How do you explain the two creation stories in Genesis?

Question

Really! After a few chapers Genisis starts with an entirely different begining. How do the more religious of us explain that?

Answer 1

I have always considered the first a brief, the next with added details of the same event.

Gen.2:2,4[ we been through day one to day six of creation to Adam, Eve, the anointed cherub that became Satan and Eden, now day seven will began and all days are one,
as we continue all through the bible to the reign of Christ Heb.4:1-12; says we are in day seven and God rest from creating, everything made perfect to Eden has been lost and the picture is to big for human minds in sin to comprehend;

There will have to be a new heavens and a new earth or what was brought back as restored 2Pet.3:13; Isa.65:17; 66:1,22; Rev.21:1-5;

From Gen.2:2,4; How much time to Rev.20:1-6,12,13;

If God would be wrong as all say he is in giving the time in math to Christ reign, then why believe the book at all, if he is right, one best be prepared to believe the book.

Revelations is same as Genesis, it is summed up, then detailed, who do you know that understands it.

Answer 2

Many contradictions are a remember of interpretation and one interpretation ought to produce a conflict with yet another passage. The introduction is one of those case. in case you consider the be conscious "day" to be literal in its meaning -- it is, having a particular length of time -- then you definately have a significant problem with 2 distinct money owed appropriate to the introduction. yet in case you deal with the be conscious in its metaphorical meaning (some thing also modern contained in the unique Hebrew), then the concept an afternoon isn't a particular length of time facilitates both memories to co-exist with out conflict. The creative "sessions" are called days, yet metaphorically, the be conscious day is used as in this sense: "today is the _day_ of mankind." And, there is no longer some thing to tutor that any day is unique of the different day, that they could ensue concurrently, consecutively, or maybe overlap. The "day" wherein our lord god created the heavens and the earth delivers no problem because back, the metaphorical meaning has no "not basic" limits or circumstances. i have always considered the 2d account as a trademark that the first account became religious in nature, or, if no longer some thing else, a grand making plans consultation, wherein the blueprint for starting to be a liveable planet in a sparkling photo voltaic equipment became placed into position. And that when this one finished, then the actual ingredient should be ordered and the genuinely actual planet presented into existence. therefore, the undeniable reality that no rain had fallen on the earth is a clue that the actual had yet to ensue. yet distinctive human beings do not pick to placed that a lot concept into this ingredient and favor to address the days in a literal way, and the critics, being truly dense, bypass top alongside with that pile of ----. further: actual, i'm one in each and every of your undesirable desires.

Answer 3

you mean this?
Genesis
1-26 ¶ And 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 heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.
1-27 And God created the man in His own image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.
1-28 And God blessed them; and God said to them, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fish of the seas, and over birds of the heavens, and over all beasts creeping on the earth.

then later ...

2-5 And every shrub of the field was not yet on the earth, and every plant of the field had not yet sprung up; for Jehovah God had not sent rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground.
2-6 And mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground.
2-7 And Jehovah God formed the man out of dust from the ground, and blew into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

and still later yet ...

2-18 ¶ And Jehovah God said, It is not good, the man being alone. I will make a helper suited to him.
2-19 And Jehovah God formed every animal of the field, and every bird of the heavens out of the ground. And He brought them to the man, to see what he would call it. And all which the man might call it, each living soul, that was its name.
2-20 And the man called names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the heavens, and to every animal of the field. But no helper suited to him was found for a man.
2-21 ¶ And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall on the man, and he slept. And He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh underneath.
2-22 And Jehovah God formed the rib which He had taken from the man into a woman, and brought her to the man.

now, I'm not all that religious, but I've wondered about this myself and have looked for answers, so ... hmmnn, in the first cause, we were created in his 'image' ... or so the story goes ... both male and females were created, 'in spirit' ... like 'God', I guess ... in the second cause, he creates a 'body' for our spirit out of the dust, or rising mist ... I imagine that implies we were messing up by doing a little of that 'creating stuff' ourselves (maybe we were mating with ... and/or trying experiments out on glands and such, with animals and other types of life) ... and someone, (God) saw a need to step in and take control once more ... and then finally, after offering all the animals to adam as a 'helpmate' ... he creates woman, from the rib of man, not dust or mist ... and together they form the perfect bond, adapted to house the foundering essence of what once was a powerful and divine spirit, 'us' ... but maybe too ... many powers and talents that we had possessed previous to that, were also lost with this earthy transformation ... oh, and I don't think God steps in too much anymore either ... now that were here, it's kind of like we're on our own ... for the most part anyway ...
was this what you were asking about?
Mau

Answer 4

what are the two different stories?

Answer 5

I pasted this from www.answersingenesis.org, whose author is more knowledgable than I am. I hope that you aren't irritated by this; I realize it is unoriginal, but I don't think that I could write a better answer!

What about the supposed contradictions between the order of events in Genesis chapter 2 and the order given in chapter 1?

By Russell M. Grigg M.Sc. (Hons.) Creationist Chemist and Missionary (Australia)

There are none! See also Genesis contradictions?
If, with the NIV, we read ‘Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east …’ (Genesis 2:8) and, ‘Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field …’ (Genesis 2:19 with emphasis added), it is clearly seen that chapter 2 states that the plants and animals were formed before Adam. When Adam named the animals (Genesis 2:20), they obviously were already in existence. There is no contradictory significance in the order of animals listed in Genesis 2:20; it is probably the order in which Adam met the animals, while the order of their creation is given in Genesis 1:20–25. Dr Henry Morris comments:

‘It was only the animals in closest proximity and most likely as theoretical candidates for companionship to man that were actually brought to him. These included the birds of the air, the cattle (verse 20—probably the domesticated animals), and the beasts of the field, which were evidently the smaller wild animals that would live near human habitations. Those not included were the fish of the sea, the creeping things, and the beasts of the earth mentioned in Genesis 1:24, which presumably were those wild animals living at considerable distance from man and his cultivated fields.’8.

