There are Two Creation Stories in Genesis

Dale · Jan 9, 2021

jhwatts said:
There are two creations in the Bible however I argue they are backwards in order.

To see this you have to start with Genesis 10:31 and the move to Genesis 11:1 and ask yourself, what is wrong with this picture? There is nothing wrong and no contradiction it's just that events in Genesis are neccesarily written in Chronological order.

Moving to Genesis 1:1 and reading we see that here God created the heaven and earth. Some people argue a gap after 1:1 and 1:2. There is a gap and what is in the gap starts in Genesis 2:4 and continues to Genesis 4:26. Theres a lot to ponder here but something very interesting to noticed is that in Genesis 3 Adam and Eve are banished from the garden however they are told to eat of the tree of life and live forever. Now look the geneologies of Genesis 4 and see how old those generations are.

Now several things went wrong here and the Master of the Sea flooded the earth. There is a lot of discussion on the earth being flooded and a lot of scripture pointing to this and I can explain more later if people want to understand why I say that. Returning to Genesis 1:2 and reading through Genesis 2:3 and now skipping to Genesis 5 to see the new creation and its geneologies. These are the generations to replenish the earth in Genesis 1:28. The ones made in the likeness of God.

Ok. Two important takeaways here. The first creation was made from the dust of the earth and has the breath of life in them and second creation was made in the likenesses of God and are made in His image.

This is a great picture of salvation. The first creation, a fallen man, a new creation made in the image and likeness of God and the earth flooded as if it was baptized, etc.

Here is something interesting. Go to Genesis 7: (13-14). Notice who entered first on the "selfsame day". These are the ones "after thier kind". These are the ones from the second creation. Now look at verse 15 and 16 and see what entered later. This was the remains of the first creation, the ones with "the breath of life" these are the ones of the first creation. They are kept separate. These are the clean and unclean.

There a lot more on this.

Jhwatts: << Now look the geneologies of Genesis 4 and see how old those generations are.

Now several things went wrong here and the Master of the Sea flooded the earth. There is a lot of discussion on the earth being flooded and a lot of scripture pointing to this and I can explain more later if people want to understand why I say that. Returning to Genesis 1:2 and reading through Genesis 2:3 and now skipping to Genesis 5 to see the new creation and its geneologies. These are the generations to replenish the earth in Genesis 1:28. The ones made in the likeness of God.

Ok. Two important takeaways here. The first creation was made from the dust of the earth and has the breath of life in them and second creation was made in the likenesses of God and are made in His image. >>

You seem to be saying that there are, or were, people from the first creation and other people from the second creation. You are getting into some very weird territory here. I said that there are two accounts of the creation but in no way are there two creations, especially not two peoples at odds because they were created at a different time and a different way.

Here is a question for you. Psalm 104 is about creation. Some have called it a third creation story. Is that a retelling of the first or second creation? I don’t have to answer that question because it can be influenced by both of the Hebrew creation accounts. What is your answer?

coffee4u · Jan 9, 2021

Dale said:
Sheila Davis: “That's why there are so many problems even within the church -people interpret scripture differently and atheist use it against the existence of God and say that the Bible contradicts itself. ”

Here’s a caution for you. More people have left Christianity because of creationism than any other reason, except sexual morality. I have talked to some of them. When someone grows up as a creationist and then finds out that creationism doesn’t work, it looks like religion is a dead end, at least to them.

There is a church within walking distance of my home where the pastor preaches that there is creationism and there is atheism, and nothing else. Apparently liberal Christianity, and any nonliteral interpretation, is a fraud and a farce. I’ve seen the same man stand in the pulpit and say,
“What happened to all the young people we used to have?”

Dave, this is your point of view and you are welcome to it. But other people like myself who have also studied on this for many years 100% believe there to be one creation and believe that you are sincerely mistaken. Can you learn to respect us or will you continue with the disrespect?

