Documentary Hypothesis.... Alleged Contradictions...

Submitted by Servant of Christ (United States), Mar 24, 2007 at 19:49

Lots of apologies for very late reply. I thought I replied earlier but my computer messed up so I have re-written what I wrote before.

Because they are examined very carefully and probably even carbon dating testing. So you agree with me that the flood story is just a myth?

No, I am not agreeing with you. Since there is still substantial evidence for a Flood. Biblical dating is still not uniformly agreed to by Christians. I would like to add that some Christians do indeed interpret the Flood as a local flood; I, however, disagree on this matter but I will do them respect by acknowledging their position.

Herr is an article I found:

"Creationists call us to believe the Biblical creation story as a literal account of historical events. However, Genesis contains two distinctly different creation accounts. Which creation story are they calling us to "literally" believe?

Same story different angles. This person is obviously not a historian (definately not a Jewish one). When historians see 'different angles' not opposing angles, they do their best to see how the piece may fit together. Jewish history is written in a distant overview followed by a closeup view in a certain spot (it does not necessarily have to be in the beginning). So Genesis 1 is an overview and Genesis 2 zooms up on day 6, the creation of man. If you take 5 minutes to look up "Creation Accounts and Apologetics" you will find it so easy how to explain this 'alleged contradiction' that vexes many misunderstanding skeptists.

For generations, serious students of Scripture have noted stark divisions and variations in the age of the Hebrew, its style and language within Genesis. As we have it now, Genesis is actually a composite of three written primary sources, each with its own character, favorite words and distinctly different names for God. Such differences all but evaporate when translated into English, but they are clear in the ancient Hebrew text.

Yes and no. It is very true that today's source of scripture was derived from various 'caches' of sources like the Dead Sea Scrolls, Masoretic Text, Pentateuch, Samaritan, etc. While it is true that some versions have more or less words with an occassionally different word in every book of scripture, the large opulence of text actually validates the authority. There are three names for God: YHWH, his personal name, Elohim, meaning God in English, and finally Adonai, which translates to Lord. It is not like these names are found exclusively in different sources like the name YHWH is ONLY found in Text A, Elohim in Text B, and Adonai in Text C. Rather, the uses of the three name are used in all the sources and YHWH still maintains prevalence over all the names instead of them being neatly distributed in proportionate amounts.

If you compared the wording in scripture of different sources like the Dead Sea Scrolls and Masoretic you will see they are copied very well. Most amazing is the Isaiah scrolls which differs from the Masoretic text with only a few different spellings or different words with same meaning.

If the source you are quoting from is talking about the Documentary Hypothesis (Jehovist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, Priestly), then the name itself tells us that it is a hypothesis. The theory has no real proof, just skeptical remarks.

And for generations the ones who wrote the text

No evidence. The generations that followed recopied the text, nothing more.

The first creation account, Genesis. 1:1 to Genesis. 2:4a, was written during or after the Jews' Babylonian captivity. This fully developed story explains creation in terms of the ancient near eastern world view of its time. A watery chaos is divided by the dome (firmament) of the sky. The waters under the dome are gathered and land appears. Lights are affixed in the dome. All living things are created. The story pictures God building the cosmos as a supporting ecosystem for humanity. Finally, humanity, both male and female, is created, and God rests.

The second Creation story, Genesis 2:4b to 2:25, found its written form several centuries before the Genesis. 1:1 story. This text is a less developed and much older story. It was probably passed down for generations around the camp fires of desert dwellers before being written. It begins by describing a desert landscape, no plants or herbs, no rain; only a mist arises out of the earth. Then the Lord God forms man of the dust of the ground, creates an oasis-like Garden of Eden to support the "man whom he had formed." In this story, God creates animal life while trying to provide the man "a helper fit for him." None being found, God takes a rib from the man's side and creates the first woman. These two creation stories clearly arise out of different histories and reflect different concerns with different sequences of events. Can they either or both be literal history? Obviously not.

Many serious students of Scripture consider the first eleven chapters of Genesis as non-literal, pre-history type literature, with Abram in Genesis. 12:1 being the first literal historical figure in the Bible. This understanding of Genesis causes an uproar in some quarters. In most church communities, little of this textual study has filtered down to the pew. But, in their professional training, vast numbers of clergy have been exposed to this type of literary scriptural analysis.

Jesus takes creation, the Flood, and etc literal. It's hard to say that they were just parables that are not literal when the center of Christianity is advocating a literal reading.

In my over 28 years as a pastor, I have encountered many people who are unnecessarily conflicted because they have been made to believe that, to be faithfully religious, one must take a literal view of the Genesis creation accounts. Faced with their scientific understandings going one direction and their spiritual search another, many have felt compelled to give up their spiritual search altogether. This all too common reaction is an unnecessary shame!"

I think that science makes itself obvious to us all that these intricate beings known as organisms did not come from matter which came from non-matter which.......

