and conjugations in the KJV and other versions that can be the source of arguement and/or annoyance. I see the book as a quaint compilation of fairy tales that are not to be taken literally.

[Backspace]

Gen 2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;  And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

Here Yahweh has just created the first man and woman, and he's already talking about how good gold is.  One of the many clues that the Bible was inspired and written by man.

[Ivellios]

HAL,
There are two different schools of thought about this.
The usual Xian version is that the second account is merely a retelling of the first account.
IIRC the usual (?) Jewish version is that the first account is about Adam and Lilith. But Lilith was naughty (mother to demons and such) so she was banished and the second account relates how god made Eve for Adam to replace Lilith. IIRC there are Jewish texts that Xians do not recognize which give a more detailed account regarding Lilith - telling about her naughty deeds and motherhood.

Well, I heard the reason she was "naughty" was because she had the audacity to actually ask to be on top for once. As Adam and every man knows that a woman's place is underneath the man, missionary position is God's ordered and perfect position he gave us. For her evil desires she was cast out. God had to begin again, this time making a woman who is naturaly subservient as a woman is supposed to be instead of being created equal and demanding to be treated equally. So God makes her from his rib showing that women don't even compare to men, being so insignifigant in comparison. This pissed off Lilith even more, so she swore revenge.

------------------------

I once did a post showing the contradictions between Gen 1 & 2 to raytech70.

<snip>

[Samothec]

Well, I heard the reason she was "naughty" was because she had the audacity to actually ask to be on top for once. ...

That's right - I had forgotten, thank you. I have not studied the OT from the Jewish perspective (or the related Jewish texts) so I'm going by tangential learning.

I have always found it interesting that what is called the Old Testament by Xians (and former Xians) was originally (and still is) the Jewish holy book.
However:
1) Rabbis are not consulted for their expertise to verify what a passage really says/means.
2) Jews aren't out there arguing for Genesis to be taken litterally.
3) Jews recognize that there are errors in the OT but take them philosophically - saying things like 'if it gets us talking about [god] and the Torah then it is a good thing'. (paraphrased since I don't remember the exact wording nor the source material)

These facts have lead me to wonder at times if the OT should be excised from Xianity since Xians seem to be incompetent of reading & using it properly. If you want to reference something from the Torah you must be(come) a Jew. Otherwise Xians must stick to the New Testament. That would be an interesting law to try getting passed. A corrolary would be that Mormons are restricted to their Testament (or whatever it is called) and would be forbidden from referencing the Torah or the New Testament.

[Anfauglir]

18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.

20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

This is the bit that worries me more.  Reading on in Genesis we get Adam "cleaving unto his wife and being one flesh" - which means that the "helpmate" God wanted for Adam was one to love and mate with. 

So quite apart from God not being clued in enough about his creation to know how he reacts (canya see problems coming there?), he was originally offering Adam birds and beasts to cleave and become one flesh with.....

[HAL]

Something is not right here.

18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

OK great! Gawd realizes Adam needs a helper "suitable" for him, and this helper needs to be made. Fine. I'm impressed at gawd's reasoning powers in this regard.

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.

OK, a fun and interesting activity.

20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

Wait. Didn't we just read above that gawd said he needed to make a suitable helper? So why later make the statement that no suitable helper was found? Of course no suitable helper was found, you already admitted you needed to make one!

I tell you this god  - I don't know what to think about him.

[screwtape]

you might want The Bible with Sources Revealed.  It identifies the different OT authors by color coding the text.  That verse was probably not written by one person, but two, and edited rather imperfectly.

What Doctor X had to say on the matter:
http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24368

[rev45]

^Did Doctor X ever respond to your question?

[screwtape]

No.  I suspect he is holding a grudge because he was banned and I was a moderator at the time.  But I cannot be sure. I'd like to think he just missed it, but it is not as if there were a ton of posts. 

[inveni0]

Well it certainly sounds like some kind of contradiction to me. I wonder how the godbotherers explain it. I mean they must have invented an explanation, the Bible must be explained at all costs.

I'm glad you ask.  I actually brought this up back when I was a believer, and the answer I got was that the story of creation that is presented in Genesis begins with a pretty general outline, and then it gets a little more detailed when it starts to talk about Adam and Eve.

Now, when I started questioning my religion, I wrote this off as a way to marry the Bible and Science.  I figured that God created man (cavemen) and THEN created the chosen people...people into whom he breathed life (or a soul).  And the wars and such that broke out weren't between the descendants of Adam, but instead of these tribes of cavemen, which were basically animals.  But man started breeding with these animals, and the bloodline got all muddled up, and then God had to kill his own son so that none of that bestiality would matter anymore.

Bottom line is that it's all horseshit.  There's no explaining why the Bible doesn't make sense unless you try to read between the lines, and reading between the lines of a fairy tale is basically just writing more fairy tale.

[Quartinium]

It is my understanding that Gen 1 is a sort of overview of things, like an outline for how things will go down and then Gen 2 adds in some of the details.

As for the Lilith question, she is not a Jewish creation but is actually a much older supernatural creation of semitic orgin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilith

It has recently been suggested that God had a consort and it may be assumed that if this view is correct it would be from her that the first women were modeled after.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asherah