Christian answering questions.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

[robvalue]

It talks about "Us" as well, clearly a throwback to polytheism which it ripped off. They try and pretend it's Jesus or some shit of course.

[Drich]

[TheRocketSurgeon]

[Godscreated]

I really don't' have the crayons to answer your question any simpler.

If God died then the universe doesn't need him to exist.  Consequently God is irrelevant.

 A man died, he was also God but without His powers. Christ laid down his powers in heaven to become a man capable of sin. If Christ had come with his powers He would not have been able to sin, this is very important to understand, if you don't you'll never be able to understand why He was the perfect man (sinless) who sacrificed his life for mankind. See what happens when you refuse to study the scriptures and find out what they actually say, you make your own version of the story, a version that's little more than a lie.

GC

[TheRocketSurgeon]

If God died then the universe doesn't need him to exist.  Consequently God is irrelevant.

 A man died, he was also God but without His powers. Christ laid down his powers in heaven to become a man capable of sin. If Christ had come with his powers He would not have been able to sin, this is very important to understand, if you don't you'll never be able to understand why He was the perfect man (sinless) who sacrificed his life for mankind. See what happens when you refuse to study the scriptures and find out what they actually say, you make your own version of the story, a version that's little more than a lie.

GC

Oh we understand what the story claims, bub. We just think it's hilarious that you can't see the marks of a man turned into a myth, then into a god.

God became a man, to show us the way by being a sinless human. He became such a man that he begged himself not to force himself to let himself be murdered so a plan made by himself (to allow humans to be forgiven--by him--of sins, which he made up himself) could go forth. He then asked why he had forsaken himself, as he was being murdered.

Yeah. Sounds like a god. Nope! Sounds like a regular old apocalyptic preacher killed by the Romans to keep the peace, and turned into a legend by his followers. You just can't see that because you're still in the cult.

[SteelCurtain]

An adult talking earnestly about "powers..." It never ceases to amaze me.

[Drich]

[Godscreated]

 A man died, he was also God but without His powers. Christ laid down his powers in heaven to become a man capable of sin. If Christ had come with his powers He would not have been able to sin, this is very important to understand, if you don't you'll never be able to understand why He was the perfect man (sinless) who sacrificed his life for mankind. See what happens when you refuse to study the scriptures and find out what they actually say, you make your own version of the story, a version that's little more than a lie.

GC

Oh we understand what the story claims, bub. We just think it's hilarious that you can't see the marks of a man turned into a myth, then into a god.

God became a man, to show us the way by being a sinless human. He became such a man that he begged himself not to force himself to let himself be murdered so a plan made by himself (to allow humans to be forgiven--by him--of sins, which he made up himself) could go forth. He then asked why he had forsaken himself, as he was being murdered.

Yeah. Sounds like a god. Nope! Sounds like a regular old apocalyptic preacher killed by the Romans to keep the peace, and turned into a legend by his followers. You just can't see that because you're still in the cult.

 I would think you would be more concerned as to why God has blind you to the reality of Christ.

GC

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Again no. the story did not start over. The creation account starts Genesis 1:1 and ends Genesis 2:3 The GARDEN Account (all of which happens day 3) starts Genesis 2:4 to the end of the chapter. Genesis was a Detailed account of what happened day three only between YHWH and the Garden/Man made in the image of God.

Yes, it's likely that one tradition told the story of the interaction of god-and-man in the garden, while the other story tried to tell of cosmological origins. They're two stories. They were just combined into one.

You can assert your claims here all day, and it still is two stories. Whether they were written at the same time and by the same persons (as you claim) can be debated, but it's still two stories by any measure... one is a general, sweeping view of the earth's creation and our origin/place in it, and the other is your "Detailed" account.

Now how can we tell which of the assertions is more likely to be true? One author or two and a redactor?

Well, we look at things like writing style (there are two different styles, here), what words are used to describe the same thing (one uses Yahweh, while the other uses Elohim), and whether they both cover the same details that could have been omitted if it was a single tale (because it was covered a few lines before), and so on.

Now, you can try to assert the claims of some fundamentalist "scholars" (I use the term loosely), who will try to argue that the Documentary Hypothesis is bunk, but most serious scholars will acknowledge that it's a cut-paste job; they simply quibble over who, why, when, and how much.

Again, your cult's conditioning blinds you to the ability to see what is well-recognized by everyone else. (The hallmark of a cultist!)