-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
In addition to this statement, or an elaboration of it, can someone show in a SCHOLARLY way, with archeological things and literary texts around the same period, that the first five books were written by Moses exclusively? Because the only way you're going to convince a "secular scholar" is by showing evidence, not a faith-claim like "this is the Word of God, so you must believe it."
Please understand, I AM NOT taking one side or the other; I just want to learn.
Please understand, I AM NOT taking one side or the other; I just want to learn.
H
'These are the generations of' is a phrase which is repeated through out Genesis to assign different sections.
In Gen 2 it separates the two creation accounts.
This doesn't give any context, other than saying they are different accounts.
The problem, for me, occurs when people arbitrarily project into the different accounts things that they want to be there (like Gen 2 is a local creation, or a summary)
So I struggle to see, from the scriptures, how we understand the context to be different.
In Gen 2 it separates the two creation accounts.
This doesn't give any context, other than saying they are different accounts.
The problem, for me, occurs when people arbitrarily project into the different accounts things that they want to be there (like Gen 2 is a local creation, or a summary)
So I struggle to see, from the scriptures, how we understand the context to be different.
T
Tintin, oldhermit, and company (I say that endearingly 
):
What would you say to scholars who propose that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are actually separate creation accounts, written by two different authors? How would you eradicate that claim?
):What would you say to scholars who propose that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are actually separate creation accounts, written by two different authors? How would you eradicate that claim?
I've very familiar with the chapters in the Bible. I've studied them and I've read widely about the subject. I have come to believe that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 aren't two separate creation accounts. It's very likely Genesis 1 wouldn't have been paired with Genesis 2 when they were told orally by storytellers but that they were told separately at different times. The Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were compiled and edited together by Moses but the various threads of Genesis were written by the people who give the accounts, and if not them, their children.
For example: God would have written Genesis 1 himself and have given it to Adam or revealed it to him and have had him record it. Genesis 2 was written by Adam but he wasn't there for his creation, so God would've had to fill in the details. Adam likely also wrote Genesis 3 and 4. Noah likely wrote Genesis 5 and Noah's son, Shem - Genesis 6-9 (the Flood account and aftermath). Possibly Noah wrote all of Genesis 5-9.
How would I eradicate the claim that there are two different creation accounts and that there are two different writers? I would task the person in question to do some research and maybe point them to some resources to get them started.
T
If you examine the Book of Genesis in its entirety, you’ll discover that it is divided into ten “generations.” Toledoth subsequent to Genesis 2:4 are 5:1; 6:9; 10:1a; 11:10a; 11:27a; 25:19a; 25:12a; 36:1; and 37:2. So that's a possible ten authors writing what became the Book of Genesis. No wonder its writing style changes so regularly!
Last edited by a moderator:
H
So you really don't see a difference between 'deep waters' on Day 1 in Genesis 1, and a mist coming up from the ground to water the ground? It seems to me that it is a stretch to see mist coming up from the ground and deep waters as the same thing. It might not be 'bone dry land' but 'dry land' or just land, is different from sea.
T
Absolutely. I'm much more likely to believe the people who experienced the events rather than many biblical scholars/theologians these days who try to remove every semblance of the supernatural from the Bible. Because it has so many authors, the Book of Genesis doesn't flow as well as some other books of the Bible, but that's to be expected. It covers a huge part of human history within a small amount of pages.
K
No it is not a stretch, chapter 1 talks about how the dry land was formed, and chapter two talks about the mist from the waters that rose to let the dry land appear falling back down on the dry land as mist to water the land. Plus it can not be two separate events cause it says in 2:5 there was no man to till the ground, but in 1:26 to 1:27 is where it talks about forming man in own image. Can not have no man to till the ground if man was already created.
K
Yes, Joshua wrote of Moses' death but I have heard some Christians claim that Moses wrote ALL of Deuteronomy and that's just silly.
T
No, no. You misunderstand me. Genesis had around ten authors but was compiled and edited together by Moses. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and most of Deuteronomy were written by Moses. Joshua wrote of Moses' death and then his story. There's nothing to support the idea that other people wrote Moses and Joshua's accounts etc.
Yes, Joshua wrote of Moses' death but I have heard some Christians claim that Moses wrote ALL of Deuteronomy and that's just silly.
Last edited: