STOP! at Genesis 1

[Bartholomew Jones]

Yes. The change from God (Elohim) to LORD God (Yahweh Elohim) is indeed significant. As soon as God began to have a personal relationship with mankind, He introduced His personal name also, and Yahweh (YHWH) is also Jesus.

It was the pre-incarnate Christ who had fellowship with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden until they disobeyed God. That broke their fellowship. Which means sin the believer's life breaks fellowship with God also.

I think that's who the writer of the book we call John was alluding to when he writes, "he was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world knew him not."

 

[101G]

Addressing the OP. good topic by the way.

Gen 1 through 2:3 is the first logical break of Scripture. Notice God as creator is always referred to simply as "God." This feature is not common in Scripture.

Next (Gen 2:4) is a brief poetic block of another significance. Notice "heavens and earth," then "earth and heavens." And from this block forward he's referred to as "LORD God."

I want say a break in the scriptures but a continuation of what he A. CREATED, and what he B. MADE. for the transition is from CREATOR, to MAKER.

but Genesis 2:4 to verse 25 is a detail description of chapter 1. other words a fill in the blank, as to what was not mention in chapter one, now detailed. we get a clearer or full detail about what was the sequences in A. what was CREATED, vs What was MADE.


PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

Addressing the OP. good topic by the way.

I want say a break in the scriptures but a continuation of what he A. CREATED, and what he B. MADE. for the transition is from CREATOR, to MAKER.

but Genesis 2:4 to verse 25 is a detail description of chapter 1. other words a fill in the blank, as to what was not mention in chapter one, now detailed. we get a clearer or full detail about what was the sequences in A. what was CREATED, vs What was MADE.


PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

To me it seems much more likely Moses compiled most of Genesis from several earlier sources.

 

[Ziggy]

I'm curious what day it was the God was walking in the garden.

Surely it couldn't have been the seventh because he was resting.
And if you look at Jesus example, He healed on the sabbath, he didn't curse.
And Jesus said He does what he see His Father do.

So I wonder who the "we" are in the garden?
And who was listening to who
and who was doing the cursing..

thinking..
hugs

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

Moses had studied in Egypt and under Jethro, his father in law, and probably had collected some of his materials then.

 

[Ziggy]

I'm curious what day it was the God was walking in the garden.

Surely it couldn't have been the seventh because he was resting.
And if you look at Jesus example, He healed on the sabbath, he didn't curse.
And Jesus said He does what he see His Father do.

So I wonder who the "we" are in the garden?
And who was listening to who
and who was doing the cursing..

thinking..
hugs

and if it was the 8th day, then surely he cut them off...
cicumcision and all..

thinking..

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

I'm curious what day it was the God was walking in the garden.

Surely it couldn't have been the seventh because he was resting.
And if you look at Jesus example, He healed on the sabbath, he didn't curse.
And Jesus said He does what he see His Father do.

So I wonder who the "we" are in the garden?
And who was listening to who
and who was doing the cursing..

thinking..
hugs

It was another age. He had said, "in the day (age) that you eat thereof you will surely die." The seventh day was sanctified, set apart, preserved.

No one cursed afterwards. The curse was worked into the natural order. As soon as Adam ate, the curse came against the serpent, upon the earth. When God calls them to account he's just declaring what the order had become.

 

[Ziggy]

You mean as soon as Eve ate?
I don't believe there was a heirarchy in the garden.
They were both equal no?
Before they ate, I mean..

thinking..

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

Addressing the OP. good topic by the way.

Sorry. I forgot to thank you.

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

You mean as soon as Eve ate?
I don't believe there was a heirarchy in the garden.
They were both equal no?
Before they ate, I mean..

thinking..

No. Adam. Judging by Eve's stumbling and adding that God supposedly had said, don't touch it, I'm sure she received the commandment from Adam. He told her something like, "I'm telling you stay away from that tree don't touch it!" And she misunderstood and said that God had said don't touch it.

 

[101G]

To me it seems much more likely Moses compiled most of Genesis from several earlier sources.

