Genesis contradictions?

[sandy whitelinger]

The simple answer is that Genesis is neither history, nor science. It's theology. "Adam" isn't a literary character, but a literary type.

This doesn't answer the OP's question. The simple answer is that at the time of Adam and Eve there were no laws against incest.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Translational difference.

Why don't you snag a copy of his book for yourself to read?

Pick up a copy of the Jewish Study Bible. I have to go to work in a few minutes and I don't have time to retype a bunch of paragraphs.

You offered up the material. It is not encumbant on me, in a debate, to show that your proof is valid. It might just be your misinterpretation of their misconceptions.

 

[Riverwolf]

You offered up the material. It is not encumbant on me, in a debate, to show that your proof is valid. It might just be your misinterpretation of their misconceptions.

It would be better for you to check yourself.

Suffice to say that they use the original Hebrew version as the primary source material, as well as Rabbinic commentaries. They also use new manuscripts(Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.) to compare and contrast the existing manuscripts we do have, as well as whatever we know about the history and culture of the time. The conclusions they've made are valid conclusions with what we currently have, and subject to change should some new piece of evidence surface that contradicts what we currently have.

 

[blueman]

i have come across some things in the book of genesis that i believe are contradictory, many of them involving adam and eve.an example that has stuck out to me is although christians say incest is wrong,the children of adam and eve would have to have had an incestuous relationship (unless of course there were other humans present).i would like to hear a christian defense of this.

There were exceptions, in order to replenish the earth. This is the work of a Sovereign God carrying out His purpose. It's immoral and impure and has been for many years, but in the early years of creation, it served as a means to an end.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Suffice to say that they use the original Hebrew version as the primary source material, as well as Rabbinic commentaries. They also use new manuscripts(Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.) to compare and contrast the existing manuscripts we do have, as well as whatever we know about the history and culture of the time.

You clearly (and literally) do not know what you're talking about. It's embarrassing ...

 

[Riverwolf]

You clearly (and literally) do not know what you're talking about. It's embarrassing ...

Well, ex-cuuuuuuuse me! It seemed to me that those were the only things to go off of.

What else is there for scholars to go off of?

EDIT: Besides, gimme a break! I'm a noob in this regard!

 

[Dirty Penguin]

The NET Bible and NETS are online. Except for the interesting yet idiosyncratic Korsak, the others should be in your library.

Here's a JPS version I found online that seems to be pretty good.

Hebrew Bible in English / Mechon-Mamre

 

[sojourner]

This doesn't answer the OP's question. The simple answer is that at the time of Adam and Eve there were no laws against incest.

Since Adam and Ever were not literal human beings, but specific literary types used in a specific story, we cannot splice them into a real-time world view that includes the necessity of having sex with one's sister, because you are one of the few humans alive at the time. Therefore, the whole question of incest is moot. The question is answered by the establishment of the Genesis characters as types, and not as literal human beings.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Since Adam and Ever were not literal human beings, but specific literary types used in a specific story, we cannot splice them into a real-time world view that includes the necessity of having sex with one's sister, because you are one of the few humans alive at the time. Therefore, the whole question of incest is moot. The question is answered by the establishment of the Genesis characters as types, and not as literal human beings.

You seem to speak with authority yet that in is really just your take on things. It is certainly not everyone's opinion on the matter.

 

[McBell]

You seem to speak with authority yet that in is really just your take on things. It is certainly not everyone's opinion on the matter.

Kettle, meet pot.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Kettle, meet pot.

An irrelevant statement within the confines of a Biblical debate.

 

[McBell]

You seem to speak with authority yet that in is really just your take on things. It is certainly not everyone's opinion on the matter.

An irrelevant statement within the confines of a Biblical debate.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

An irrelevant statement within the confines of a Biblical debate.

Not at all.

 

[McBell]

Not at all.

Yes it is.
Especially when given that anything you say is nothing more than your take on things. It is certainly not everyone's opinion on the matter.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Yes it is.
Especially when given that anything you say is nothing more than your take on things. It is certainly not everyone's opinion on the matter.

Your approach here is mistaken on many levels.

 

[McBell]

Your approach here is mistaken on many levels.

Then so is yours when your rebuttal was the same thing.

Can't have it both ways.


The point is that if your rebuttal is nothing more than "yeah, well that is just your take on it and not every one is of the same opinion" then you have no rebuttal.
Why?
Because the exact same thing can be said about you and has the exact same validity.

 

[Riverwolf]

Then so is yours when your rebuttal was the same thing.

Can't have it both ways.


The point is that if your rebuttal is nothing more than "yeah, well that is just your take on it and not every one is of the same opinion" then you have no rebuttal.
Why?
Because the exact same thing can be said about you and has the exact same validity.

Sorry, Sandy, but he's right.

 

[RomCat]

At that point in time it was not incest to marry
your brother or sister. The reason being that
the human race could not procreate if the children
of Adam and Eve did not marry.

 

[McBell]

At that point in time it was not incest to marry
your brother or sister. The reason being that
the human race could not procreate if the children
of Adam and Eve did not marry.

Wow.
Humpty Dumpty ain't got nothing on you!

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Seems the bible can be whatever you want it to be these days.....Either the people and events were real or their allegory...(Depending on who you ask).....Either the events happened or they were allegory (Depending on who you ask)......