"deliberate to thwart those of the future who are filled with knowledge."
Indicates that we not only have no knowledge but are preventing others finding it.
Would you like us to turn around and say the same thing back to you?

Romans 12:10
Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honour.

"More people have left Christianity because of creationism"
That isn't the fault of creationism, it's due to the overwhelming lie of evolution. People these days don't want faith, they want proof of everything. We also know that is the way things are destined to go.
Luke 18:8
Nevertheless when the Son of man comes, shall he find faith on the earth?

jhwatts · Jan 9, 2021

genez said:
Seth was the line of Christ. Cain was not. Its not rocket science..... That is why they were divided up.

That is what I said. Genesis 5 is the genealogy.

jhwatts · Jan 9, 2021

Dale said:
Jhwatts: << Now look the geneologies of Genesis 4 and see how old those generations are.

Now several things went wrong here and the Master of the Sea flooded the earth. There is a lot of discussion on the earth being flooded and a lot of scripture pointing to this and I can explain more later if people want to understand why I say that. Returning to Genesis 1:2 and reading through Genesis 2:3 and now skipping to Genesis 5 to see the new creation and its geneologies. These are the generations to replenish the earth in Genesis 1:28. The ones made in the likeness of God.

Ok. Two important takeaways here. The first creation was made from the dust of the earth and has the breath of life in them and second creation was made in the likenesses of God and are made in His image. >>

Here is a question for you. Psalm 104 is about creation. Some have called it a third creation story. Is that a retelling of the first or second creation? I don’t have to answer that question because it can be influenced by both of the Hebrew creation accounts. What is your answer?

I will tell you that Psalm 104 is part of the second creation. One reason is the language of the word the deep. For example Genesis 1:2

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Now look at Psalms 104:6

6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains.

That being said, I think Job 38 also fits there too. As a mater of fact Job talks a lot about first creation and feel that Job is a much much older book than we think. The langue in Job is very similar tot the language in Genesis 2:3 through Genesis 4:26. One thing that is fascinating about Job is the references to ice and now. That book sounds nothing like it should have transpired in a dry Middle Eastern Desert.

The two chapters (Job 38 and Psalms 104) are describing the second creation. Notice verse 6. The waters covered the mountains so the mountains had to already exist before the water was put on them.

Look at verse Psalms 104:3

3 Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind:

This is another reason why think this why Christ has so many references to the sea and water.

Ezekiel 28:2

2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord God; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

When was the throne of God in the midst of the sea?

GenemZ · Jan 9, 2021

coffee4u said:
Dave, this is your point of view and you are welcome to it. But other people like myself who have also studied on this for many years 100% believe there to be one creation and believe that you are sincerely mistaken. Can you learn to respect us or will you continue with the disrespect?

"deliberate to thwart those of the future who are filled with knowledge."
Indicates that we not only have no knowledge but are preventing others finding it.
Would you like us to turn around and say the same thing back to you?

Romans 12:10
Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honour.

"More people have left Christianity because of creationism"
That isn't the fault of creationism, it's due to the overwhelming lie of evolution. People these days don't want faith, they want proof of everything. We also know that is the way things are destined to go.
Luke 18:8
Nevertheless when the Son of man comes, shall he find faith on the earth?

Creationism has been shown in a Biblical manner to place evolutionists into reality. Its the Young Earth Creationists... who treat creation like many devoted Catholics treat Mary as to be the mother of God... That delusional devotion causes believers with intelligence to throw up their hands in surrender.

I read a book by an evolutionist who confessed that those who teach the GAP in Genesis are the only ones that make sense. That the atheistic war against Christianity stems from an intellectualized, clever, yet having its own contradictions found by nerdy Young Earth Creationists. Its become an unresolvable conflict, because both sides see the glaring error of those opposing, but stubbornly remain dogmatic where they have their own dishonest evaluations.

GenemZ · Jan 9, 2021

jhwatts said:
That is what I said. Genesis 5 is the genealogy.

