2 different creation stories?

Ioustinos

Veteran
Feb 6, 2002
1,719
175
✟56,948.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
My biology teacher brought a bible in to class and showed us that in Genesis there are actually 2 different stories of creation! He went on to pose the question, "How can these stories be different and still both be right?" Please someone give me some way to respond back to him.



:scratch: What Bible was he reading? There is only one creation story in the Bible. If you could post what you are referring to we could help clarify things.



Jesaiah
 
Upvote 0
Jimbo7315 is reffering to Genesis chapter 1 and chapter 2.

In Genesis are two contradictory stories of creation. In Genesis 1:20 & 21, "every living creature" is brought forth from the waters, including every winged fowl." But in 2:19 God brings forth "every beast of the field and every fowl of the air" from dry ground.

In Genesis 1:2, earth comes into existence on the first day, completely underwater. Only by the 3rd day were waters of the deep collected, and dry land formed. But in Genesis 2:4, 5, & 6, earth on the first day was dry land, unwatered.

The first story has trees made on the 3rd day and man formed 3 days later (1:12-13 and 26-31). In the second version man was made before trees (2:7, 9). If chapter 1 is true, then fowls were created before man. If chapter 2 is true, then they were created after man.

Version one teaches man was created after all beasts. The second is clear, Adam was created before beasts. (1:25,27 versus 2:7,19).

In version one, man and woman are created simultaneously (1:27) while in version two (2:7,20-22), man and woman are separate acts of creation.
 
Upvote 0
Genesis 1 and 2 are different creation stories, dating back to the time before the ancient Hebrews were a united people.

Yes. Prolly written by totally different peoples too. They resemble the Babylonian creation myth as well, not to mention the Muslim creation story also.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Jimbo7315
My biology teacher brought a bible in to class and showed us that in Genesis there are actually 2 different stories of creation! He went on to pose the question, "How can these stories be different and still both be right?" Please someone give me some way to respond back to him.

My first thought is why is this even a topic in your biology class.

Anyways, your biology teacher isn't wrong. There are two distinct creation stories in Genesis. Biblical scholars refer to these as the J (Yahvist) and P (Priestly) creation stories.

Here are the stories placed side by side.
 
Upvote 0

Ioustinos

Veteran
Feb 6, 2002
1,719
175
✟56,948.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
The first story has trees made on the 3rd day and man formed 3 days later (1:12-13 and 26-31). In the second version man was made before trees (2:7, 9). If chapter 1 is true, then fowls were created before man. If chapter 2 is true, then they were created after man.


It's late :sleep: and I have to get up in the morning and teach children's church. But this question has come up before at another board in which I use to post and so I will post my reply from there. I will come back later to the other statements because I need to hit the sack.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

J:
In Genesis 1:11-12 God created grass, herbs, and trees which was before the creation of man. The same chronology is found in Genesis 2:4-9. Look at vs 5. Look at the order of the verse. First plant life is mentioned, then mist to water it, then man needed to till it. This is fulfilled in vs 6. Since we know that in Genesis 1:11-12 the grass and trees were created before man, vs 5 and 6 of chapter two are leading to why man was created. God created the grass and trees then created man to tend to the grass and trees. And in regards to verses 8-9 it speaks of the Garden of Eden; which was separate and special. Just like you would pick a spot in your yard to make a garden and in it you would put your favorite flowers, trees, etc.



Jesaiah
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Zadok

In Genesis are two contradictory stories of creation. In Genesis 1:20 & 21, "every living creature" is brought forth from the waters, including every winged fowl." But in 2:19 God brings forth "every beast of the field and every fowl of the air" from dry ground.

Huh? You must be reading the TBT (Totally Bogus Translation). Genesis 1:20-21 does not say every living creature is brought from waters. See Genesis 1:20 and 1:24

20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky."

24 And God said, "
Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so.

The first story has trees made on the 3rd day and man formed 3 days later (1:12-13 and 26-31). In the second version man was made before trees (2:7, 9).

