Discuss science topics such as creation and evolution and how they relate to Christianity.

Two Creation Accounts?

First Prev Next Last
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Two Creation Accounts?

    by Jason Lisle, Ph.D.

    Critics of the Bible sometimes claim the first and second chapters of Genesis represent two different creation accounts and that these two accounts are clearly contradictory. They allege the order of events is different. Genesis 1 teaches that plants and birds were created before people. But some critics claim Genesis 2 teaches the opposite. Genesis 2 teaches that Adam was created before Eve. But doesn’t Genesis 1 indicate they were created at the same time?

    As is often the case, the critics just haven’t read the text carefully. Genesis 1:1–2:4 records an overview of the cosmic events of the creation week. It gives the order of events and a broad summary of what happened on each day.

    Genesis 2:5-25 is not a second or different account of creation; rather, it’s a more detailed report of the Adam-and-Eve-focused events of Day Six. This should be clear, because this chapter describes in greater detail the creation of Adam and Eve—events that Genesis 1:26-30 indicate happened on the sixth day.

    But what about the alleged differences? Genesis 1 indicates plants were created on Day Three and people were created on Day Six. So, plants already existed when man was created. But regarding the early events of Day Six, Genesis 2:4-5 discusses a time “before any plant of the field was in the earth and before any herb of the field had grown. For the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground.”

    Is this contradictory? Not at all. Notice that Genesis 2:5 does not teach that there were no plants on Day Six. Rather, it states there was no plant of the field and that no herb of the field had grown. The phrase “of the field” is translated from the Hebrew word sodeh, which in this context refers to cultivated plants—those that were planted by man in ground tilled by man. So there were plants on Day Six, just no cultivated plants. And the rest of the verse gives the reason—because “there was no man to till the ground.”

    And what of the creation of animals? According to Genesis 1:23-30, land animals were made on Day Six—the same day as man and apparently just before the creation of man. Birds were made on the fifth day and therefore before man. But Genesis 2:18-20 mentions the creation of birds and land animals after describing the creation of Adam. But notice that Genesis 2 doesn’t actually state the animals were made after man—it only mentions their creation after it mentions the creation of man. The order in which events are mentioned here does not claim to be (and so it need not reflect) the order in which they happened. Moreover, Hebrew verbs focus on completeness of action, not past/present/future temporality. So, they do not have “tense” like English verbs. Instead, the past/present/future temporality of an action verb is determined by context. Thus, in context with Genesis 1, Genesis 2:19, which uses a verb that denotes completion of actions, can be translated as “Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air.”

    And what about the claim that Genesis 1:27 teaches that Adam and Eve were made at the same time? The text only states that God created both the man and the woman on Day Six. It says nothing at all about the precise timing. It is only by reading the details in Genesis 2 that we learn that some time elapsed, perhaps several hours, between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve on the sixth day. As with most alleged Bible errors, the resolution is found by simply reading the text carefully and thinking logically.

    The gift of the grace of God by the effectual working of his power unto me ... the unsearchable riches of Christ ... to see ... the mystery which from the beginning of the creation of the world hath been hid in God who created all things by Jesus Christ to the intent that now might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God according to the eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Eph3:7-9)

    Use the method you like, the sources, the helps, the Dictionaries, the linguistics, the genius of the Greats - if not Christ is exalted and perceived as in rising from the dead by the Glory of the Father -- it's all IN ERROR!

    That is my key to the understanding of the first three chapters of the Book of Genesis.


      Genesis 3v8-24

      <<<Adam and Eve were the first humans to keep the sabbath.>>>

      Adam and Eve were the first humans to be driven from the Sabbath, Genesis 3:8-24.
      Jesus Christ was the First Man "that has entered into the Rest of God as by virtue of his own works, God had rested… for God… by the Son… in these last days… thus concerning the Seventh Day spake… And God the day The Seventh Day by having finished, from all his works, rested." Hebrews 4:10,4.

        I say the fall happened on the sixth day – the day of the creation of man: The same day. The Text UNINTERRUPTEDLY in chapters 2 to 3 goes on to tell how God after the fall of man, called for him in the garden – Afrikaans – "In the evening breeze", English, "in the cool of day" (from, ‘to deilinon’ / ‘ruach’). That was after the Sixth Day, as the Seventh Day with evening after sunset had begun.

