• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are there Two Creation Events in Genesis?

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
The redactors of Genesis put two mutually exclusive stories at the beginning.
I think that's a not too subtle hint to avoid taking Scripture too literally.
Tom

True, but I consider them two views likely recorded for reasons of comparison, because the compiler and editor who finally compiled them considered them from two reliable sources that he would not make the judgment as to which was the correct version, but considered them comparable.
 

jhwatts

Member
There was only one creation. The scripture is quite clear on that.
I disagree, there are many difference s in both creation accounts. A simple example is in Genesis 1 they are told they can eat of any tree they want while in Genesis 2 they are told not to eat of the tree of knowledge. That's because these are two different creations. There are many differences.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
because the compiler and editor who finally compiled them considered them from two reliable sources that he would not make the judgment as to which was the correct version, but considered them comparable.
That, or both stories were too well known to leave either one out.
Tom
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes, there are two creation stories in Genesis that differ.

Exactly. There are two, different, creation *stories*. They were written by different people with different writing styles and even different vocabulary. This has long been known among Biblical scholars and simply isn't controversial. You can see some of those differences even in the name of God that is used: Elohim vs. Yahweh. The differences go throughout Genesis.
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
The real intent of the first chapters of Genesis is not to provide a record for the creation of the universe, earth, and its inhabitants. There are some useful pieces of the information about creation is in there but it is not the intent of Genesis. There are two different creations mentioned in Genesis. One creation becomes cursed and hence Gods wants it removed from the earth and replace it with a new creation made in his likeness. I am not going to go through the usual difference in Genesis 1 and 2 but rather show this conclusion a different way. Lets start by taking a look at the creation of beings who are made in his likeness.

Genesis 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 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.

Now, lets take a look at another creation.

Genesis 2:7 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 soul.

and

Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

We see that the animals and man in Eden (Notice Eden is not mentioned in Genesis 1) are made from the dust and dirt of the earth and are described by having the breath of life in their nostrils. Keep in mind these beings are of the earth and they have the breath of life in their nostrils.

Most people will claim that both Genesis 1 and 2 are the same creation and the account in Genesis 2 is simply more detail of the first. They are two different collection of beings. Lets take a look at what got on the ark later in Genesis.

Genesis 7: (13-15) 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.

We see that they are different. Those “after their kind” are placed on the ark. and those “wherein is the breath of life” are also placed on the ark.

Now if we take a look at what occurs when Noah’s flood we can see the intent of the flood.

Genesis 6 :7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

God obviously wants to dispose of those “created from the face of the earth” and those created from the dust of the earth are in Genesis 2.

Are there a difference between those on the ark and those on the land? Lets look at what got off the ark.

Genesis 8:19 Every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, and whatsoever creepeth upon the earth, after their kinds, went forth out of the ark.

Where did the ones that got on the ark “wherein is the breath of life” go?

Genesis 6: (19-21) 19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. 20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. 21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

We don't see them get off and it would seem they are eaten.

Now we see that the creation from the dust of the earth was destroyed.

Genesis 7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

Those preserved from the flood are those “after his kind” and those destroyed are of the creation from the dust of the earth. There is a significance in making the distinction of those “after heir kind” and those from the dust of the earth. I find this hard to call coincidence.

Any thoughts?
If you used another translation with a different verb tense in 2:19, you would have your solution:
2:19: 19 And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim had formed every animal of the field and all fowl of the heavens, and brought them to Man, to see what he would call them; and whatever Man called each living soul, that was its name.​

Once this small and important detail is handled, the problem disappears in a puff of smoke.

Genesis chapter 1 then is seen as having its greater focus on the earth at large, the Terra-forming of the earth, its animals, even the creation of man. Chapter 2 has then the natural change of focus down to mankind - because that is what the Bible is about, the interaction of God with man and vice versa in view of satan and the fallen angels' actions..
 

jhwatts

Member
I'm interested in the order and scripture presented in my first post. God makes it clear that those left on the earth during the flood and what was on the ark, what got off the ark, and what was destroyed. The language used to describe these groups during Noah's flood is the same language used in Genesis 1 and 2 used to describe each creation. Any thoughts on these undeniable correlations?
 

jhwatts

Member
If you used another translation with a different verb tense in 2:19, you would have your solution:
2:19: 19 And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim had formed every animal of the field and all fowl of the heavens, and brought them to Man, to see what he would call them; and whatever Man called each living soul, that was its name.
I use early English translations only for items relating to creation. This is simply to avoid inherent biases due to the evolutionary argument by modern translators.
 

