Does Genesis 1, contradict or not jive with, Genesis 2 on...?

[Neogaia777]

Does Genesis 1, contradict or not jive with, Genesis 2 (5) on...?

No, it does not at all, and I'm about to tell you why, but, I have heard that many non-believers are using this to put a major dent in Christian and Jewish religious beliefs, so, I thought I'd address it (once more, again)...

Again, Genesis chapter 1, to Genesis 2:4, is a is an extremely brief "summary" of "a" or "an" "entire creation" from beginning to end, beginning after Genesis 2:4, it goes on to get more specific...

What is contained or begins in Genesis 2:5 and on is only what happens in the time described in Genesis 1:26-30... We are, and have been in, the "sixth day" for a very long time now... Ever since the land animals came forth from the sea... After Genesis 1:30 to Genesis 2:4 is what happens on the seventh day (age of or day of rest or peace with Christ) after the end times, at the ending or conclusion of the sixth day, to the real end of mankind (and all of creation-kind)... And God saw that it was, or it all had been, "all good" and "very good", even the brief period of bad...

Hell, Genesis 2:4 even says that all that was said prior to that was a (an) (entire) "history" of (an) entire creation, basically...

How can it be or get any more clear than that...?

God Bless!

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Does Genesis 1, contradict or not jive with, Genesis 2 (5) on...?

No, it does not at all, and I'm about to tell you why, but, I have heard that many non-believers are using this to put a major dent in Christian and Jewish religious beliefs, so, I thought I'd address it (once more, again)...

Well, you are ignoring the contradictions in this. Take, for example, the order of creation. In the first narrative, which covers Genesis 1:1 through 2:3, God creates the animals first, and then creates man:

Gen 1:25-26 God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."

In the second narrative, Genesis 2:4 +, God creates man first, and then the animals.

Gen 2:18-19
18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
NASU

Regardless of whether one is considered a summary of the other or not, we do have a plainly different order of creation here, and they cannot both be right at the same time.

To me, this is evidence that these narratives are not meant to be literal. They are a creation parable, conveying the truth that God is creator, but not meant to show us the literal details of creation. To say they are literal is to say the Bible has a contradiction, and I choose not to do that.

So accepting that we are free to find the real truth from nature itself is actually how we can rescue God's word from being in contradiction. Only those who actually accept evolution and the great age of the earth are able to accept the Bible as true, without contradiction when properly interpreted. Others have to claim they believe a contradiction.

 

[Neogaia777]

Well, you are ignoring the contradictions in this. Take, for example, the order of creation. In the first narrative, which covers Genesis 1:1 through 2:3, God creates the animals first, and then creates man:

Gen 1:25-26 God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."

In the second narrative, Genesis 2:4 +, God creates man first, and then the animals.

Gen 2:18-19
18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
NASU

Regardless of whether one is considered a summary of the other or not, we do have a plainly different order of creation here, and they cannot both be right at the same time.

To me, this is evidence that these narratives are not meant to be literal. They are a creation parable, conveying the truth that God is creator, but not meant to show us the literal details of creation. To say they are literal is to say the Bible has a contradiction, and I choose not to do that.

So accepting that we are free to find the real truth from nature itself is actually how we can rescue God's word from being in contradiction. Only those who actually accept evolution and the great age of the earth are able to accept the Bible as true, without contradiction when properly interpreted. Others have to claim they believe a contradiction.

Genesis 2:19, God "was forming", or "had been forming" or was making or causing to come to be, before or prior to, or even while he was making man, every beast of the field, ect, ect...

Is that what you are referring to...? Genesis 2:19 cause it does not contradict...

It flows just as as science says it does, and science and the Bible or creation account(s) do not contradict each other...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Genesis 2:19, God "was forming", or "had been forming" or was making or causing to come to be, before or prior to, or even while he was making man, every beast of the field, ect, ect...

Is that what you are referring to...? Genesis 2:19 cause it does not contradict...

It flows just as as science says it does, and science and the Bible or creation account(s) do not contradict each other...

God Bless!

Examine other translations of Genesis 2:19, half say "was forming" or "had formed" or "had been forming", or "had been causing there to come to be", ect, ect...

 

[Neogaia777]

Well, you are ignoring the contradictions in this. Take, for example, the order of creation. In the first narrative, which covers Genesis 1:1 through 2:3, God creates the animals first, and then creates man:

Gen 1:25-26 God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."

In the second narrative, Genesis 2:4 +, God creates man first, and then the animals.

Gen 2:18-19
18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
NASU

Regardless of whether one is considered a summary of the other or not, we do have a plainly different order of creation here, and they cannot both be right at the same time.

