Why are creationists incapable of understanding Gen. 2:4&5?

Question

They seem to close the book after the preceding Chapter.

One day or Seven? The Hebrew says "Yom" not "Yamim". And in Chapter Two creation of the plants is definitely dependent on the Man to till the ground. The rain and the mists are definite parts of THIS creation and earth (prior to heaven) is cocreated the SAME day. If a day is 24 hrs as you say, and one day is only one day don't you see any problems with your myths being a bit mixed? It is not a summary of the forgoing, it says THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS WHEN IT WAS MADE.

Later in the Chapter you'll find the animals being created AFTER Man, with Adam being given the priviledge of helping by naming them

The only problem I have is that God's Word seems to have been taken over by idiots. "Generations" means bringing things into BEING, i.e. this is an earlier Creation account which does not conform to the one preceeding it in this book, all your chain references and middle margin notes (Many based on the most bizarre translations possible) to the contrary. You'll insist on a literal reading of the Bible while not having done so yourselves. I've not shot myself inthe foot, I've read it , read it in the original, read it in Greek, read corresponding texts from other sources, read numerous tranlations into other languages, read the Mishnah Bereshith, seriously read the Gospell of John's telling of the same account in again as many versions and successive varieties, and found fundamentalism fundamentally WRONG!!! You've not only shot yourselves in both feet you've managed to hang yourselves in a manner insulting to all thinking Christian.

Answer 1

Now, now silly people, you are not playing nice........

Answer 2

Hi Fr.Al,

I am assuming you posted this verse because you believe it in some way undermines the Creationist view. Obviously I do not know this for certain.

Why would I assume this? I'll try to explain.

Many people are confused by this verse. There are a few primary difficulties in understanding this chapter in general:

1. Is this a separate and contradictory account of the Creation?

The answer is no. What it describes is a more detailed account of man's creation and the events surrounding it. While it primarily talks about day six it does make reference to events occurring in other days.

2. If plants were created on day three then where were they in this chapter?

The answer is that this chapter is not referring to all vegetative life. It is referring to that vegetative life that came into existence after man's fall from grace. Those plants and trees which bear food/fruit necessary for man's survival but also require man's labor. This was part of God's judgment upon man when he "fell".

3. There was no rain? How did any plants survive at all?

The surface of the earth used to be watered from "springs" within the depths of the ground. Rain did not occur until after man's fall. This is significant. Rain is part of God's judgment on man. It can be given and withheld at God's descretion. Whereas the "flooding" occurred on a routine basis rain does not. Remember that rain was used as a judgment when God flooded the earth.

There are many other difficult aspects to understanding this chapter. This is also a lot more explanation needed to truly bring this chapter into a coherent whole for the sincere Bible student.

However, I do hope that it helps put to rest some of the confusion you were experiencing.

~Neeva

Answer 3

What exactly do you mean? Creationists believe that God created everything.
Gen 2:4-5 states that "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 [b] and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth [c] and there was no man to work the ground,"

Whats the problem there?

Answer 4

Makes you wonder how all the animals were surviving without foliage. I am assuming that it took some time for the plants to grow after God sent the rain, so according to the bible, God created the heavens and the earth, then populated the earth with animals, then sent rain and the plants started to grow then he make man out of dirt.

There must have been some hungry animals for several weeks because the book of Genesis also states that animals didn't eat one another until Eve was tempted without a knowledge of good of evil.

Sounds like a theory made up by an uneducated, pre-scientific man with the need to keep everyone believing in his direct access to God.

Answer 5

Gen.2"4,5 "This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven. Now there was yet no bush of the field found in the earth and no vegetation of the field was as yet sprouting, because Jehovah God had not made it rain upon the earth and there was no man to cultivate the ground."The middle index scriptures it says to look up are Isa. 45:18andMatt.5:45. "This is what Jehovah has said, the CREATOR of the heavens, He the true God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, He the One who firmly established it, who did nnot create it simply for nothing, who formed it to be INHABITED: 'I am Jehovah and there is no one else'" The other scripture says that God made the sun rise and makes it rain upon the wicked ones and the good ones.

Answer 6

What is there not to understand???

This is the account of the heavens and the earth...

Do not get hung up on the translation "generation". It does not mean a period of years, it is the History or Account of how everything was created in 6 (24 hour) days.

Answer 7

I am quite capable. Are you having a problem with it? Besides having nothing to say about it, you have just assumed something negative, but nobody here knows what. Genesis one gives the overview of the creation of earth, and Genesis two gets down to details, specifically as they pertain to the creation of man. I think you "seem to close the book" before you've read or heard any explanations. Of course, we don't even know what your beef is because you don't tell us, you just assert some blanket statement that is untrue for me and thousands of biblical Christians.

Answer 8

Wrong.When your are in your teen years things should be easier to comprehend.

Answer 9

I understand it perfectly, and I'm a creationist. I fail to see how this passage negates the creationist teaching.

Answer 10

you shot yourself in the foot
maybe you should read a scripture before you quote it