Cart 0
While practically every chapter and verse of the Bible has come under scrutiny at some time or another, probably no other Biblical book has been more viciously attacked than Genesis. And there’s a very good reason for that: The historical account of Genesis is foundational to Christianity. All the major doctrines of the Bible are directly or indirectly rooted in Genesis. Salvation through Christ is spiritual, of course. But that salvation is based upon events that physically took place in history beginning with Creation. And even though many Christians today think this is merely a side issue, unbelievers know how critical a role Genesis plays which is why they make such a concerted effort to discredit it as a historical record.
For example, one of the accusations unbelievers make is that Genesis chapters 1 and 2 contain two different (and contradictory) creation accounts. Some Christians who reject Genesis as actual history also concur with this view. But this claim is just simply not true. A careful reading will show that Genesis 1:1-2:2 documents the entire seven-day creation week while Genesis 2:3-25 zooms in on the sixth day to give us the specifics regarding the most important part of God’s creation: mankind. In other words, Genesis 1 is more general while Genesis 2 is more specific.
“Genesis 2 focuses on issues of direct importance to Adam and Eve in the garden, not creation in general.”
Don Batten
But the reason for the confusion is due in part to some apparent contradictions with the order of creation. Because some English translations make it seem like the plants, herbs, and trees were created after Adam in Genesis 2 instead of before as Genesis 1 records (plants on day 3, people on day 6). But remember that “Genesis 2 focuses on issues of direct importance to Adam and Eve in the garden, not creation in general. Notice that the plants and herbs are described as ‘of the field’ in chapter 2 (compare 1:12) and they needed a man to tend them (2:5). These are clearly cultivated plants, not plants in general. Also, the trees (2:9) are only the trees planted in the garden [of Eden], not trees in general. These events relate to God creating the garden, not creation in general.”[1] Some English translations of Genesis 2 also make it seem that Adam came before the animals instead of after as Genesis 1 says. But here again, there is no true contradiction because, “The original Hebrew used in Gen. 2 indicated that God had already (yâtsar) formed the animals from the earth, and then brought them to Adam. He did not create them again.”[2] So this is the order: On day six God made the animals first, then he made Adam second, He then showed the animals He had already made to Adam, so Adam could see that he had no suitable mate. And then God created Eve.[3] The ESV’s translation of Genesis 2:19 follows the meaning of the Hebrew really well here when it says, “Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them.”
So no, Genesis 1 and 2 are not different creation accounts nor are they contradictory and so cannot be discredited as an accurate historical record on these grounds.
Ryan Hembree is a daily co-host, speaker, and writer of Bible Discovery. He also hosts a YouTube channel that shows the unity of the Bible and how science and Scripture fit together. Ryan also has an honorary Masters of Ministry in Creation Science from Phoenix University of Theology.
