I am asking how the chiastic structure removes the contradictions. As you said:
“The chiastic structure of Genesis 7 is a legitimate way to read the passage as a whole without it contradicting itself.”
How doers the chiastic structure make the contradictions go away or become irrelevant?
Maybe they ponder skeptical theism and lèse-majesté.
I am not asking about the problem of evil. I am asking why a Psalm in my Bible says happy is he who smashes babies on rocks and how that relates to you advocating just accepting the surface meaning of scripture as if its all consistent or morally sane. We could maybe quote “skeptical theism” as a response to justifying slavery and misogyny can we not? I’m sure a lot of slave supporters said “its in God’s word, we have to accept it.” A hermeneutic that doesn’t actually allow change is not scripturally sound to me.
When contradictions between the gospels are presented do you have problems with digging beneath the surface to harmonize them? Or is it only that we are to accept surface readings when they teach whatever modern Protestants already believe to be true?
Maybe they simply say, “I don’t get it” and God the Holy Spirit still speaks to his own. I have wondered if maybe we have the Bible in the form that we do isn’t a test of humility… for the person in the pew who is not an academic.
Certainly all academics have no lack of humility. 
I can’t find the commentary now. I thought it was Kline, but that is not the case. It must have been a pdf file I found while searching this awhile back.
What I recall was that there was a clear chiasm for Genesis 7 and the apparently contradictory elements were variants in the chiasm. (A,B,B’,A’).
Depends on how you define humanity and human civilization. Homonids living practically the same way for millions of years according to their biologically evolved traits isn’t it. What I call human civilization is something that began around 10,000 years ago.
So… nope. Even 20,000 years ago would make A&E insignificant.
A local flood means local animals. The earth in the Bible is never described as a planet or a globe but only a small section of it.
Maybe they’ve had a 7th grade English class and have heard of hyperbole and poetic license?
No it was a chiasm centered in chapter 7. I really want to find it and searched my old devices today.
I had a novel thought: google it! Maybe one of the hits is what you were looking for, or at least is comparable?
https://www.google.com/search?q=chiasm+centered+in+Genesis+chapter+7
No. It might have been something from James Jordan, but I’m striking out. Searched the Biblical Horizons website and still not finding it.
There is historicral proof of evidence of human death, even in the area of the garden.
" Around 7000 BC – The first farmers settle in northern Mesopotamia, herd animals and grow crops on the fertile river soil . Around 5400 BC – The world’s first city is established by the ancient Sumer people. It is called Eridu. About 5000 BC – Farmers begin to settle in the south of Mesopotamia." https://www.historyforkids.net/timeline-of-mesopotamia.html#:~:text=Around%207000%20BC%20–%20The%20first,in%20the%20south%20of%20Mesopotamia.
Review: The Early Settlement of Southern Mesopotamia: A Review of Recent Historical, Geological, and Archaeological Research on JSTOR
" Cyprus. He is considered to have founded the world’s first successful empire, as it lasted longer than one generation when he died in 2279 BC after a 56 year reign and was replaced by his son, Rimush." Mesopotamia, History & The Rise Of Civilisation | Ancient Origins
Continued:
https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1116&conhttps://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ancient-brutal-massacre-may-be-earliest-evidence-war-180957884/
text=stu_hon_theses
" Stone Age cultures
The oldest burials that attest to a belief in life after death can be placed in the period between about 50,000 and 30,000 BCE. The earliest evidence of human activity in any form, on the other hand, goes back more than 1,000,000 years." Prehistoric religion - Stone Age cultures | Britannica
Fact sheet | Institute of Human Origins
I’m sure I responded to every objection or idea you presented?
I sway between a misotheist and someone who tries to follow Christ. I get awful whip lash. If it wasn’t for Jesus, I’d be a militant atheist.
What convinces you that Jesus isn’t a great fictional character, or a mythologized good guy?
Oh… That isn’t very helpful for me. I suppose if I had that kind of proof, I’d be risking my life daily to help prosecuted Christians in places like China and be happy to suffer and die for the cause.
A guy called Mike Jones deals with this on his Inspiring Philosophy Youtube channel. I don’t agree with everything he teaches, but the Flood stuff is pretty solid. I mean, it at least passes the smell test.
I’m flattered. Thank you! I know I can seem antagonistic and a bit… Unconventional? In my thinking to some here… I’m quite lost in life to be honest. So I came here to try and see things differently.
Yes, Mike Jones - https://www.youtube.com/@InspiringPhilosophy
He’s a real up-and-comer in the apologetics game, I think.
Mike is pretty good, but he isn’t always correct. Dan McClellan has a video where he corrects Mike. Dan is also pretty good at taking apart bad apologetics.
Slight correction. The language contained vowels when spoken. The original written Hebrew didn’t include the vowels. The indications for vowels were added later. I have never heard why the vowels weren’t included from the beginning. Another point about the original written Hebrew was they didn’t include any indication of words or sentences. It is just an unbroken string of consonants.
No. This is from a learning Hebrew site.
I don’t think the name change itself was that significant. It was the fact that God gave him that name.
Assigning meaning to individual Hebrew letters was done centuries after the OT was written. It wasn’t a part of the original meaning of the text.
no Riversea…there are not multiple views on the Exodus. And I thought that was your issue?? the Adam and Eve accounts are unrelated to that subject. And also they are not an exercise in comparative religons…they at bottom are a refutation of other religious views…take one subject at a time. There is, after all, such a thing as “always learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth”
I wish I could help you, but I am also confused and learning about the topic. I’m about to tackle a book by Joshua Swamidass titled “The Genealogical Adam and Eve”. Maybe it will help.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.