We all know that everything comes from something, except God because the definition of God is one who has always existed. It requires more faith to believe evolution than to honestly believe in creation. I believe in creation because it is logical. Logic does not deny the supernatural and neither does science, atheism does.

I understand that you gave me this article because it was written by a pastor. Christianity is being filled with increasingly liberal 'christians' from the beginning of the church. I will not judge this man but I will say that my views differ from his and that I have biblical evidence.

So, the next time someone asks you if you believe the Biblical story of creation, just remember the correct reply: "To which Biblical creation story do you refer?"

I believe the only creation account. It is found in Genesis 1-2.

In the first two chapters in the Bible are found two contradictory accounts of creation. There are eight points of contrast between the accounts:

Genesis 2

a. The story comes from the southern storyteller of this and other stories.

b. It was first written about 1000 BCE (before the common era, same as BC)

Both points a and b have no evidence.

c. The pre-creation situation is dry desert because that's what you find in southern Israel.

C. is very humorous because Genesis 2:10-14 makes it clear that the beginning of man was found in Mesopotamia. Not only this, Genesis 2 never talks about there being a lack of vegetation; it says that no field plants were yet grown since man had not come (v. 5). And verse 6 tells us that the land had 'streams of water' which tend to be lacking in deserts.

d. Creation of humanity precedes the creation of vegetation and animal life.

The passage focuses on the creation of man. The foundation is already upon the fact that plants were already formed. Verse 6 says the streams watered the earth; why? Perhaps it's because it was to water the vegetation? In verse 8 it says that God had made the Garden of Eden and he put Adam there. The Hebrew wording can interpreted as the Garden being there prior to Adam being there. Verse 9 is worded similarly in Hebrew as the pluperfect or past perfect tense of grammar in English.

e. Man and woman, Adam and Eve, are created in two separate acts.

They were always separate acts on the same day.

f. The Creator is called "the Lord God."

It still makes use of Elohim and YHWH.

g. Creation is a hands-on experience for the Lord God.

Always was, all of scripture acknowledges this.

h. One important aspect of the concept of the Lord God presented in this story is fertility.

God just says that man and woman have sexual union, not necessarily fertility.

Genesis 1

a. This is the religious establishment's official authorized description of creation.b. This description was first written about 500 BCE, in or around the time the Jews returned to Jerusalem from exile in Babylon.c. The pre-creation situation is watery chaos because Babylon sat between the Tigris and Euphrates.d. Order of creation is light, sky, sea, earth, vegetation, sun and moon and stars, birds, sea creatures, land animals, and lastly, humanity.e. Creation of humanity is single act.f. The Creator is called "God."g. The Creator is present only through the commands that cause the creative acts to occur.h. One important aspect of the concept of God presented in this description is bringing order out of chaos.

a. "Creation account 2" also has a setting at Babylon. Not only this, but Creation account 2 says that there were streams of water, animals, and the Garden of Eden which makes it clear that this was just a part of a creation and not all of it.

b. Though the Jews were in Babylonian captivity, there is no evidence that this was written during those times. If it was then I'm really confused why many books of the Bible from Joshua to Hebrews refer to the books of Moses though in fact many of them were pre-dating Babylonian captivity.

c. Both creation accounts settle in Babylon. "Creation 1" doesn't even mention the names of the rivers.

d. Genesis 2 doesn't differ from the order. It just starts on day six after animals were made. The creation of Adam and Eve are may be mentioned together as a 'uniform event' but that doesn't mean they happened at the same time (albeit the same day). It's similar to me saying, "People made mechanical television." versus "Man made the television box and later they made the remote." It's very obvious that both my sentence use different names for Homo sapiens but we know that I wrote both sentences despite different name uses and how I had a short sentence and then another one that gave a little more detail about the television adding the fact that the remote was made after the television set. Of course, analogies are not completely accurate, but this is very similar to the argument skeptists try use.

e. See above.

h. Although he commands it, he also does the action. It's not like Variable A is commanding Variable B. Variable is giving the voice to show us his power and majesty. Although some people say that different Persons of the Trinity were involved with different roles of creation.

5. In Genesis 6-8, there are two stories of the Great Flood, a common story in the literature of the Middle East. These stories have been intermingled in the text by the editors and redactors. The older of the stories is found in Genesis 6:8-10; 7:1-10, 16c; 8:6-12, 20-22. This story comes from 1000 BCE and may have Egyptian influence. The newer story is found in Genesis 6:9-22; 7:11-24; 8:1-5, 13-19; 9:1-17, and comes from 500 BCE with Babylonian influence. Here are six contradictions:

No evidence. It fails because so many cultures in history had flood stories.

Old Flood Story

a. Human wickedness prompted "Yahweh" to wipe out descendants of Adam, along with animals, reptiles and birds, but not sea creatures.

Agreed.

b. No details are given about the size of the ark or what it's made from or how it's made.