Wow, I love this one. According to your level of reading comprehension, there have not been just two creations, but thousands upon thousands of supernatural creations of trees -- perhaps even millions. Because the text reads...

8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed.

So I guess every time anyone plants a garden, they are supernaturally creating trees all over again from scratch.

In Genesis 1:2, earth comes into existence on the first day, completely underwater. Only by the 3rd day were waters of the deep collected, and dry land formed. But in Genesis 2:4, 5, & 6, earth on the first day was dry land, unwatered.

Wow. This one is so bizarre that it requires a complete citation of Genesis 2:1-6.

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.

2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested [1] from all his work. 3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.

When the Lord God made the earth and the heavens- 5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, 6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- 7 the Lord God formed the man [ADAM] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man [ADAM] became a living being.

Remember that the way we "format" our Bibles today has nothing to do with the way the original text looked. There were no chapters and verses or neatly formatted paragraphs and headings. So it's unfortunate that some Bibles visibly isolate verse 4 as if it's the heading of another account of genesis. It is clear from the text that follows from verse 5 that this is not another account, but the beginning of the story of Adam. Verse 4 is therefore more likely the "wrap-up" verse of all the preceding information about creation.

Regardless, the following text is clearly an exposition for the story of Adam. As part of the story, it explains what the world was like when God created Adam -- there was no rain on the earth until the flood, so the ecosystem was obviously quite different then.

To illustrate that this is all about Aadm, I included in brackets the actual Hebrew word that is commonly translated as "the man" -- it's Adam. In fact, it's always Adam. The translators decided when to start using the name Adam instead of "the man", but in the Hebrew it's always the same. Some translations replace "the man" with "Adam" earlier in the translation, some later. I would have started using Adam where I put it above, but the story is the same either way.

If chapter 1 is true, then fowls were created before man. If chapter 2 is true, then they were created after man.

That's just plain silly. Anyone with a grade school level of reading comprehension can see that verse 19 is simply restating in general terms that God had created beasts, birds, etc. You really have to torture the text to interpret it to mean this is a brand new account, especially when it's encased in the story of Adam and not a separate chronology of creation by itself.

19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man [ADAM] to see what he would name them; and whatever the man [ADAM] called each living creature, that was its name.

This is clearly going to be a waste of time, so I'll stop here. But I must point out that your treatment of the Bible is 100% consistent with your treatment of evolution. You love to post URLs to talkorigins but you almost never post any context or content, because if you posted the content, people would see how silly and unsubstantiated your arguments are. Likewise, you love to post references to chapters and verses when you make misstatements about the Bible, but you don't quote any actual text for precisely the same reason. IMO this is immature and downright dishonest. You folks should know better.
 
Upvote 0
By the way, I have heard an ALMOST reasonable sounding case for something similar to two creations, but it had nothing to do with two creations in Genesis. IMO it doesn't really jibe with the text in Genesis, so I don't think it is reasonable enough to take seriously. But this interpretation had to do with text in Jeremiah or Ezekiel (I forget which) that also paints a picture of the earth as being "formless and void." The original text is the same as that in Genesis, but this time the description of the "formless and void" earth also includes a description of destroyed cities.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Jimbo7315
My biology teacher brought a bible in to class and showed us that in Genesis there are actually 2 different stories of creation! He went on to pose the question, "How can these stories be different and still both be right?" Please someone give me some way to respond back to him.

Jimbo, your flag icon puts you in the U.S. Are you in public school or private school? If in private school, you might want to mention to your biology teacher that you are there for biology, not for philosophy or theology. If in public school, you might want to mention to your biology teacher that the U.S. Constitution doesn't provide for religious discursions on the part of teachers in Public Schools. You may want to point out to him that he may actually have some legal liability for teaching religious doctrines (or anti-religious doctrines) in the classroom.

