Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Genesis 1:2: new section
Line 1: Line 1:  
Perhaps chapters one and two could be combined in some way so that they clearly tell the same story in the same order?  Liberals often claim that they show two differently ordered creation stories and it would be a good idea to clarify this.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:09, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
 
Perhaps chapters one and two could be combined in some way so that they clearly tell the same story in the same order?  Liberals often claim that they show two differently ordered creation stories and it would be a good idea to clarify this.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 15:09, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
 
:That's a major re-write, something we're not doing.  While I agree we should make clear that Genesis 2:6-25 expands on what happened in Genesis 1:26-27, re-writing Genesis is a more drastic step than that action requires. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 15:31, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
 
:That's a major re-write, something we're not doing.  While I agree we should make clear that Genesis 2:6-25 expands on what happened in Genesis 1:26-27, re-writing Genesis is a more drastic step than that action requires. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 15:31, 11 October 2009 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Genesis 1:2 ==
 +
 +
If "the waters under the heaven [were] gathered together unto one place, and ... the dry land appear[ed]" on the third day (Gen. 1:9), can it really be said that there were "oceans" on the first day? [[User:AngusF|AngusF]] 18:10, 14 October 2009 (EDT)
167

edits

Navigation menu