But, you appeared to be trying to prove two different creations of man.

jhwatts · Jan 9, 2021

genez said:
But, you appeared to be trying to prove two different creations of man.

I am. Genesis 5 is one while Genesis 4 is the other.

GenemZ · Jan 9, 2021

jhwatts said:
I am. Genesis 5 is one while Genesis 4 is the other.

The other what? Its a family line. Not another creation.

Both Cain and Seth had the same father - Adam.

What is your "quest?" What do you want to prove?

jhwatts · Jan 9, 2021

genez said:
The other what? Its a family line. Not another creation.

Both Cain and Seth had the same father - Adam.

What is your "quest?" What do you want to prove?

No they are different. That is what I was pointing out in Luke and in the book of Jude. In Jude, it states Enoch is 7th from Adam not 5th so Jude was pointing to the chapter 5 genealogies not the chapter 4 line. When people combine both 4 and 5 the are bending the Bible to fit thier own personal theology. They are different with different names and orders, etc. They Adam's are different. One was made from the dust of the earth and the other was mad in the image of God see Luke 3. That is why the Adam in Luke 3 is called the Son of God.

GenemZ · Jan 9, 2021

jhwatts said:
No they are different. That is what I was pointing out in Luke and in the book of Jude. In Jude, it states Enoch is 7th from Adam not 5th so Jude was pointing to the chapter 5 genealogies not the chapter 4 line. When people combine both 4 and 5 the are bending the Bible to fit thier own personal theology. They are different with different names and orders, etc. They Adam's are different. One was made from the dust of the earth and the other was mad in the image of God see Luke 3. That is why the Adam in Luke 3 is called the Son of God.

Now... Give exact chapter and verse of what you speak. You did the work. It should be right there for you.

Now... Be that as it may. There has been more than one person named Enoch. Or, do you thin it was that first Enoch? Who wrote the book of Enoch? You know how many stone tablets that would have taken?

Enoch was a name. Just like there were many boys in Israel named Yeshua when Jesus walked the earth.

Among the Jews of the Second Temple Period, the Biblical Aramaic/Hebrew name יֵשׁוּעַ‎ Yeshua‘ was common:

Link - Yeshua - Wikipedia

jhwatts · Jan 9, 2021

genez said:
Now... Give exact chapter and verse of what you speak. You did the work. It should be right there for you.

Now... Be that as it may. There has been more than one person named Enoch. Or, do you thin it was that first Enoch? Who wrote the book of Enoch? You know how many stone tablets that would have taken?

Enoch was a name. Just like there were many boys in Israel named Yeshua when Jesus walked the earth.

Among the Jews of the Second Temple Period, the Biblical Aramaic/Hebrew name יֵשׁוּעַ‎ Yeshua‘ was common:

Link - Yeshua - Wikipedia

Jude verse 14 and Luke 3:38.

Ok, however Jude specifically states he is 7th from Adam so we know which Enoch he is talking about. It has to be the Genesis 5 Enoch. Also Jude here is drawing from the book of Enoch and so the author of it must be the one that is 7th from Adam.

GenemZ · Jan 9, 2021

jhwatts said:
Jude verse 14 and Luke 3:38.

Ok, however Jude specifically states he is 7th from Adam so we know which Enoch he is talking about. It has to be the Genesis 5 Enoch. Also Jude here is drawing from the book of Enoch and so the author of it must be the one that is 7th from Adam.

This much I can tell you..

Luke was working backwards from Christ to Adam.... Eliminated in Luke's genealogy were Abel and Cain. Abel because he was murdered and had no progeny... and Cain was eliminated, because his progeny could not be included in the line of Christ. So, that's two names not mentioned in Luke.

mmksparbud · Jan 9, 2021

Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

From Adam to Enoch--Enoch is the 6th in both Luke 3 and in Genesis 5. It is
Adam
Seth
Enos
Cainan
Mahnalaleel
Jared
Enoch

Jude is technically correct in that Enoch is the 7th from Adam---because of Cain. Jude is counting Cain as he was actually the son of Adam, but not listed in the genealogies of inheritors. It is no mystery and no reason to go off on some non biblical theory.

mmksparbud · Jan 9, 2021

genez said:
This much I can tell you..