First thanks for the reply, second, I don't believe so, but if so it was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit/Holy Ghost. for, 2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." 2 Peter 1:21 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.".

so I believe all of Genesis is of God, it's just that us who do not completly understand God Holy Word.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

First thanks for the reply, second, I don't believe so, but if so it was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit/Holy Ghost. for, 2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." 2 Peter 1:21 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.".

so I believe all of Genesis is of God, it's just that us who do not completly understand God Holy Word.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Absolutely it's of God. But absolutely it's not one unit. The terms used at the beginning of 2:4 are accountancy terms making it impossible to be one original source. All the indexing and titling wasn't added till sometime after Rome.

And there are other accountancy breaks like that in Genesis. I'm certain Moses collected it in parts.

 

[101G]

Absolutely it's of God. But absolutely it's not one unit. The terms used at the beginning of 2:4 are accountancy terms making it impossible to be one original source. All the indexing and titling wasn't added till sometime after Rome.

And there are other accountancy breaks like that in Genesis. I'm certain Moses collected it in parts.

thanks for the reply, but Genesis 4:4 is a recap of chapter 1 with detail account of chapter 1. for the term "generation" there in the verse indicate HISTORY. and in this HISTORY (chapter1), what was missing is now defined in detail.

example the CREATION of Man on DAY 3, and the Making of Mandkind on DAY 6.

or the Creation of land animals after the making of MAN, which brought about MANKIND. see thge difference in details ... NOW?

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

thanks for the reply, but Genesis 4:4 is a recap of chapter 1 with detail account of chapter 1. for the term "generation" there in the verse indicate HISTORY. and in this HISTORY (chapter1), what was missing is now defined in detail.

example the CREATION of Man on DAY 3, and the Making of Mandkind on DAY 6.

or the Creation of land animals after the making of MAN, which brought about MANKIND. see thge difference in details ... NOW?

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Of course there are differences but the fact is the two sections are too dissimilar to be one original source. The Hebrew term rendered "generations," actually is an accounting term also rendered "accounting."

 

[101G]

Of course there are differences but the fact is the two sections are too dissimilar to be one original source. The Hebrew term rendered "generations," actually is an accounting term also rendered "accounting."

thanks for the reply. but I must disagree with that assessment, they are not dissimilar, but are placed in ORDER. that's whay I said that chapter 2 is a detailed account of chapter 1. see Adam was here before the grass and the herbs and the trees. and so was Eve, but was not brought forth or manifested until after the animals was formed.

see the details one miss is they don't have a chapter 2 to fill in the blanks.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Ziggy]

Not to muddy the waters but...

I have a controversy.. a few chapters up..

Why does Paul say this:
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

and not attribute it to the one that said it?

Gen 21:9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.
Gen 21:10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.
Gen 21:11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son.

Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

Is it scripture or tradition?

thinking..

 

[101G]

Not to muddy the waters but...

I have a controversy.. a few chapters up..

Why does Paul say this:
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

and not attribute it to the one that said it?

Gen 21:9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.
Gen 21:10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.
Gen 21:11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son.

Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

Is it scripture or tradition?

thinking..

read the scriptures before, it should clear up the waters, Galatians 4:22 "For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman."Galatians 4:23 "But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise."Galatians 4:24 "Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar."Galatians 4:25 "For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children."Galatians 4:26 "But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."Galatians 4:27 "For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband."Galatians 4:28 "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Ziggy]

for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband

 

[Ziggy]

Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

 

[Bartholomew Jones]

thanks for the reply. but I must disagree with that assessment, they are not dissimilar, but are placed in ORDER. that's whay I said that chapter 2 is a detailed account of chapter 1. see Adam was here before the grass and the herbs and the trees. and so was Eve, but was not brought forth or manifested until after the animals was formed.

see the details one miss is they don't have a chapter 2 to fill in the blanks.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

No, because the flora was day 3. The creatures of land, and then man, were day 6. The garden had lush vegetation, and the perimeters were sketchy. The way ecology works is that had they maintained the garden, the whole place would have populated gorgeously. God drew the creatures to Adam one by one over time. Adam called out what they were like and communicated to a degree with them and named them.

If you look at the language with Noah it shifts between God bringing the creatures and their coming to Noah. Same thing.

Sorry, I think it shifted between Noah bringing and their coming to Noah.