Genesis 1-3

[wolfpurplemoon]

Only thought I've had so far (beyond the whole literal creationism=crazy thing) is that Adam just suddenly has that name after being known as 'Man' for much of Chapter 1 and 2, although it depends on the version you read, as my book doesn't mention the name until 3:17 but the SAB starts using Adam at 2:19. Adam then bestows his 'Woman' with the name Eve (3:20), wasn't that nice of him.

Not sure that this is the sort of thing to be noticing, but it's what jumped out at me as I already know the creation story and the fact that chapter 2 starts all over again with God creating everything in a different order from chapter 1!

Actually in a way the first version is better as Man and Woman are created at the same time rather than Woman being created as an after-thought to provide companionship to Adam.

Comments

Okay

[(Anonymous)]

Understood. However, I will say that I will never understand why you would do something like this. Is there some deep purpose you have to mock something that is so sacred to so many others? Why can atheists not just resolve to being good people who don't believe there is a God? I mean, if you don't want to believe in God, that's your prerogative, but why be so hateful and so cynical? Anyway, try to just imagine that all that you are reading is real just as it is written; because, if it isn't real, then you have nothing to worry about, but if it is... Also, understand that once you have read the New Testament, a lot more of what you are reading now will make a lot more sense. In closing, I don't appreciate what you are doing but I sincerely desire that God will show Himself to you in some way through your endeavors. His Word says that He uses the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, that He uses what was meant for evil for His good, and that His ways are mysterious. I urge you to change, my friend. If nothing else, we are all fellow humans, and there is no need to deliberately hurt each other. -Kenneth Spond

Re: Okay

[wolfpurplemoon]

I think that if God is real he probably isn't too bothered by a bit of criticism of his sacred book from us non-believers, and I'm sure he wouldn't need Christians to constantly defend him or the book. And likewise, if your personal belief is so strong then why do you feel the need to come and defend it against one of many random atheists on the internet?

And you really see my criticism as hateful? I really can't understand where you got that from, unless you immediately lump all atheists who dare to speak out critically about your religion into a stereotype of 'hateful atheist', because I think you'd find that's not where most of us fit.

And as for resolving to just be good people who don't believe there is a God? Sure, we'll get on that as soon as the Christians all resolve to just be good people who believe there is a God and stop trying to brainwash all children with their dogma. Oh sorry, was I generalising/stereotyping?

Re: Okay

[(Anonymous)]

See it as a family kind of thing. If someone brings open sarcasm and mockery (which is vastly different from criticism) to your mother, brother, sister, spouse, best friend, etc, you are going to defend them. This is the same issue to someone who believes that God is real and that He has, in fact, saved them. And I wouldn't say that He is bothered. Hurt, maybe, but not bothered. It is because of my strong belief that I am compelled to defend the God Whom I serve. And you had to know I would say this, but i don't believe that you are random, I believe that I am debating with you for a reason.

Please understand that I am completely open to criticism. Criticism has a much different and independent definition than that of sarcasm and mockery. Also, I have debated with and read materials from a lot of atheists, and, among the atheists who make their view known openly by opposing religions, the majority of them are disrespectful, arrogant, and hateful. Now, does that mean that I stereotype the individual? Absolutely not. I originally give all men (and women) the benefit of the doubt. Actually, I had a much different view of you before I read more of your blog. It is your constant sarcasm and mockery that lumped YOU into the crowd.

Generalize and stereotype if you must; however, I would have to fall on the side that believes that no one is good (you'll understand that when you get into the New Testament [and a bit in the Old]).

I feel that we are ALL suppose to read the Bible critically to find out what is really being said. It is criticism that I believe that you are lacking. I believe you are confusing criticism for skepticism. I apologize if I have offended you.

I also want to clarify a poor use of language in my previous post. When I say "good people" I mean to try to be good people. By that I mean, attempting to live with moral conviction in relation to other humans in all avenues. You may call this coexisting, but my implications are deeper.