Luke was working backwards from Christ to Adam.... Eliminated in Luke's genealogy were Abel and Cain. Abel because he was murdered and had no progeny... and Cain was eliminated, because his progeny could not be included in the line of Christ. So, that's two names not mentioned in Luke.

I do disagree with Abel having no progeny---he was not an inheritor and he COULD have had many sons and daughters---no one knows his age or Cain's at Abel's death. They would not be listed because, no matter what, Abel was not a part of the inheritors genealogy. He can not be counted.
Enoch was 6th in line -- Jude was counting Cain as a son of Adam for technically he certainly was his son--just not counted in the inheritors line.

coffee4u · Jan 9, 2021

genez said:
Creationism has been shown in a Biblical manner to place evolutionists into reality. Its the Young Earth Creationists... who treat creation like many devoted Catholics treat Mary as to be the mother of God... That delusional devotion causes believers with intelligence to throw up their hands in surrender.

I read a book by an evolutionist who confessed that those who teach the GAP in Genesis are the only ones that make sense. That the atheistic war against Christianity stems from an intellectualized, clever, yet having its own contradictions found by nerdy Young Earth Creationists. Its become an unresolvable conflict, because both sides see the glaring error of those opposing, but stubbornly remain dogmatic where they have their own dishonest evaluations.

Catholics may claim this but we all know this claim comes as tradition from their church not from scripture. I have asked and yet to be shown any scripture that says Mary never sinned or never died. If they had scripture saying such I would believe it.
We do have scripture stating that God created and how he created and how long he took creating.

There is possibly a gap in Genesis or possibly not. I have said that many times on here, but this is not some other creation, it is merely the world sitting void and empty. Time and the creation week began with the light source hitting the turning earth.
I am not sure what you mean by intellectual, my bases of belief is scripture and scripture only.

GenemZ · Jan 9, 2021

coffee4u said:
Catholics may claim this but we all know this claim comes as tradition from their church not from scripture. I have asked and yet to be shown any scripture that says Mary never sinned or never died. If they had scripture saying such I would believe it.
We do have scripture stating that God created and how he created and how long he took creating.

There is possibly a gap in Genesis or possibly not. I have said that many times on here, but this is not some other creation, it is merely the world sitting void and empty. Time and the creation week began with the light source hitting the turning earth.
I am not sure what you mean by intellectual, my bases of belief is scripture and scripture only.

To make a point... For those who think the earth was simply "empty and void." Why did Jeremiah quote Genesis 1:2 as a means to threaten the rebellious Jews to prophesy the destruction that God was going to bring upon them? Yet, Jeremiah has to add something. That they will not be "utterly destroyed." For, you see. The Jews knew the Hebrew intent plainly. They knew that the Hebrew was describing utter destruction which included and eerie sense of 'emptiness' as the aftermath of God's judgment of the prehistoric world.

The mild translation the Young Earth Creationists cling to shows that they do not understand what even the lascivious rebellious Jews knew and understood when Jeremiah threatened them with the wrath of God by quoting Genesis 1:2!

Jeremiah 4:22-26

“My people are fools;
they do not know me.
They are senseless children;
they have no understanding.
They are skilled in doing evil;
they know not how to do good.”

23 I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone.

I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
I looked, and there were no people;
every bird in the sky had flown away.
I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;
all its towns lay in ruins
before the Lord, before his fierce anger.

Verse 23 contains exact same Hebrew words found in Genesis 1:2! Nowhere else in the Bible in that form! Notice how it describes the state we find the earth in Genesis 1 including having no more light!

" Tohu wa bohu." Translated in many English translation with a curtsy.

