Gen 1 in a vacuum

[d taylor]

Which is why they would be different accounts using different information to build their points. Even if you do look at them as the same accounts there still is a problem. Gen 2 doesn't have plants sprouting before man and Gen 1 does.

Show one verse in Genesis 2 where it is stated that man was created before the plants.

Also show a day (first,second,thrid,etc..) given for the creation of man in Genesis 2 and while you are doing that, show a day that the plants were created. It is not there because Genesis 2 is not giving an account of creation order, that was done in Genesis 1

Verse 5 in Genesis 2 tells why there was no plant or herb yet, because God had not water the earth to make these plants and herbs to grow. There is nothing about verse 5 and an order of creation.

The next verse tells how God created Adam, because in Genesis 1 God does not tell how.
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

But in Genesis 2:7 we see some of how God created Adam.

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

Again noting in that verse about an order of creation just a little detail of Gods creation method.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

When we read Gen 1 creation account we see 3 days of God separating, 3 days of God creating and 1 day of God resting. The creating days start on day 4 starting with the celestial objects, the birds and marine life then finally land creatures concluding with man. All these living creatures are in the singular in Hebrew yet they are all translated as not as a simple male and female pairing or a single specimen but mass nouns.

Then comes man. Some translations say "humans" some say "mankind". The Hebrew is "adam" but like all Hebrew names they are first Hebrew words with real meanings and "adam" is the word for mankind. So why in v26 do we assume male and female only (or just 1 man) but in the rest of the entries we assume mass nouns (birds, fish, animals etc..)? If Gen 1 was looked at in isolation when God creates man he creates an entire species that populate the world which would be the most consistent in the context.

Gen 1 opens in 1:1 and it closes in Gen 2:1-3. These are bookends to the creation account then starts a new account opening with a different focus in v4. Gen 1:1 says "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth..." and Gen 2:4 flips the focus saying "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens." it opens with "heavens and the earth" and closes with "earth and the heavens" which may suggest Gen 1 has more of downward perspective and Gen 2 may be more of an upward perspective which is a common tension in scripture (ie. was Pharaoh's heart hardened or did he harden it himself...? scripture says both). This points to Gen 1's creation as a separate account from Gen 2's creation which would make sense with the inconsistencies the two present such as the order of creation or the different word used for "God" when juxtaposed together.

So according to Gen 1 should "adam" be a mass noun as it is commonly translated such as "humankind" or should it be in strict singular form going against the rest of the creation account?

What translation are you using? I do not see humans or mankind in the KJV. I see man.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

The reason male and female creatures are not separated is because this account was not written to them, it was written to us. Men and women.

 

[DamianWarS]

What translation are you using? I do not see humans or mankind in the KJV. I see man.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

The reason male and female creatures are not separated is because this account was not written to them, it was written to us. Men and women.

the hebrew word is "adam" strongs says "aw-dam'; from H119; ruddy i.e. a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.)". NIV uses "mankind" others say "human" or "human being", the most common is "man"

 

[DamianWarS]

Show one verse in Genesis 2 where it is stated that man was created before the plants.

Also show a day (first,second,thrid,etc..) given for the creation of man in Genesis 2 and while you are doing that, show a day that the plants were created. It is not there because Genesis 2 is not giving an account of creation order, that was done in Genesis 1

Verse 5 in Genesis 2 tells why there was no plant or herb yet, because God had not water the earth to make these plants and herbs to grow. There is nothing about verse 5 and an order of creation.

The next verse tells how God created Adam, because in Genesis 1 God does not tell how.
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

But in Genesis 2:7 we see some of how God created Adam.

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

Again noting in that verse about an order of creation just a little detail of Gods creation method.

if they are different accounts one is built up using days and the other is not so there is no need to speak of days in Gen 2. In the Gen 1 account Day 3 plants are created and would appear to be in full bloom, seed, fruit etc... the order of plants here probably is important because many creatures depend on them for food such as birds and fish (day 5) and insects and many other land animals (day 6). If there were no plants because the rain hasn't come yet or because they weren't tilled yet this would present a problem for the creatures that depend on plants to survive. many insects have a very short life cycle and wouldn't survive the wait. But if these are two separate accounts there really is no conflict because they are not meant to be reconciled together and just stand as separate accounts of a creation both with a different focus.

 

[d taylor]

if they are different accounts one is built up using days and the other is not so there is no need to speak of days in Gen 2. In the Gen 1 account Day 3 plants are created and would appear to be in full bloom, seed, fruit etc... the order of plants here probably is important because many creatures depend on them for food such as birds and fish (day 5) and insects and many other land animals (day 6). If there were no plants because the rain hasn't come yet or because they weren't tilled yet this would present a problem for the creatures that depend on plants to survive. many insects have a very short life cycle and wouldn't survive the wait. But if these are two separate accounts there really is no conflict because they are not meant to be reconciled together and just stand as separate accounts of a creation both with a different focus.