Concerning the names of geographical sites, we have no idea what the configuration of the land or the rivers was before the Flood, because the pre-Flood world was completely destroyed. The land areas and rivers named before the Flood do not correspond to similarly named features after the Flood.

The purpose of Genesis 2:18–25 is not to give another account of creation but to show that there was no kinship whatsoever between Adam and the animals. None was like him, and so none could provide fellowship or companionship for him. Why not? Because Adam had not evolved from them, but was ‘a living soul’ whom God had created ‘in His own image’ (Genesis 2:7 and 1:27). This means (among other things) that God created Adam to be a person whom He could address, and who could respond to and interact with Himself. Here, as in many other places, the plain statements of the Bible confront and contradict the notion of human evolution.

There is therefore enough evidence for us to conclude that Adam most probably was the author of Genesis 2:4b–5:1, and that this is his record of his own experiences with respect to events in the Garden of Eden, the creation of Eve, the Fall, and in the lives of Cain, Abel, and Seth.

The next section is from 5:1b to 6:9a, and deals with the line from Adam to Noah, ending with, ‘These are the generations [or origins] of Noah.’

The next section is from 6:9b to 10:1a, and deals mainly with the Ark and the Flood, ending with, ‘Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.’ The wording of this subscript suggests that this portion was written by one of Noah’s sons, probably Shem, as Moses was descended from Shem. These chapters read very much like an eye-witness account because of the intimacy of detail which they contain. Consider Genesis 8:6–12 and note how this contains that ring of authenticity which is characteristic of an eye-witness account. It may even have been Shem’s diary!

Genesis 8:6–12:

6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:
7 And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.
8 Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground;
9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.
10 And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;
11 And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
12 And he stayed yet other seven days; and sent forth the dove; which returned not again unto him any more. (KJV).

Such meticulous details are the stuff of authentic eye-witness testimony. They have the ring of truth.

There is thus a substantial body of evidence that these portions of Genesis delineated by subscripts were written by the persons named therein, for the purpose of making and passing on a permanent record.

So then, were these first 11 chapters written as a record of authentic historical facts?

Answer: Yes, for several reasons.
Internal evidence of the book of Genesis
1. There is the internal evidence of the book of Genesis itself. As already mentioned, chapters 12–50 have always been regarded by the Jewish people as being the record of their own true history, and the style of writing contained in chapters 1–11 is not strikingly different from that in chapters 12–50.

2. Hebrew scholars of standing have always regarded this to be the case. Thus, Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford, has written:

‘Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience (b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story (c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark. Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the “days” of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know.’9.

3. One of the main themes of Genesis is the Sovereignty of God. This is seen in God’s actions in respect of four outstanding events in Genesis 1–11 (Creation, the Fall, the Flood, and the Babel dispersion), and His relationship to four outstanding people in Genesis 12–50 (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph). There is thus a unifying theme to the whole of the book of Genesis, which falls to the ground if any part is mythical and not true history; on the other hand, each portion reinforces the historical authenticity of the other.10

Evidence from the rest of the Bible
4. The principal people mentioned in Genesis chapters 1–11 are referred to as real—historical, not mythical—people in the rest of the Bible, often many times. For example, Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, and Noah are referred to in 15 other books of the Bible.

5. The Lord Jesus Christ referred to the Creation of Adam and Eve as a real historical event, by quoting Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 in His teaching about divorce (Matthew 19:3–6; Mark 10:2–9), and by referring to Noah as a real historical person and the Flood as a real historical event, in His teaching about the ‘coming of the Son of man’ (Matthew 24:37–39; Luke 17:26–27).

6. Unless the first 11 chapters of Genesis are authentic historical events, the rest of the Bible is incomplete and incomprehensible as to its full meaning. The theme of the Bible is Redemption, and may be outlined thus:

i. God’s redeeming purpose is revealed in Genesis 1–11,
ii. God’s redeeming purpose progresses from Genesis 12 to Jude 25, and
iii. God’s redeeming purpose is consummated in Revelation 1–22.

But why does mankind need to be redeemed? What is it that he needs to be redeemed from? The answer is given in Genesis 1–11, namely, from the ruin brought about by sin. Unless we know that the entrance of sin to the human race was a true historical fact, God’s purpose in providing a substitutionary atonement is a mystery. Conversely, the historical truth of Genesis 1–11 shows that all mankind has come under the righteous anger of God and needs salvation from the penalty, power, and presence of sin.

7. Unless the events of the first chapters of Genesis are true history, the Apostle Paul’s explanation of the gospel in Romans chapter 5 and of the resurrection in 1 Corinthians chapter 15 has no meaning. Paul writes: ‘For as by one man’s [Adam’s] disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one [Jesus] shall many be made righteous’ (Romans 5:19). And, ‘For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive … And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit’ (1 Corinthians 15:21–22; 45). The historical truth of the record concerning the first Adam is a guarantee that what God says in His Word about the last Adam [Jesus] is also true. Likewise, the historical, literal truth of the record concerning Jesus is a guarantee that what God says about the first Adam is also historically and literally true.

Conclusion
We return to the question which forms the title of this article. Should Genesis be taken literally?

Answer: If we apply the normal principles of biblical exegesis (ignoring pressure to make the text conform to the evolutionary prejudices of our age), it is overwhelmingly obvious that Genesis was meant to be taken in a straightforward, obvious sense as an authentic, literal, historical record of what actually happened.