Posted on 12/29/2015 7:13:32 AM PST by GonzoII
In Genesis chapter 2 the order of creation seems to be different to that in chapter 1 with the animals being created (2:19) after Adam (2:7). Doesn't the Bible contradict itself here?
Between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve, the KJV/AV Bible says (Genesis 2:19) 'out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air'. On the surface, this seems to say that the land beasts and birds were created between Adam and Eve. However, Jewish scholars apparently did not recognize any such conflict with the account in chapter 1, where Adam and Eve were both created after the beasts and birds (Genesis 1:23-25). Why is this? Because in Hebrew the precise tense of a verb is determined by the context. It is clear from chapter 1 that the beasts and birds were created before Adam, so Jewish scholars would have understood the verb 'formed' in (Genesis 2:19 to mean 'had formed' or 'having formed'. If we translate verse 19 as follows (as one widely used translation1 does), 'Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field ...', the apparent disagreement with Genesis 1 disappears completely.
The question also stems from the wrong assumption that the second chapter of Genesis is just a different account of creation to that in chapter 1. It should be evident that chapter 2 is not just 'another' account of creation because chapter 2 says nothing about the creation of the heavens and the earth, the atmosphere, the seas, the land, the sun, the stars, the moon, the sea creatures, etc. Chapter 2 mentions only things directly relevant to the creation of Adam and Eve and their life in the garden God prepared specially for them. Chapter 1 may be understood as creation from God's perspective; it is 'the big picture', an overview of the whole. Chapter 2 views the more important aspects from man's perspective.
Genesis 2:4 says, 'These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens'. This marks a break with chapter 1. This phraseology next occurs in Genesis 5:1, where it reads 'This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man'.
'Generations' is a translation of the Hebrew word toledoth, which means 'origin' or 'record of the origin'. It identifies an account or record of events. The phrase was apparently used at the end of each section in Genesis2 identifying the patriarch (Adam, Noah, the sons of Noah, Shem, etc.) to whom it primarily referred, and possibly who was responsible for the record. There are 10 such divisions in Genesis.
Each record was probably originally a stone or clay tablet. There is no person identified with the account of the origin of the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1-2:4), because it refers primarily to the origin of the whole universe, not any person in particular (Adam and Eve are not mentioned by name, for example). Also, only God knew the events of creation, so God had to reveal this, possibly to Adam who recorded it. Moses, as 'author' of Genesis, acted as a compiler and editor of the various sections, adding explanatory notes under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The toledoths acknowledge the sources of the historical records Moses used. This understanding underlines the historical nature of Genesis and its status as eyewitness history, contrary to the defunct 'documentary (JEDP) hypothesis' still taught in many Bible colleges. [Ed. note: for a refutation of this fallacious and anti-Christian theory, see Did Moses really write Genesis?.]
The differences in the toledoth statements of Genesis 2:4 and 5:1 affirm that chapter 1 is the overview, the record of the origin of the 'heavens and earth' (2:4)-whereas chapter 2 is concerned with Adam and Eve, the detailed account of Adam and Eve's creation (5:1,2). The wording of 2:4 also suggests the shift in emphasis: in the first part of the verse it is 'heavens and earth' whereas in the end of the verse it is 'earth and heavens'. Scholars think that the first part of the verse would have been on the end of a clay or stone tablet recording the origin of the universe and the latter part of the verse would have been on the beginning of a second tablet containing the account of events on earth pertaining particularly to Adam and Eve (Genesis 2:4b-5:1a).
Let us apply this understanding to another objection: some also see a problem with the plants and herbs in Genesis 2:5 and the trees in Genesis 2:9. We have already realized that Genesis 2 focuses on issues of direct import to Adam and Eve, not creation in general. Notice that the plants and herbs are described as 'of the field' in Genesis chapter 2 (compare 1:12) and they needed a man to tend them (2:5). These are clearly cultivated plants, not just plants in general. Also, the trees (2:9) are only the trees planted in the garden, not trees in general.
Genesis was written like many historical accounts with an overview or summary of events leading up to the events of most interest first, followed by a detailed account which often recaps relevant events in the overview in greater detail. Genesis 1, the 'big picture' is clearly concerned with the sequence of events. The events are in chronological sequence, with day 1, day 2, evening and morning, etc. The order of events is not the major concern of Genesis 2. In recapping events they are not necessarily mentioned in chronological order, but in the order which makes most sense to the focus of the account. For example, the animals are mentioned in verse 19, after Adam was created, because it was after Adam was created that he was shown the animals, not that they were created after Adam.
Genesis chapters 1 and 2 are not therefore separate contradictory accounts of creation. Chapter 1 is the 'big picture' and Chapter 2 is a more detailed account of the creation of Adam and Eve and day six of creation.