To me, this is evidence that these narratives are not meant to be literal. They are a creation parable, conveying the truth that God is creator, but not meant to show us the literal details of creation. To say they are literal is to say the Bible has a contradiction, and I choose not to do that.

So accepting that we are free to find the real truth from nature itself is actually how we can rescue God's word from being in contradiction. Only those who actually accept evolution and the great age of the earth are able to accept the Bible as true, without contradiction when properly interpreted. Others have to claim they believe a contradiction.

Man had come out of animal, or they were coming to be (relatively) around the same time, and man and (land) animal(s), have a great sharing and a lot and much in common, coming about kind of around the same time, on a much larger or greater timeframe that is...

 

[Neogaia777]

Man had come out of animal, or they were coming to be (relatively) around the same time, and man and (land) animal(s), have a great sharing and a lot and much in common, coming about kind of around the same time, on a much larger or greater timeframe that is...

While God was making the land animals, he was making man, or while he was making man, he was making the land animals...

God Bless!

 

[drjean]

The main reason that skeptics do not see harmony in the events recorded in the first two chapters of the Bible is because they fail to realize that Genesis 1 and 2 serve different purposes. Chapter one (including 2:1-4) focuses on the order of the creation events; chapter two (actually 2:5-25) simply provides more detailed information about some of the events mentioned in chapter one. Chapter two never was meant to be a chronological regurgitation of chapter one, but instead serves its own unique purpose—i.e., to develop in detail the more important features of the creation account, especially the creation of man and his surroundings.

Did God Create Animals or Man First?

It would not, in our estimation, be wrong to translate yatsar as a pluperfect in this instance: “He had molded.” The insistence of the critics upon a plain past is partly the result of the attempt to make chapters one and two clash at as many points as possible

Hebrew scholar Victor Hamilton agreed with Leupold’s assessment of Genesis 2:19 as he also recognized that “it is possible to translate formed as ‘had formed’ ” (1990, p. 176). Keil and Delitzsch stated in the first volume of their highly regarded Old Testament commentary that “our modern style for expressing the same thought [which the Holy Spirit, via Moses, intended to communicate—EL] would be simply this: ‘God brought to Adam the beasts which He had formed’ ”​

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Did God Create Animals or Man First?

It would not, in our estimation, be wrong to translate yatsar as a pluperfect in this instance: “He had molded.” The insistence of the critics upon a plain past is partly the result of the attempt to make chapters one and two clash at as many points as possible

Hebrew scholar Victor Hamilton agreed with Leupold’s assessment of Genesis 2:19 as he also recognized that “it is possible to translate formed as ‘had formed’ ” (1990, p. 176). Keil and Delitzsch stated in the first volume of their highly regarded Old Testament commentary that “our modern style for expressing the same thought [which the Holy Spirit, via Moses, intended to communicate—EL] would be simply this: ‘God brought to Adam the beasts which He had formed’ ”​

But there is nothing in the context to suggest this interpretation. It is a rescue interpretation.

 

[drjean]

But there is nothing in the context to suggest this interpretation. It is a rescue interpretation.

Maybe not in English, but in Hebrew.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Maybe not in English, but in Hebrew.

It is written exactly like a plain past tense rather than "pluperfect". If a plain past tense was intended, it would be written just like it is. Indeed, one can question whether there even IS a pluperfect tense in biblical hebrew.

 

[drjean]

Here's a thought: Parshat Bereshit: The Two Stories of Creation - OU Torah

 

[Aman777]

Man had come out of animal,

False, since man (Heb-Adam) was made BEFORE the plants, herbs and rain, Genesis 2:4-7 on the 3rd Day. The Lord made the Trees on the 3rd Day Gen 1:12 to go into the Garden where He placed Adam. Genesis 2:8-9 All other living creatures were created and brought forth from WATER on the 5th Day. Genesis 1:21

 

[Neogaia777]

False, since man (Heb-Adam) was made BEFORE the plants, herbs and rain, Genesis 2:4-7 on the 3rd Day. The Lord made the Trees on the 3rd Day Gen 1:12 to go into the Garden where He placed Adam. Genesis 2:8-9 All other living creatures were created and brought forth from WATER on the 5th Day. Genesis 1:21

Either way Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:4 is a "summary" of a, or the, entire creation from beginning to end... Then from Genesis 2:5 onward we get into details starting of "somewhere in the middle" of that prior summary...

I cannot explain why it says that there were no plants and no rain in Genesis 2:5-7 since in the prior summary (Genesis 1:11-13) it says plants came long before man on the third day, and man on the sixth day (Genesis 1:26-27)... Yet, in Genesis 2:8-9 it seems to say man came before plants... That I cannot explain...