As to your question, the theory of evolution has no answer. That is an answer from apologetics. If you read the stories, you will see the differences that folks are talking about. You can also find apologetics from literalist inerrantists that show why they think that the two stories still fit their doctrine.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Regardless, the following text is clearly an exposition for the story of Adam. As part of the story, it explains what the world was like when God created Adam -- there was no rain on the earth until the flood, so the ecosystem was obviously quite different then.

That fits in perfectly with the flat earth the old testaments teaches.

In In Genesis, the long discredited description of the heavens as a "firmament" is a fundamental contradiction in the Bible of the known realities of astronomy today. Biblical stars, sun and moon are all embedded "in" this firmament.

We are told there are waters below the firmament, and told waters are "above" it, too (1:7).

Why was the firmament formed in the "midst" of earth's "waters"(1:6)? Clearly, this is an image of a dome-like firmament over flat waters of a flat earth. Had earth commonly been known to be round then, the writers wouldn't need to have God set the domes in the sea, a notion likely conceived to keep seas from draining off over the "edges" or "ends" of the earth.

In order to accept a litteral genesis you MUST accept a flat earth. Sorry...

As said by a modern day bible believers that believe in a litteral genesis located here-

http://www.geocentricity.com/

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/geocentr.htm

Just example verses they use to accept the "geocentric model"... Remember, Heaven is up and the underworld is down in the bible.

In Joshua 10:13, the children of Israel are avenging themselves on their enemies. The Bible says that THE SUN STOOD STILL and hasted not to GO DOWN about a whole day.

Isaiah 38:8 says THE SUN RETURNED ten degrees by which degrees it was GONE DOWN.

Daniel 4:7-8, "I saw a tree of great height at the center of the world. It was large and strong, with its top touching the heavens, and it could be seen from the ends of the earth." Dream or not, this is a flat earth story.

Matthew 4:8, "The devil took him (Jesus) to a very high mountain and displayed before him all the kingdoms of the world in their magnificence...."

Job 38:22, "Have you entered the storehouse of the snow, and seen the treasury of the hail?"

In Genesis 11:4, the people wanted to build a tower up to heaven. The tower of Babel.

MT 24:29-30 Although the sun and the moon have been darkened and the stars have fallen from heaven, there is still enough light to see.

JOB 9:6 (KJV) God shakes the earth out of its place and makes its pillars tremble.

Isaiah 40
22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

Note: Not a sphere, a circle... Flat earth all the way.

Oh and the "ascention of christ"... Jesus litteraly got up off the ground and FLEW up to heaven. This is consistant with a flat earth.

After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God." Mark 16:19-20

"What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!" John 6:62

'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"" John 20:17

Eph. 4:8-10, down to Hell, up to Heaven...
 
Upvote 0
Jerry, I go to a public school in Louisville, and I'm afraid your wrong on that one. The law says that he can present any other theory on how humans came to be. Whether that be evolution or creation. He is within his bounds to bring a bible into class and show another what he calls "theory". In fact, he even brought up the Chinese theory which was that we all came from an egg.
 
Upvote 0

kern

Miserere Nobis
Apr 14, 2002
2,171
7
43
Florida, USA
Visit site
✟3,249.00
Faith
Catholic
Originally posted by Jimbo7315
Jerry, I go to a public school in Louisville, and I'm afraid your wrong on that one. The law says that he can present any other theory on how humans came to be. Whether that be evolution or creation.

This is not correct. The Supreme Court has ruled several times that teachers cannot teach the Biblical account of creation (or any other religious creation) as an alternative theory to evolution.

The creation stories can be presented as literature, or in a comparitive religions course (or even a "christianity" course), but not in a science class.

-Chris
 
Upvote 0

kern

Miserere Nobis
Apr 14, 2002
2,171
7
43
Florida, USA
Visit site
✟3,249.00
Faith
Catholic
Originally posted by npetreley

This is clearly going to be a waste of time, so I'll stop here. But I must point out that your treatment of the Bible is 100% consistent with your treatment of evolution. You love to post URLs to talkorigins but you almost never post any context or content, because if you posted the content, people would see how silly and unsubstantiated your arguments are. Likewise, you love to post references to chapters and verses when you make misstatements about the Bible, but you don't quote any actual text for precisely the same reason. IMO this is immature and downright dishonest. You folks should know better.