The final word on this matter, however, should really be given to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. In Matthew chapter 19, verses 4 and 5, the Lord is addressing the subject of marriage, and says: "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?"
Notice how in the very same statement, Jesus refers to both Genesis 1 (verse 27b: 'male and female he created them') and Genesis 2 (verse 24: 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.'). Obviously, by combining both in this way, He in no way regarded them as separate, contradictory accounts.
I'm gonna walk here round in a circle...
Oh Josephus!
Truly, I commend you, betty boop, to all my brothers and sisters in Christ as you have consistently shown me, over the years, that your highest priority is God Himself. In many debates on the forum, private correspondence and in our book writing collaborations, your priorities have never changed. No one has cause to question your motives, nor should you be offended if that ever happens.
Concerning the root of the present exchange, how much direct observation (e.g. science) can illuminate our understanding of Scripture - I am confident of several things.
First, that we Christians see the glory of God in His creation as He said we would:
That does not mean that we cannot grow in understanding Who God IS, what He has done, what He wants and so on.
Truly, God the Father has revealed Himself to us in several ways: in the Person of His only begotten Son Jesus Christ, in the Person of the indwelling Holy Spirit, in His own words - Scriptures, and in His creation, both physical and spiritual.
Indeed, we not only should look and see, we must. For if we love God - and as Christians, we do - then we hunger to learn more about Him, we hang on His words, cherish His fellowship, His presence, His leading.
After all, doubting Thomas was an apostle, too.
Indeed, the apostles were each quite different from one another - having different learning curves, some requiring the school of hard knocks while others bent seemingly effortlessly to Jesus' words.
This passage is quite telling:
Likewise here, xzins was blessed with the eyes of a theologian; betty boop, the eyes of a philosopher and TXnMA, the eyes of a scientist. Each of you magnify the revelations of God through the lens God Himself gave you.
And please never be discouraged from doing this, even if you do not get a reply - or if the reply is "huh?" - or even disdain. We are only responsible for the seeds He gave us, individually.
Thank you ever so much, dearest sister in Christ, for your beautiful, gracious essay-post -- so full of light and grace and love.
And we have known and believed the love that God hath for us. God is love, and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. -- 1 John 4:16May God continue to bless you and all your dear ones; may His Holy Spirit ever abide with you, now and always.
In Christ's love and peace.
God's Name is I AM.
Genisis is an oral tradition, but the amazing thing is the Bible Codes embedded in the written version.
I don’t think much should be made of the oral traditions personally. But there are amazing historic truths, such as the Land of Cain [Canaan] which did indeed have the first known large scale smelting facility. [Smelted copper for the Sumerians.]
Also, oral traditions similar to the Arc are all over the world.
Ezekiel is my favorite prophet. I named a cat after him once, one of the liveliest, most interesting cats I ever had.
Minor ‘coincidence’.
This thread covers Eden. Many believe that was located in Bahrain. I just happened to be posting about the kindly King of Bahrain yesterday. [Someone the Clintons shook down for $30 million.] He donated land for a Coptic Christian church.
You [Ezekiel] mentioned a dream:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3479720/posts?page=21#21
Wonders like that keep popping up in my life. Some would not call them ‘signs’ exactly — moments that seem like little coincidences. But to me they are wonders.
God can work through extraterrestrials as well as demonic forces. They could be like humans in some ways — God on one shoulder and a devil on the other.
I’ve always believed that Eden was in an alternate reality. For all we know it could have been a garden space station. Some mechanical device or reflection on glass could have appeared to be an angelic sword.
Just one example.
Countless ways a prehistoric mind would view technology.
God might have spoken through computer programming, a powerful voice that seemed ‘all knowing’.
That’s why I don’t put much stock in oral traditions even though I wonder at them and ponder them.
We can put our faith in Jesus. That is solid history backed up by countless miracles over the centuries.
It is amazing what can be discovered through it when the true source of the supposed randomness is recognized.
It's a parallel channel of open communication that most simply dismiss as noise. I suppose that needs to be the commonly embraced explanation, otherwise anyone half paying attention would realize that nothing is by accident - it's all orchestrated.
That sort of information and sensory overload could "kill people", but really, that's were all the action (life) is.
Re: Eden, God told those people not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, because in that day they'd surely die. It all ties in. No wonder the keruvim had to block the way to the tree of life, heh.
Was Eden a *literal* place? I think that is a non-question, because when the parable IS the literal meaning, there's no question.
Eden is where everything resolves down to the simplest explanations, so everyone can finally calm down and relax. :)
But I never could find that scripture again. So it might not have been there. I might have misread something.
Dunno.
Just read Rashi, Ramban, or some other classic commentator on Genesis.
Where are you Alamo-Girl?
Bookmark.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.