Those Hebrew words were describing an utter chaotic mess with an eerie sense of emptiness encapsulating the destruction. Like viewing a city after an atomic blast that was utterly leveled and in smoldering charred remains.

Now.. Jeremiah threatening them with severe JUDGMENT! Threatening them by referencing the state the earth was found in as found in the Hebrew of Genesis 1:2!

Jeremiah also needed to add in verse 27.

To let Israel know that God was not going to wipe out the Jewish race in entirety.

27 This is what the Lord says:

“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely."

After quoting from Genesis 1:2, Jeremiah had to pull the reigns in. For if he left alone the Genesis 1:2's refence, as it appears in Genesis 1:2? It would have indicated that God would be obliterating the Jewish people utterly.

Jeremiah also added verse 27, because the Holy Spirit wanted Satan to know that he was not going to get his deepest wish. That the Jews will remain on earth, and in the future the seed of David would be born.....

grace and peace!

Sheila Davis · Jan 10, 2021

Dale said:
Sheila Davis: “That's why there are so many problems even within the church -people interpret scripture differently and atheist use it against the existence of God and say that the Bible contradicts itself. ”

Here’s a caution for you. More people have left Christianity because of creationism than any other reason, except sexual morality. I have talked to some of them. When someone grows up as a creationist and then finds out that creationism doesn’t work, it looks like religion is a dead end, at least to them.

There is a church within walking distance of my home where the pastor preaches that there is creationism and there is atheism, and nothing else. Apparently liberal Christianity, and any nonliteral interpretation, is a fraud and a farce. I’ve seen the same man stand in the pulpit and say,
“What happened to all the young people we used to have?”

Sheila Davis · Jan 10, 2021

Dale said:
Sheila Davis: “That's why there are so many problems even within the church -people interpret scripture differently and atheist use it against the existence of God and say that the Bible contradicts itself. ”

Here’s a caution for you. More people have left Christianity because of creationism than any other reason, except sexual morality. I have talked to some of them. When someone grows up as a creationist and then finds out that creationism doesn’t work, it looks like religion is a dead end, at least to them.

There is a church within walking distance of my home where the pastor preaches that there is creationism and there is atheism, and nothing else. Apparently liberal Christianity, and any nonliteral interpretation, is a fraud and a farce. I’ve seen the same man stand in the pulpit and say,
“What happened to all the young people we used to have?”

Here is a caution for me? Nowhere in my statement did I say there was or wasn't a problem with members of the church and their belief in creation or they were or were not leaving Christianity because of creationism.

And the people that you are referring to have not done an in-depth study of evolution and creation of scripture. Which actually occurred in same order of events.

And if living organisms can live in outer space and fall down to earth through rain or meteorites and start the process of evolution they call abiogenesis and panspermia - then a *living* spiritual God can exist in space too.

If before the Singularity of the Big Bang Theory occurred there was nothing in existence in the universe - then a living God can create something from nothing too. Most likely the Big Bang was a result.

And if they realize that God is Not subject to time and nothing that he does is - as written in 2 Peter 3:8 a thousand years to God is as one day and one day is as a thousand years. They may realize what the term day actually implies when used in the creation account of scripture.

And maybe, just maybe if they realized that Spirit cannot be seen, just as energy cannot be seen. God is energy, living energy, and just as man has determined energy cannot be created and cannot be destroyed and it exist and can change from one form to another ... God was not created nor can God be destroyed - and can be in any form he chooses.

It's the teachings that are in error. But like I always say to each his own people agreeing people disagree.

Dale · Jan 10, 2021

jhwatts said:
I dont.

How do you know they are parables and not literal?

I think they are very symbolic but representative of things that actually happened.

Genesis 7: (13-16)

13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; 14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort. 15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life. 16 And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the Lord shut him in.

The point here is that one day, what I am calling the second creation, the creation made in the likeness of His kind and His image. (See Genesis 1: (2-31)) enters the ark first and then the animals from the first creations enters next. These enter later and go unto Noah. Notice Verse 15 uses the term breath of life. This corresponds to the first creation (See Genesis 2:4 - Genesis 4:26).