I just know that Genesis 1:1 to 2:4 is a summary of an, a, or the entire creation from a beginning to it's ending... (And was the point and purpose of this thread) Then we get into some of the details of that, in Genesis 2:5 on...

There are some things about those "details" I cannot yet explain...

Most of the sixth day, is the age and era of "the fall", (which isn't even mentioned in the summary) and the seventh day, is the age or era of or the peaceful reign of Christ, after the results or the fall are fixed and restored, or the sixth day ends, and we live in the not literal "1,000 year reign" but an "age of and era" of a reign and age and era of peace with Christ then to the end of that creation, at the end of that seventh day...

God Bless!

 

[Chinchilla]

Does Genesis 1, contradict or not jive with, Genesis 2 (5) on...?

No, it does not at all, and I'm about to tell you why, but, I have heard that many non-believers are using this to put a major dent in Christian and Jewish religious beliefs, so, I thought I'd address it (once more, again)...

Again, Genesis chapter 1, to Genesis 2:4, is a is an extremely brief "summary" of "a" or "an" "entire creation" from beginning to end, beginning after Genesis 2:4, it goes on to get more specific...

What is contained or begins in Genesis 2:5 and on is only what happens in the time described in Genesis 1:26-30... We are, and have been in, the "sixth day" for a very long time now... Ever since the land animals came forth from the sea... After Genesis 1:30 to Genesis 2:4 is what happens on the seventh day (age of or day of rest or peace with Christ) after the end times, at the ending or conclusion of the sixth day, to the real end of mankind (and all of creation-kind)... And God saw that it was, or it all had been, "all good" and "very good", even the brief period of bad...

Hell, Genesis 2:4 even says that all that was said prior to that was a (an) (entire) "history" of (an) entire creation, basically...

How can it be or get any more clear than that...?

God Bless!

No it does not , God created earth full of animals on separate days , then he created garden with trees and one animal from ground so Adam could name them . He did not create anything new just alredy existing ones same as Jesus turned water to wine.

Genesis 2 is going back to what happend day 6.

 

[Aman777]

Either way Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:4 is a "summary" of a, or the, entire creation from beginning to end... Then from Genesis 2:5 onward we get into details starting of "somewhere in the middle" of that prior summary...

Amen. God tells the entire History of the Creation in the first 34 verses of Genesis, including events which are future to our time, at the end of the present 6th Day, the Day of Salvation. God told us the whole story of His work in the FIRST chapter and the rest of the Bible gives the details of God's 7 Day Creation.

I cannot explain why it says that there were no plants and no rain in Genesis 2:5-7 since in the prior summary (Genesis 1:11-13) it says plants came long before man on the third day, and man on the sixth day (Genesis 1:26-27)... Yet, in Genesis 2:8-9 it seems to say man came before plants... That I cannot explain...

It's because Adam was "formed" by Lord God/Jesus on the 3rd Day, but he fell and lost his image like the Lord's and like ALL men, he MUST be born again Spiritually by God the Trinity, or "created in God's Image" which is in Christ Spiritually, in order to enter Heaven. Adam was made physically on the 3rd Day Gen 2:4-7 but was NOT created by God (The Trinity) until the 6th Day. Gen 1:27 Today is the same Day of Salvation, the last before we enter Eternity/7th Day.

Most of the sixth day, is the age and era of "the fall", (which isn't even mentioned in the summary) and the seventh day, is the age or era of or the peaceful reign of Christ, after the results or the fall are fixed and restored, or the sixth day ends, and we live in the not literal "1,000 year reign" but an "age of and era" of a reign and age and era of peace with Christ then to the end of that creation, at the end of that seventh day...

Genesis 1:28-31 is the outline of the end of the present 6th Day when Humankind will be given dominion/rule of "every living creature" Gen 1:28 including mosquitoes and Angels. 1Co 6:3 Isaiah 11:7 is the fulfillment of the prophecy of changing ALL living creatures into vegetarians. Genesis 1:30 Then, and only then will the perfect God look upon His perfect Creation and say. It is very good. Genesis 1:31

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

No it does not , God created earth full of animals on separate days , then he created garden with trees and one animal from ground so Adam could name them . He did not create anything new just alredy existing ones same as Jesus turned water to wine.

Genesis 2 is going back to what happend day 6.

That's not what the scripture says. You have, there, a rescue interpretation, not based on the plain meaning of the text.

 

[Jonathan David Michael]

Does Genesis 1, contradict or not jive with, Genesis 2 (5) on...?

