It is curious, however, that the scholars who produced their maps of the geocentric cosmos, did so from a variety of viewpoints outside that cosmos, whether vertically above, or from a position above but to the side. They didn't show what they saw, but what they considered to be the case.

Pete, if God employs Satan to carry out his wishes, that raises far more questions than the apparent conflict between the texts about what is going on. If he wants to punish Israel, why does he need to tempt David into error in order to do it? And the text does not, as Job does, say that Satan was acting as God's agent in this case. In the one Satan is the only actor. In the other, God is the only actor.

And why does God need to employ two sets of writers to produce two subtly different versions of the history? It's very interesting reading the two accounts and seeing what is included in both, and what appears only in one. But in an inerrant text, what is the need? In this instance, it allows for a confusion that should have been avoided.

As for Genesis, by reading the work of various scholars, it appears that Ch 2 was written before Ch 1, and is it suggested that the reason for Ch 1 was to distance the creation from the relics of the surrounding mythologies found in Ch 2. And, whatever creationist sites say (and I have on occasion looked at them), the order of creation in Ch 2 is completely different from that in Ch 1, where the animals are created before humanity, instead of between the man and the woman. To explain those differences by suggesting that it makes the detail clear is asking for a major suspension of reading skills, and to raise questions about the literary ability of the author - which I assume you would not wish to do.

Penny