Bible talked in circles at start

[Ketzer]

First, wikipedia has all the qualifications to be a reliable source of information as a conspiracy theorist. I'd get more reliable material from twitter. (joking)
Second, you just made my point for me in another area. People are basing their lives on a book written by a group of people who didn't speak the original language. Plus, it was written hundreds of years after the last supposed apostle died. Be this as it may, there is a popular mem out right now that has alot of truth to it. "My favorite part of the Bible is when Jesus talks to god alone and someone who wasn't there is writing about it". lmao, I thought, "Even I didn't catch one in my studies.

Actually, the Bible WAS written by people who spoke the original languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek). Also, the writings that were assembled into the Bible were not written hundreds of years after the last apostle died.

You’re giving atheists a bad name.

Boru

You got that backwards. The king James version was written by a committee of 9 leading clergy of the time. The Christian Standard Bible was compiled in a similiar fashion. They themselves commissioned the gathering of stories then voted on what were to be put into the bible. I highly doubt anyone here speaks Hebrew. This is afterall, according to what i see, an English speaking forum. I don't give Atheists a bad name. People who pretend to be Atheists and speak without being truly informed do that already. Example, people who try to get churches removed from neighborhoods. Religion or any belief system in a deity doesn't offend me nor effects me. I rank all modern deity beliefs into the same categories as viking lore, greek mythology and so forth. In case why you are wondering I haven't flew back at you with a rant, rave or a just all around exchange of insults, the answer is easy. I'm an adult and make little time for such things. I view the time responding to you as a waste in fact as well. Have a good day.

---

Welcome to AF, Ketzer. Nice starting thread.

I don't think Bel's "royal we" idea holds up. The Hebrew word used in Genesis 1:1, ’elohîm, is plural. Here is a link to a 7th day Adventist site explaining the noun ’eloah, but I'm not drawing from this site for my information. I've heard a Jewish analysis of the text point out the same thing.
https://www.adventistworld.org/is-it-tru...is-plural/

The standard explanation for the many gods thing from Christians is the Trinity. This really doesn't gel with the rest of their theology, although I'm sure they can't help but be giddy at their beloved Trinity being spoken of all the way back in Gen 1:1.

A better explanation for all of OP's concerns is that Genesis and other texts were compiled from a bunch of different manuscripts... some of this compilation of texts happened as late as 200 BC. Lot's of scholarly work suggests that early Judaism might have had a pantheon of different gods where, historically, one became the favorite over time. Also, the two different tellings of creation of humans can be explained by multiple manuscripts.

Plenty of good theories. Too many to detail here. All of them dispute inerrancy.

Nice. A kindred spirit. You hit my point exactly. If I may extrapolate on your input. The Gilgamesh story of creation predates the Christian Genesis book and unsurprisingly enough, Genesis mirrors it quite a bit. Of course it has always been the way of Christiananity to incorporate into their system what they couldn't squash. Christmas is an excellent example of this in my opinion.