In short, the animals from each creation are kept separate. This also is the difference between clean and unclean. Unclean belongs to the first creation and also when you hear unclean spirit it mean a spirit from the first creation.

jhwatts: “In short, the animals from each creation are kept separate. This also is the difference between clean and unclean. Unclean belongs to the first creation and also when you hear unclean spirit it mean a spirit from the first creation.”

This isn’t true at all. Clean animals are those that the Israelites were allowed to eat and the unclean animals are those they were forbidden to eat. Most of the animals in the world were never classified because they weren’t around in the Middle East. The Books of the Law only give a few examples of what birds and land animals are clean and available for consumption and which are not.

God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.
-From Genesis 1:31 NIV

This verse, Genesis 1:31, is about the First Creation. If God says it is not only good but “very good,” why would animals from that creation – if they could somehow be distinguished from those created later – be unclean? Why wouldn’t they be good as well?

My answer would be that whether an animal is “good” has nothing to do with whether it is suitable for consumption, or “clean.”

Your point about spirits is even more confusing. The first two chapters of Hebrews tell us more about angels than any other part of the Bible. Hebrews doesn’t make any distinction between spirits or angels of a “first creation” or “second creation.”

There aren’t two creations but two accounts of one creation.

Dale · Jan 10, 2021

jhwatts said:
Absolutely. These are two different lines and two different genealogies.

What is interesting about the Genesis 4 genealogies is that this Adam was told to eat of the tree of life before he was banished from the garden and he also partook of the tree of knowledge. When you look at those people in Genesis 4 you notice there are no ages associated with them and you also can see that this chapter begins to describe the product of their knowledge. They made cities, made music, crafted metal, etc.

The chapter 5 genealogies are totally different. These have ages associated with them and they seemed to be more spiritual and connected with God not technological or materialistic. Enoch walked with God and was taken with him. What is interesting is that these are the genealogy of the later creation. These are the one we see in Luke 3 that is part of the lineage of Christ not the Genesis chapter 4 ones. Also if read Jude you will see that Enoch was 7th from Adam and so this is the Enoch in chapter 5 too. The Enoch in chapter 4 I think is 5th from Adam, and he is not the 7th I know. Jude is not point toward those in Genesis 4 but those in Genesis 5.

If you really want to get down in the weeds. Notice that in chapter 5 it is made clear that man was made male and female. This is also made clear in Chapter one as is the creation of the chapter 5 genealogies.

What is really interesting in Job 14:1, 25:4, and 15:14, a point is made that some men was born not by a woman. Especial in Job 14:1, when was man born not by a woman. We see in Genesis that Adam was made and not born by a woman. This is the only record but dont be so sure he was it, again notice God made it clear man was made male and female.

Something is up here with man not being born of a woman.

Interesting.

Jhwatts; <<What is really interesting in Job 14:1, 25:4, and 15:14, a point is made that some men was born not by a woman. Especial in Job 14:1, when was man born not by a woman. We see in Genesis that Adam was made and not born by a woman. This is the only record but dont be so sure he was it, again notice God made it clear man was made male and female.

Something is up here with man not being born of a woman. >>

You are misconstruing these passages completely. To say that “man is born of woman” is simply a way of speaking. It’s like saying, “he came into the world in the usual way.” What does Job really mean when he says “How can one born of woman be pure?” He’s saying that we were all born to and raised by fallible mortals, people who have limitations.

Notice that Job never refers to any man NOT born of woman. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit but even He had a mother.

Job 14:1 “Man born of woman is of few days and full of trouble.”

Job 15:14 “What is man, that he could be pure, or one born of woman,
that he could be righteous?

Job 25:4 How then can a man be righteous before God? How can one
born of woman be pure?

There are Two Creation Stories in Genesis

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Similar threads