(January 20, 2015 at 12:05 pm)Tonus Wrote:(January 18, 2015 at 1:39 pm)Drich Wrote: Actuall look up how ancient jews relayed a story. In their traditional story telling they give an overview first then come back and fill in the detail.That's not how the two accounts read. One is complete and the other seems partially complete, and they differ in numerous areas. They also describe a very different creator; in the first account, god is an ethereal being who speaks things into existence ("let there be" ... "and it was so"). He creates the plants, then the sun/moon, then the fish and flying creatures, then the land animals. Finally he creates man and woman at once and gives them stewardship over the entire planet and everything on it.
The second account actually begins with "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens." It does not pretend to be an ancillary account, but THE account of creation, as if the other doesn't exist. This version of the creator is more human: he "forms" man and "planted" a garden. Unlike the god of the first version, he works as a craftsman would. He creates man, then puts the man to work in the garden of Eden and limits him to the fruits of the garden (with two exceptions), then finally creates woman after that.
It is also notable that in chapter 2 there is a sudden transition from referring to "the man" and suddenly calling him "Adam." The man is never formally introduced by name (and has no name in the first account), which makes it seem as if at least a portion of the second account is missing. Indeed, the second account seems a bit fragmented, and there are probably a few parts missing. Whether this is intentional or not, I don't know. But IMO they are clearly two different tellings of the tale.
Bravo!