        Scriptures – I don't care whatsoever what anybody whosoever says – Scriptures, makes NO break between the Sixth and Seventh Days; Scriptures gives NO 'history' other than man's creation and fall in “the garden”. Like ‘in the garden’ of God’s planting there is NO 'history' other than man's, so in the six days of God’s creating there is NO 'history' other than of man’s creation and fall. But “on the Seventh Day God rested” in that He through grace provided for forgiveness of sin on it, and, on the Seventh Day, over sin and death conquered: Through the Lamb – symbolically through the blood taken for life there and then – not long afterwards.

        My standpoint is built upon a vertical following up of the three 'stories' of Genesis 1, 2 and 3; I don't arrange them linearly. The repeated references to the SAME days of the ONE creation in the three chapters, are undeniable. Their sequence is the very same, over-spanning like a beam resting on the pillars of days one and two, and six.

        Of interest also is the division of the days of 'creation-week' – of the first six days – specifically, whereby the Sixth Day belonged to the creation of man only, and wasn't shared with the creation of animals (created on the Fifth Day as I have shown in our first conversation on the present subject, ‘Dae van Genesis Een’).

        Have I come up with this, myself; is it supported by theologians?
        Not all of it – not the division of days in Genesis 1; that was my own. But for the fall on man’s first day I do have the support of good men! But their support is nothing to me – as I have said above! It is what the Bible teaches, that matters.

        Some of you have protested: “There is not one particle of Scripture that supports your conjecture or re-division of the creation days! A ‘house of cards’ will usually collapse of its own weight, in the slightest breeze. There is also not one particle of Scripture to suggest the fall of man happened on the Sixth Day – “the day of the creation of man". We simply are not told when this did occur, only that it did occur, and sometime after Adam and Eve were around. Conjecture is still conjecture, and it makes little difference whose it is; that does not change its nature.”

        Quibling, yet another, protested: “That's what I said!” as if he might loose out on the credit for my undoing. I answer: My friends, I return your questions with gratitude, since you are the ones who proposed the indubitable notion, “Only that it did occur, and sometime after Adam and Eve were around”. What would make the ‘sometime after’ another day or another year or another century later or ‘after’? You – friend or foe it matters not – give me, 'one particle of Scripture to suggest', the fall of man ‘occurred some time after on the Sixth Daythe day of the creation of man? You, present it! Here’s your opportunity to make me look foolish, because so far you have made only yourselves look foolish! Only one Scripture will do it! Just ‘one particle of Scripture to suggest’ it; or only one Scripture why, ‘We simply are not told when this did occur’! … Such you presume right after having read Genesis 1, 2 and 3 right where it is told you in Scripture by Scripture, when as well as why the fall occurred!

        ‘My’ idea still is to show how the whole Bible, Genesis 1–3 included, is the story of Redemption; and not even in purpose, of creation firstly or independently.

          Originally posted by Gerhard Ebersöhn View Post
          I say the fall happened on the sixth day – the day of the creation of man
          Maybe. In my Bible interpretation, I try not to be too certain about details that aren't explicit and repeated. It's all too easy to read into the text things it doesn't say... or maybe it says in our translation, but not the original.

            Originally posted by Cornelius View Post

            Maybe. In my Bible interpretation, I try not to be too certain about details that aren't explicit and repeated. It's all too easy to read into the text things it doesn't say... or maybe it says in our translation, but not the original.

            Your described <<Bible interpretation>> exactly is what I argue for in case of <translation> or <original> -- as long as the <translation> is <translation> and not <interpretation>!

            My view of the fall on the same day --the Sixth Day of God's creating man and woman--, is as old as Reformation and pre-Reformation scholars and 'saints'. I made the discovery before I knew about anybody else holding the view. The fall right after man's creation was inevitable in the light, of, First) the Covenant of Grace; and, Two) of the very principle of study and making conclusion from what "is written" purely.

            Any understanding placing the fall in later times requires will-worship of the evolutionary self-improvement of man. Which perverse philosophy must first lift itself by the boot strings before it could expect man to act Hercules at the cross roads.


              NO and NO, first off the first two chapters,
              #1 is God creating the heavens and the Earth.
              #2 is God forming the garden for man to live in.

              Now as for the fall, it HAD to be after the seventh day but before 130 years were up, "and God saw all that He had created, that is was very good", it wouldn't be too very good if the fall had happened, and it was before the birth of Adams first child when Adam was 130 years old, Lucifer hadn't even fallen at the 6th day point because that wouldn't be "very good" either.

                Originally posted by JSB View Post
                #1 is God creating the heavens and the Earth.
                #2 is God forming the garden for man to live in.
                That's a pretty amazing wide angle lens in the beginning, and the telescopic lens zooming in on Eden just incredible. Obviously Adam and Eve weren't expecting that! :cool:

                God bless,
                Articles - News - SiteMap