D
DrewC
Guest
I have a question pertaining to the book of Genesis. I was wondering who wrote it and how did they know about Adam and Eve? Thanks in advance.
- Status
J
junostarlighter
Guest
the first draft was written in the 10th century BC; the final editing of the book took place in the 6th century BC. jewish and catholic tradition traces the origins of this book back to moses, but inspired editors worked on it after he did to give it the form in which we now have it.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
How much of it was edited and by whom?
If I recall Ezra and/or Nehemiah correctly, the Jews returning to Jerusalem after exile found the ancient texts (the Pentatauch) and read them as if it was the first time they came across it.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
the content of the early books of the OT was handed on in oral tradition for centuries before it was compiled in written form, and that process of writing and editing also took centuries. There are several past threads on history of OT, or consult a good commentary for more info. search also the This Rock back issues on the CA homepage for good articles on history of the bible.
J
Jim_Baur
Guest
In the first part of the Summa, q. 46 art. 2, …Gregory says (“Hom. i in Ezech.”), that Moses prophesied of the past, saying, In the beginning God created heaven and earth:…
A
awalt
Guest
Based on analysis of style etc. there were probably 4 final authors, or groups of people under 4 sets of authorship. Reading this analysis is very interesting, a simplistic example I always remembered was that there are two creation stories, for example - likely two different author(s) of those.
S
Seamus_Sully
Guest
Origen’s analysis: the first creation of man and woman tells us we have a spiritual nature. We are made in God’s image and likeness.
The second account of creation of man and woman tells us we are made of the earth. We are dust and to dust we will return.
Both of these are most helpful for understanding many parts of the Holy Bible.
Now we are new creations, we are adopted children of God, Our Father.
Seth to John the Baptist humans could only be friends with God.
Now we are new creations. We are adopted children of God.
We are now spiritually able to do loving deeds.
God’s love is poured into our hearts.
We have new hearts and new grace, grace in place of grace.
The old grace, at best friends.
The new grace, children of God.
The power of the new Gospel is most powerful, just look at the official saints.
We partake in the Divine Nature.
The second account of creation of man and woman tells us we are made of the earth. We are dust and to dust we will return.
Both of these are most helpful for understanding many parts of the Holy Bible.
Now we are new creations, we are adopted children of God, Our Father.
Seth to John the Baptist humans could only be friends with God.
Now we are new creations. We are adopted children of God.
We are now spiritually able to do loving deeds.
God’s love is poured into our hearts.
We have new hearts and new grace, grace in place of grace.
The old grace, at best friends.
The new grace, children of God.
The power of the new Gospel is most powerful, just look at the official saints.
We partake in the Divine Nature.
S
Seamus_Sully
Guest
Regardless of how we got the final draft, it is inspired.
There are many arguments about how we got the final draft, but it must be loved. If we love it we will accept it. Or to say the same thing differently, if we love it we will believe it.
There are many arguments about how we got the final draft, but it must be loved. If we love it we will accept it. Or to say the same thing differently, if we love it we will believe it.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I understand that there are two creation stories, but I think the author is trying to convey two sides of God:
1st) God is all-powerful. He says, “Let there be light” and there is light.
2nd) God is a loving Father. I imagine him scooping up the clay and molding man, and then breathing life into him.
I really detest the four authors theory, and obviously I’m not convinced of it yet.
For instance, I understand that there is no evidence of the two stories being separated. Every recording of one creation accout includes the other. If these were separate accounts, there should be evidence of one writing without the other.
V
Valke2
Guest
As a wise owl once said, “the world may never know”
On the two creation stories, R. Solovetchik (sp?) theorizes that there are two Adams. Adam one is created simultaneously with Eve. He is a creature of community. Adam 2 is created alone. In his loneliness, he cries out to God. Obviously, there’s a lot more to it, but I’m not capable of recalling it all.
On the two creation stories, R. Solovetchik (sp?) theorizes that there are two Adams. Adam one is created simultaneously with Eve. He is a creature of community. Adam 2 is created alone. In his loneliness, he cries out to God. Obviously, there’s a lot more to it, but I’m not capable of recalling it all.
R
richardeekw
Guest
Here are Must read books for your growth in understanding the Old Testament Origins
**And God Said What?: **
An Introduction to Biblical Literary Forms
Discovering Old Testament Origins
The Books of Genesis, Exodus, and
Author:
**Margaret Nutting Ralph **is secretary of educational ministries for the Roman Catholic diocese of Lexington, Kentucky, and director of the masters degree programs for Roman Catholics at Lexington Theological Seminary. She is the author of books on Scripture and has given workshops on Scripture throughout the U.S. and in Canada.
Talk a look at this websites too
religioustolerance.org/jepd_gen.htm
theopedia.com/Mosaic_authorship_of_the_Pentate
uch
C
cialovesyou
Guest
The best theory around today is this…
That it was written and redacted by four different schools of thought, probably between 800 BC, until 600 BC. The four schools are the Elohist, Yawist, Priestly, and Deuteronomist schools.
Prior to it being written, some stories would likely have have come out of the oral tradition of the people of Israel.
C
Crumpy
Guest
Scott Hahn recommends Fr. Jean Corbon’s “Path to Freedom” written before the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council as a general and inspiring spiritual overview of scripture.
It was a difficult book for me to read.
It’s written in such a fashion for people familiar with theology, it seems. The point of my distraction here is that he calls the first account of creation a “song.”
He wants to shake us out of the tendency to look at it as either a legal or a scientific document. So, he’s definitely in the camp of those who advise looking at the genre of the writing.
I think that’s a silly argument. It’s as if there is a group of experts among us who are so brilliant as to recognize an entire “genre” of literature of which our sacred text is merely a confusing and patchworked example.
It’s as if some modern analysis unlocks the Babylonian creation myth, on which at least part of the first book supposedly depends – instead of acknowledging that Genesis is perhaps a later inspired ‘correction’ of that earlier myth.
To Drew: your questions are reasonable, but you have cast the whole creation account in very limited terms. You’re spoiling the grilled cheese sandwich, so to speak, by questioning how old the Velveeta is.
It was a difficult book for me to read.
It’s written in such a fashion for people familiar with theology, it seems. The point of my distraction here is that he calls the first account of creation a “song.”
He wants to shake us out of the tendency to look at it as either a legal or a scientific document. So, he’s definitely in the camp of those who advise looking at the genre of the writing.
I think that’s a silly argument. It’s as if there is a group of experts among us who are so brilliant as to recognize an entire “genre” of literature of which our sacred text is merely a confusing and patchworked example.
It’s as if some modern analysis unlocks the Babylonian creation myth, on which at least part of the first book supposedly depends – instead of acknowledging that Genesis is perhaps a later inspired ‘correction’ of that earlier myth.
To Drew: your questions are reasonable, but you have cast the whole creation account in very limited terms. You’re spoiling the grilled cheese sandwich, so to speak, by questioning how old the Velveeta is.
S
Seamus_Sully
Guest
Origen says: The first creation of man refers to our spiritual side, that is, made in His image and likeness.
The making of man from mud is our body.
It seems to make great sense to me.
The making of man from mud is our body.
It seems to make great sense to me.
- Status