You are overlooking a major point there was no death yet, Adam had not sinned until he ate of the fruit. So death was not in/part the creation.

 

[DamianWarS]

You are overlooking a major point there was no death yet, Adam had not sinned until he ate of the fruit. So death was not in/part the creation.

death is implicit pre-fall (like the death of seed for new life to grow) I also might add a strict no death before the fall is not a widely accepted position and typically even literal creationist accept death, just not the death of creatures with a soul (man). don't believe me? See for yourself. You may still claim there was no death you just do so largely alone and perhaps it's best to start a new thread discussing it if it's something you are passionate about.

 

[-57]

the two accounts conflict with each other, specifically with the order of things created, but they also differ in the word they use for God plus Gen 1 opens-closes, then Gen 2 opens with another account. This doesn't speak to one macro and the other micro, it speaks to two contrasting accounts.

There is no conflict of the order of creation.
...I haven't been through the entire thread yet, perhaps you will present the conflicts.

 

[Ronald]

When we read Gen 1 creation account we see 3 days of God separating, 3 days of God creating and 1 day of God resting. The creating days start on day 4 starting with the celestial objects, the birds and marine life then finally land creatures concluding with man. All these living creatures are in the singular in Hebrew yet they are all translated as not as a simple male and female pairing or a single specimen but mass nouns.

Then comes man. Some translations say "humans" some say "mankind". The Hebrew is "adam" but like all Hebrew names they are first Hebrew words with real meanings and "adam" is the word for mankind. So why in v26 do we assume male and female only (or just 1 man) but in the rest of the entries we assume mass nouns (birds, fish, animals etc..)? If Gen 1 was looked at in isolation when God creates man he creates an entire species that populate the world which would be the most consistent in the context.

Gen 1 opens in 1:1 and it closes in Gen 2:1-3. These are bookends to the creation account then starts a new account opening with a different focus in v4. Gen 1:1 says "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth..." and Gen 2:4 flips the focus saying "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens." it opens with "heavens and the earth" and closes with "earth and the heavens" which may suggest Gen 1 has more of downward perspective and Gen 2 may be more of an upward perspective which is a common tension in scripture (ie. was Pharaoh's heart hardened or did he harden it himself...? scripture says both). This points to Gen 1's creation as a separate account from Gen 2's creation which would make sense with the inconsistencies the two present such as the order of creation or the different word used for "God" when juxtaposed together.

So according to Gen 1 should "adam" be a mass noun as it is commonly translated such as "humankind" or should it be in strict singular form going against the rest of the creation account?

He created on all six days. "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
Day One
He created Earth. It goes on to describe it being formless and void, with water, just like a floating bubble, like a lava lamp. Evidently since there was no stars, planets or moon yet with the physics, gravitational forces, it was a basic lump that He then worked on. He created light on the first day as well - this was light that was a physical light with waves, particles, the color spectrum - very complex, but notice it did not come from the sun, created on the 4th day. It radiated from Himself onto a physical earth.
Day Two
Separating the waters, was an act of creation as well, our breathable atmosphere, the clouds, the upper atmosphere, a protective barrier from space and this of course involves gravity.
Day Three.
He gathered the waters onto seas rivers and lakes and allowed dry land. And then created all the botanicals.
Day Four
Sun, moon, and the rest of the universe.
Obviously the botanicals could not survive too long without the sun. This proves 1 day equals 24 hours, not epochs of time.
DAY FIVE
Sea life of all kinds.
Day Six
Animals of all kinds and finally Man.
Notice, God finished all His work by the end of the sixth day. Therefore, all events, order and creation of Eve in chapter 2 are details about the first six days.
Day Seven
He rested
What you seem to be confused about is the style of writing. The Hebrews have a style of outlining their thoughts, introducing the basic information in a paragraph or chapter first, then going back and filling in the details in the next paragraph or chapter. This is what Genesis 2 is, details about Genesis 1.
You will see this style throughout the Bible.

 

[-57]

Gen 1: light→water→land→celestials→fish/birds→animals/mankind.
Gen 2: man→plants→woman→animals

The plants in this instance appear to be plants God planted in the Garden of Eden.

 

[-57]

but they are in conflict, specifically the order of creation.

we like to insert stuff in between the lines to reconcile the accounts but the text can't support this and there is no responsible way of figuring about what is not mentioned. We must treat the text like a non-literal account in that in a non-literal account no details outside of it are relevant or play any role in the account, (ie. was each day a million years... the text cannot support this and we must stick to what the text says)

If you accept it as a non-literal account or not isn't the point, what I'm saying is that in practice it should be treated the same as a non-literal account even if you see it as a literal account because in non-literal accounts every detail inside the account is very important and every detail not in the account doesn't matter. To maintain it's the true meaning we must maintain every detail in the account and not force reconcile them.

