Karma reasons for concrete message

Message

euroclydon



    Posts: 91
  • Darwins +1/-14

Most of the confusion surrounding these two chapters is based on the following assumption: Chapter 2 is re-telling the story of the Sixth Day in Chapter 1.

But that is not logically conclusive. Logically, these are two different peoples.

Genesis 1:25-27.

Gen 2:18-19.

Genesis 2:5.


P: the first humans Gen 1:25-27.

Q: foragers

R: tillers of the ground

~R: NOT tillers of the ground Gen 2:5.

IF the "men and women" "created" on the sixth day were the first humans (P), THEN they were foragers (Q), OR they were tillers of the ground (R).

"and there was NOT a man to till the ground." (~R).

THEREFORE, IF the "men and women" "created" on the sixth day were the first humans (P), THEN they were foragers (Q).

P -> (Q ^ R) : (P -> Q) v (P -> R)
~R
P -> Q


VALID REASONING. ARCHAEOLOGICALLY and ANTHROPOLOGICALLY SOUND

Foraging precedes Agriculture in human history

No time is articulated between the 7th day and the formation of "eth ha Adam" - we don't know how long that was.

To "keep the garden" and to eat "of the garden". (Gen 2:15-16) When you eat what you tend and grow, that's Agriculture, not Foraging. This was not said of the sixth day.

The Sixth Day creation were foragers.

Eve is called the mother of all "living".

Eve is NOT called the mother of all "mankind".

Therefore, when Cain went to the land of Nod, clearly a placed already named by somebody (Cp 2:11-14), he could take a wife from among the Sixth Day creation.

The folks in Chapter two were a different people entirely from the Sixth Day Creation, They were a family of Agriculturists. (This will limit quite a bit the scope of the flood of chapter 9).
Changed Change Reason Date
One Above All Purposefully confusing June 08, 2012, 02:44:57 PM