Grandliseur

Well-Known Member
I use early English translations only for items relating to creation. This is simply to avoid inherent biases due to the evolutionary argument by modern translators.
If you do not have this yet, there is a free software for both PCs and tablets called SWORD. This app permits a very large number of translations, English and others.

On my PC I have, Darby, ASV, and all in all about 20 various translations. It is a great program that also may contain Strong's and much more.
At times when there is need for it, I go to Interlinear translations on the net to get either the Hebrew or the Greek word for word translation so as to make up my own mind which is the most accurate rendition.
 

jhwatts

Member
If you do not have this yet, there is a free software I have for both PCs and tablets called SWORD. This app permits a very large number of translations, English and others.

On my PC I have, Darby, ASV, and all in all about 20 various translations. It is a great program that also may contain Strong's and much more.
At times when there is need for it, I go to Interlinear translations on the net to get either the Hebrew or the Greek word for word translation so as to make up my own mind which is the most accurate rendition.
I do have it but it doesn't change the fact that by default translators make decisions about how things are translated based hot button issues of the day. For example the Geneva translation has inherant biases about the Roman Catholic church. It was the hot topic of the day. Likewise evolution is a hot button issue of today and will impact translations of today. That's way I use translations that predate the evolution argument.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
If you used another translation with a different verb tense in 2:19, you would have your solution:
2:19: 19 And out of the ground Jehovah Elohim had formed every animal of the field and all fowl of the heavens, and brought them to Man, to see what he would call them; and whatever Man called each living soul, that was its name.​

Once this small and important detail is handled, the problem disappears in a puff of smoke.

Genesis chapter 1 then is seen as having its greater focus on the earth at large, the Terra-forming of the earth, its animals, even the creation of man. Chapter 2 has then the natural change of focus down to mankind - because that is what the Bible is about, the interaction of God with man and vice versa in view of satan and the fallen angels' actions..
I appreciate your post. I'm not a Christian so I don't find the Bible inerrant, but I do appreciate the problem of translation.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
The scripture draws it's own conclusion and doesn't need my opinion.

There was only one creation. The scripture is quite clear on that.

Tee Hee.
animated-laughing-image-0157.gif


.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
Actually maybe three Creations as St Augustine describes the first instantaneous Creation in Genesis 1:1

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God Created the Heaven and the earth.
Wait, how did St. Augustine come into this picture? Are you citing a commentary of his or something?
 

eldios

Active Member
The real intent of the first chapters of Genesis is not to provide a record for the creation of the universe, earth, and its inhabitants. There are some useful pieces of the information about creation is in there but it is not the intent of Genesis. There are two different creations mentioned in Genesis. One creation becomes cursed and hence Gods wants it removed from the earth and replace it with a new creation made in his likeness. I am not going to go through the usual difference in Genesis 1 and 2 but rather show this conclusion a different way. Lets start by taking a look at the creation of beings who are made in his likeness.

Genesis 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 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.

Now, lets take a look at another creation.

Genesis 2:7 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 soul.

and

Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

We see that the animals and man in Eden (Notice Eden is not mentioned in Genesis 1) are made from the dust and dirt of the earth and are described by having the breath of life in their nostrils. Keep in mind these beings are of the earth and they have the breath of life in their nostrils.

Most people will claim that both Genesis 1 and 2 are the same creation and the account in Genesis 2 is simply more detail of the first. They are two different collection of beings. Lets take a look at what got on the ark later in Genesis.

Genesis 7: (13-15) 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.

We see that they are different. Those “after their kind” are placed on the ark. and those “wherein is the breath of life” are also placed on the ark.

Now if we take a look at what occurs when Noah’s flood we can see the intent of the flood.

Genesis 6 :7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

God obviously wants to dispose of those “created from the face of the earth” and those created from the dust of the earth are in Genesis 2.

Are there a difference between those on the ark and those on the land? Lets look at what got off the ark.

Genesis 8:19 Every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, and whatsoever creepeth upon the earth, after their kinds, went forth out of the ark.

Where did the ones that got on the ark “wherein is the breath of life” go?

Genesis 6: (19-21) 19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. 20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. 21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

We don't see them get off and it would seem they are eaten.

Now we see that the creation from the dust of the earth was destroyed.

Genesis 7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

Those preserved from the flood are those “after his kind” and those destroyed are of the creation from the dust of the earth. There is a significance in making the distinction of those “after heir kind” and those from the dust of the earth. I find this hard to call coincidence.

Any thoughts?

There was one invisible creation and everything we experience including our visible bodies come from the creation.
 
Top