The account presented in Genesis is literal account of how the Word that became flesh created and how mankind fell in Adam.

In fact this view is strongly supportrf in Pauls letter to Timothy he explains how women should act in church....and Paul provides a reason based upon a literal interpretation of Genesis.

 

[-57]

"Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up,..." NKJV

Genesis 2:5 doesn't say that plants weren't created, yet. In fact, the highlighted parts tell us that plants were present (just not yet visible).

These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created,
in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up

When you take out the verse numbers and simply read what it says...it says there was a time when the heavens and earth were created and there was no plants. The verses are a sort of transition into the creation of Adam and Eve.

 

[DamianWarS]

He created on all six days. "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
Day One
He created Earth. It goes on to describe it being formless and void, with water, just like a floating bubble, like a lava lamp. Evidently since there was no stars, planets or moon yet with the physics, gravitational forces, it was a basic lump that He then worked on. He created light on the first day as well - this was light that was a physical light with waves, particles, the color spectrum - very complex, but notice it not not come from the sun, created on the 4th day. It radiated from Himself onto a physical earth.
Day Two
Separating the waters, was an act of creation as well, our breatable atmosphere, the clouds, the upper atmosphere, a protective barrier from space and this if course involves gravity.
Day Three.
He gathered the waters onto seas rivers and lakes and allowed dry land. And then created all the botanicals.
Day Four
Sun, moon, and the rest of the universe.
Obviously the botanicals could not survive too long without the sun. This proves 1 day equals 24 hours, not epochs of time.
DAY FIVE
Sea life of all kinds.
Day Six
Animals of all kinds and finally Man.
Notice, God finished all His work by the end of the sixth day. Therefore, all events, order and creation of women in chapter 2 are details about the first six days.
Day Seven
He rested
What you seem to be confused about is the style of writing. The Hebrews have a style of outlining their thoughts, introducing the basic information in a paragraph or chapter first, then going back and filling in the details in the next paragraph or chapter. This is what Genesis 2 is, details about Genesis 1.
You will see this style throughout the Bible.

can you give me some biblical examples of this style? Hebraic block logic may also have two opposing thoughts side by side that creates a tension. This tension is meant to be left unanswered and simply exist in tension.

 

[JacksBratt]

can you give me some biblical examples of this style? Hebraic block logic may also have two opposing thought side by side that creates a tension. This tension is meant to be left unanswered and simply exist in tension.

People are talking to you.... just stop..... read.... comprehend.... and learn.

 

[DamianWarS]

The plants in this instance appear to be plants God planted in the Garden of Eden.

What you seem to be doing is implicitly recognizing the conflict then trying to fix it with information the text doesn't give.

 

[DamianWarS]

The account presented in Genesis is literal account of how the Word that became flesh created and how mankind fell in Adam.

In fact this view is strongly supportrf in Pauls letter to Timothy he explains how women should act in church....and Paul provides a reason based upon a literal interpretation of Genesis.

Who told you it was literal? Paul takes from the account in the same way one would take from a non-literal account. Non-literal doesn't mean "make believe" it is truth presented in extremely precise words that has a greater focus then the literal. We may take the same approach using the parables which are also non-literal accounts.

 

[DamianWarS]

People are talking to you.... just stop..... read.... comprehend.... and learn.

I learn through discourse. I am not demanding these things, but I am challenging them in an open form meant for questions.

 

[-57]

What you seem to be doing is implicitly recognizing the conflict then trying to fix it with information the text doesn't give.

It does say...8 And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden,

 

[-57]

Who told you it was literal? Paul takes from the account in the same way one would take from a non-literal account. Non-literal doesn't mean "make believe" it is truth presented in extremely precise words that has a greater focus then the literal. We may take the same approach using the parables which are also non-literal accounts.

The bible in several places presents Genesis as a literal and historical event.

Why would Paul instruct the women of the church and base it upon something that never happened?

1 Tim 2: 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.

If the above verse never happened....then what did happen?

 

[DamianWarS]

It does say...8 And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden,

It also tells us that there was no plants because it hadn't rained yet and because man was there to cultivate it. Then immediately after God makes man, then he makes a garden.

It is important to show that a punishment for man was being thrown out this garden and to laboriously work the soil and eat of the very plants that haven't shouted yet. The garden seems to be a gift for the hardships life offers.

 

[DamianWarS]

Why would Paul instruct the women of the church and base it upon something that never happened?

Because God ordained the words. If this is true it doesn't matter if it happened, what matters is what God says.

If the above verse never happened....then what did happen?

I am agnostic to what happen, except that God did it so I have no replacement theories for you. I wasn't there so I don't know.