Despite your strong and insulting reaction to this, the idea of the two Creation accounts is not some athiest theory designed to undermine Christianity. It's a common idea that's several hundred years old and has been advanced by a lot of Christian scholars who have done biblical criticism.

As for your "grade school reading comprehension", it is you who are torturing the text. The first account clearly says that animals were created before humans. Now, we see in the chapter 2 account that in verse 18 God says "it is not good that the man should be alone, I will make him a helper as his partner." Then in verse 19, it says "So (i.e. because of this reason), out of the ground the LORD God formed every animal of the field..."

How can this second account be read as matching completely with the first one? I don't latch on to the other supposed differences, but in 1 it clearly says that animals were created before man, and in 2 the man is created before the animals.

It doesn't matter, of course, both creation stories have the same important point.

-Chris
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MatthewDiscipleofGod

Senior Veteran
Feb 6, 2002
2,992
267
46
Minnesota
Visit site
✟13,302.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Chapter 2 really ends up being a recap of creation. It's not a seperate story at all. I take it the teacher was athiest by the sounds of it. It's plain wrong that he would do that. Preaching religion and not knowing anything about it. You can read the bible but if you don't have the Holy Spirit guiding you you NEVER will FULLY UNDERSTAND it.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Jimbo7315
Jerry, I go to a public school in Louisville, and I'm afraid your wrong on that one. The law says that he can present any other theory on how humans came to be. Whether that be evolution or creation. He is within his bounds to bring a bible into class and show another what he calls "theory". In fact, he even brought up the Chinese theory which was that we all came from an egg.

Would you mind giving us the name of the school and the teacher?

He needs some things explained to him.
 
Upvote 0
Originally posted by Jimbo7315
He is within his bounds to bring a bible into class and show another what he calls "theory". In fact, he even brought up the Chinese theory which was that we all came from an egg.

He may be within his bounds to mention that there are nonscientific ideas about some of the same issues he will be dealing with in biology, even to mention which ones are current, and even (if he isn't equipped to teach the subject and needs to fill class time) to show some of the religious documents that discuss other ideas.

He is not within his legal bounds to do Biblical criticism and exegesis. If you will let me know his name and the name of the school he works for, I will see to it that someone points this out to him.
 
Upvote 0
He may be within his bounds to mention that there are nonscientific ideas about some of the same issues he will be dealing with in biology, even to mention which ones are current, and even (if he isn't equipped to teach the subject and needs to fill class time) to show some of the religious documents that discuss other ideas.

He is not within his legal bounds to do Biblical criticism and exegesis. If you will let me know his name and the name of the school he works for, I will see to it that someone points this out to him.

Trying to be the hero arn't we? What buisiness is it of yours. This is the type of thing right wing fundamentalists do when they want to harrass and stalk you.

Kinda like when abortion clinics were routinely being bombed and abortion doctors shot to death at their breakfast table by fundamentalists committed to their cause...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

kern

Miserere Nobis
Apr 14, 2002
2,171
7
43
Florida, USA
Visit site
✟3,249.00
Faith
Catholic
Originally posted by Project 86
Chapter 2 really ends up being a recap of creation. It's not a seperate story at all. I take it the teacher was athiest by the sounds of it. It's plain wrong that he would do that. Preaching religion and not knowing anything about it. You can read the bible but if you don't have the Holy Spirit guiding you you NEVER will FULLY UNDERSTAND it.

Why does he have to be an athiest? I am a Christian and I think the two creation accounts are separate and contradictory. If you look at any interpretation or commentary on the Bible, they are almost always written by Christians, and they often contain ideas like this. That may be too liberal or mainstream for you, but don't go accusing other people of not being Christian just because they don't believe in your version of infallible scripture.
-Chris
 
Upvote 0