I hate:

You read a Scroll of Protection.
A Scroll of Protection suddenly bursts into flames!

Someone use an envoy slot or something to make scrolls not use up charges in the arena, by the way

Whereas I say that the mythology is not one and the same, and an annoyed that most people don't care about the nuances and uses them interchangeably, as Xavius said.

You know I heard that Lucifer fell from Heavan and killed Satan to become the prince of hell. I'm not sure where I heard that...

It's possible. Mythology is confusing enough as it is, so like most people just choose the one you like best .

Yeah, it could be that.

Or perhaps the explanation that has existed for over 2000 years as to what the meaning of those "two stories" are, and how those "two stories" are infact, one story written twice, so that we can understand the real meaning behind the words.

But afterall, I am sure a subject of study that started in the 1850's knows more than a subject of study that started in the 0070's.

Afterall, we know more about Paentology than anybody knows about Physics.

Studying JudeoChristian mythology from a modern secular viewpoint, and studying it from an ancient religious viewpoint are going to be almost nothing alike. People who believe in it are never going to be able to fully seperate that belief from their study of it, and will thus obtain a different view than a secular viewpoint will.

One story written twice? Everything is created in a different order in each story. Pretty odd story. But the argument that was made earlier was that we "changed" something in the mythology, when in fact the mythology itself isn't even consistent with itself. I agree that you have to read into things in the Bible, not take any word at its face value. If everyone took the time to interpret the Bible with care and logic, we wouldn't have to ban people picketing funerals because they claim death is God's punishment for homosexuality.

Its not really created in a different order. What is diferent is the emphasis on details.

This whole arguement/debate makes me want to go back to reading the bible again..just to know what the heck some things said here are about. We only briefly touched on creation stories in History last year so..yeah. Back to reading.

Except.. in one version, the world is all water and God raises the land out of the sea, and in the other, the world is parched, and God opens up the sky to fill up the oceans... that seems sort of.. contradictory.. dontcha think?

But, we also can't forget that the Bible was an oral tradition for a very long time, and during the Jewish exile in Babylon, it would have been severely degraded. It wasn't until after that exile came to an end that the Old Testament was officially written down.. and that was after 500 or so years of it not being as widely told as it once was, if I am remembering the timeframe right. The proof of that is shown in the story of Noah's Arc, which is quite similar to the Epic of Gilgamesh, which the Jewish Scholars had access to during the exile. With all of that.. I just get annoyed at people that try to say that the Old Testament is 100% divinely inspired and the pure word of God..people who say that simply don't know their history.

That's one reason I have a lot more respect for the Jewish religious culture than I do for most, because part of their learning is all about arguing each and every possible point, where as other religions are all about accepting everything the person above you in the religious chain says as law.

Creation Order:

Genesis Chapter 1:

(water already present)
Light
Sky
Land; Flora
Sun; Moon; Stars
Fish; Birds
Land animals; Mankind (both man and woman together)

Genesis Chapter 2:

Land (with little, if any water)
Man (from the stream that came out of the ground)
Eden (and other plants, assuming)
Animals
Woman

So yes, the details are not only emphasized differently, but things are created in a clearly different order (and yes, I have a Bible on my desk where I got this).

What I find most interesting is where the scholars think the stories came from. I can't remember much of the details of the discussion from religion class, but I remember the theory that the second story made sense in that the people lived basically in a desert area, so it it was natural for the creation to begin in a desert, whereas the other story might have been taken from elsewhere, as it starts with nothing but water. Historically, looking at where they came from, they are two very different stories.

Darn double post... and darn action!

The first story is based on certain mesopotanian myths, where the world is made from the body of Tiamat, whose corpse is a vast body of water.

Tiamat was the bastard who got forest defences upgraded in Achaea because he would fly above the trees dropping holobombs.

The God of evil dragons?

Hope I'm not the only one that knows what I'm talking about...

Oh yes, a rant. I'm pissed that it's so easy to bash as a Mugwump.

Edited, not the place for biblical text discussions.

Basically, Story 1 is about Man's relationship to Gd, and Story 2 is about Man's relationship to Plants, animals and other humans.

Also there is no indication of a lack of oceans or water in the second story. Only that it did not rain before man was on the scene.

Tiamat and Bahamut have real life mythological origins. Their names were however popularised by both Dungeons and Dragons and Final Fantasy series, which more or less covers about 90% of the geekdom.

You can see it that way, I hadn't thought of it like that before.

And now that I read back on these posts, it looks like we are on opposite sides of an argument, though I can't remember or figure out what it is anymore...

That's interesting about Bahamut...I guess I should look these things up more often since I'm interested in mythology.