No, it does not at all, and I'm about to tell you why, but, I have heard that many non-believers are using this to put a major dent in Christian and Jewish religious beliefs, so, I thought I'd address it (once more, again)...

Again, Genesis chapter 1, to Genesis 2:4, is a is an extremely brief "summary" of "a" or "an" "entire creation" from beginning to end, beginning after Genesis 2:4, it goes on to get more specific...

What is contained or begins in Genesis 2:5 and on is only what happens in the time described in Genesis 1:26-30... We are, and have been in, the "sixth day" for a very long time now... Ever since the land animals came forth from the sea... After Genesis 1:30 to Genesis 2:4 is what happens on the seventh day (age of or day of rest or peace with Christ) after the end times, at the ending or conclusion of the sixth day, to the real end of mankind (and all of creation-kind)... And God saw that it was, or it all had been, "all good" and "very good", even the brief period of bad...

Hell, Genesis 2:4 even says that all that was said prior to that was a (an) (entire) "history" of (an) entire creation, basically...

How can it be or get any more clear than that...?

God Bless!

Interesting take on the two creation stories! Thank you!

 

[Walks with watchers]

Does Genesis 1, contradict or not jive with, Genesis 2 (5) on...?

No, it does not at all, and I'm about to tell you why, but, I have heard that many non-believers are using this to put a major dent in Christian and Jewish religious beliefs, so, I thought I'd address it (once more, again)...

Again, Genesis chapter 1, to Genesis 2:4, is a is an extremely brief "summary" of "a" or "an" "entire creation" from beginning to end, beginning after Genesis 2:4, it goes on to get more specific...

What is contained or begins in Genesis 2:5 and on is only what happens in the time described in Genesis 1:26-30... We are, and have been in, the "sixth day" for a very long time now... Ever since the land animals came forth from the sea... After Genesis 1:30 to Genesis 2:4 is what happens on the seventh day (age of or day of rest or peace with Christ) after the end times, at the ending or conclusion of the sixth day, to the real end of mankind (and all of creation-kind)... And God saw that it was, or it all had been, "all good" and "very good", even the brief period of bad...

Hell, Genesis 2:4 even says that all that was said prior to that was a (an) (entire) "history" of (an) entire creation, basically...

How can it be or get any more clear than that...?

God Bless!

M

 

[Aman777]

Genesis chapter 1, to Genesis 2:4, is a is an extremely brief "summary" of "a" or "an" "entire creation" from beginning to end, beginning after Genesis 2:4, it goes on to get more specific...

Amen. The first 34 verses of Genesis are an outline of ALL of the rest of the Bible. This is because God told the entire HISTORY of His 7 Day/Age creation in those verses. From Genesis 2:4 to the end of Revelation, we find the DETAILS concerning those 7 Days/Ages.

What is contained or begins in Genesis 2:5 and on is only what happens in the time described in Genesis 1:26-30...

I love your post but the above doesn't quite agree. It is because man (Heb-Adam) was made on the 3rd Day BEFORE the plants, herbs and rain. Genesis 2:4-7 Adam was born again Spiritually on the present 6th Day/Age along with Eve. Genesis 1:27 Genesis 5:1-2 Remember that Eve was NOT made until the present 6th Day. Genesis 2:22 This makes in impossible for Adam to be created Spiritually until AFTER Eve was made from his rib. Amen?

 

[A_Thinker]

Does Genesis 1, contradict or not jive with, Genesis 2 (5) on...?

No, it does not at all, and I'm about to tell you why, but, I have heard that many non-believers are using this to put a major dent in Christian and Jewish religious beliefs, so, I thought I'd address it (once more, again)...

Again, Genesis chapter 1, to Genesis 2:4, is a is an extremely brief "summary" of "a" or "an" "entire creation" from beginning to end, beginning after Genesis 2:4, it goes on to get more specific...

What is contained or begins in Genesis 2:5 and on is only what happens in the time described in Genesis 1:26-30... We are, and have been in, the "sixth day" for a very long time now... Ever since the land animals came forth from the sea... After Genesis 1:30 to Genesis 2:4 is what happens on the seventh day (age of or day of rest or peace with Christ) after the end times, at the ending or conclusion of the sixth day, to the real end of mankind (and all of creation-kind)... And God saw that it was, or it all had been, "all good" and "very good", even the brief period of bad...

Hell, Genesis 2:4 even says that all that was said prior to that was a (an) (entire) "history" of (an) entire creation, basically...

How can it be or get any more clear than that...?

God Bless!

I see Genesis 1 as a description of God's general creation of the heavens and the earth.

Genesis 2 is a description of the creation of the Garden of Eden ...