Yes they are given. But it seems that skeptists try to divide (what they claim to be a) 2500 old document into very oddly managed halves. http://www.carm.org/bible/jedp_b.htm The link shows us how they divide the passages.

c. Noah is instructed to take seven (7) pairs of edible animals on board, and one pair of animals that you don't eat.

The reasoning is simple. The extra ones are used for sacrifices. I would include the address but it might be considered to be the 'New Flood".

d. The flood is a simple matter of too much rain falling for "forty days and forty nights," a Hebrew idiomatic phrase meaning "long enough."

Not necessarily. Jesus and Moses spent 40 days and nights in the desert. In fact, many biblical characters spend 40 days and nights fasting or other deeds. Forty is more than just an idiomatic term; it is symbolic.

e. The ark lands in an unknown location after Noah sends out a dove on three occasions to test for dry ground. All passengers disembark soon after, it seems.

I can't really follow this because I'm not sure which ones are considered old or new since not only are the chapters divided, their verses are too.

f. Noah initiates a covenant-making ceremony with Yahweh. He builds an altar, kills one of every edible specie of animal and bird and cooks the meat on the altar. Yahweh is pleased and promises never again to destroy every living thing.

New Flood Story

a. "God" decided to kill everything under the heavens in which there is the "spirit of God," in response to humans filling the Earth with violence.b. Details are given of the size and shape of the ark, along with specific directions as to how it is to be built and from what it is to be made.c. Noah is instructed to take one pair of all animals on board, and is reminded to take food for all.d. The flood is a complex matter involving the undoing of creation. The dome that divided the waters above the Earth from the waters below the Earth is severely threatened when water comes down from above, and comes up from below for one hundred fifty days.e. The ark lands in the mountains of Upper Mesopotamia and Noah and his family and all the animals remain in the ark for several months before disembarking.f. God initiates a covenant-making ceremony with Noah. He gives the humans similar instructions to those he gave to the humans in the description of creation in the first chapter of Genesis. God gives the rainbow as a sign of his promise that he will never again drown every living thing.

When God says everything under the heavens, it excludes certain aquatic life. Taking the passage out of context makes Point A an understandable error. http://www.carm.org/bible/jedp_b.htm

But still that many men fighting a battle which happened 3000 thousand years ago is to much.

It's not like the U.S. where less than 10% of our population goes to war. In the ancient world, everyone was serviced to the king from the inexperienced town militia to the high-ranking general.

14 Now, behold, in my straits I have prepared for the house of the LORD a hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand thousand talents of silver; and of brass and iron without weight, for it is in abundance; timber also and stone have I prepared; and thou mayest add thereto. 1 chronicles 22:14According to the above verse David gives solomon; 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver. Since a talent was about 60 pounds, this would be about 3,000 tons of gold and 30,000 tons of silver. Where did they get that much gold and from? 7 and they gave for the service of the house of God of gold five thousand talents and ten thousand darics, and of silver ten thousand talents, and of brass eighteen thousand talents, and of iron a hundred thousand talents. 1 Chronicles 29:7

As usual, the reported amounts of gold, silver, and iron are grossly exaggerated. (100,000 talents of iron, for example, would be about 34 million kilograms.) Where did they get the Iron from?

They weren't loaded on one heavy wagon. Each soldier most likely took a set unit of plunder. The amounts above are indeed large but so were the amounts of wealth used to build Solomon's Temple yet even Josephus agrees to the biblical units.

It also says King David collects ten thousand drams (or darics) for the construction of the temple in Jerusalem. This is especially interesting since darics were coins named after King Darius I who lived some five hundred years after David. So when was this book written?

The answer is really quite simple if you understand the background of Chronicles. Chronicles was written after Babylonian captivity since it uses the word drachma and Darius was a Mede (as portrayed in the Book of Daniel). Chronicles is believed to be written by Ezra (or a prophet) when the Israelites returned from exile as ordained by King Cyrus the Great (of Persia).

Here is another contradiction:

13 So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him: 'Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thy foes while they pursue thee? or shall there be three days' pestilence in thy land? now advise thee, and consider what answer I shall return to Him that sent Me.' 2 Samuel 24:13

11 So Gad came to David, and said unto him: 'Thus saith the LORD: Take which thou wilt:12 either three years of famine; or three months to be swept away before thy foes, while the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee; or else three days the sword of the LORD, even pestilence in the land, and the angel of the LORD destroying throughout all the borders of Israel. Now therefore consider what answer I shall return to Him that sent me.' 1 Chronicles 21:12

In 2 Samuel 24:13 it says that famine will be seven years long but in 1 Chronicles 21:12 it says that the famine will be 3 years long. There is a big contradiction there.

http://www.carm.org/diff/2Sam24_13.htm

Let us not stray from the biblical prophecies.

Again, I apologize for such a late reply.

May God Bless You and Enjoy Easter

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".