SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Genesis 1 and 2

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 Next Page )
PosterThread
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5478
NC, USA

 Genesis 1 and 2

I thought I would start a discussion on something other than eschatology. I am starting this topic because I find it very interesting. It may have been discussed here before. If so I can't remember.

As a disclaimer, I am 90% convinced of the "old earth" view of creation; i.e. I don't believe the earth is only 6000 years old or so.

But I am looking for **reasonable** and I stress reasonable harmonization of the events outlined in Gen 1 and those in Gen 2.

As a starting point I believe that the first couple three verses in Ch 2 belong at the end of Ch 1.

In Gen 2:4-6 it seems it is describing a gradual process as opposed to the sudden event of day 3 described in Gen 1.

I would like to keep the discussion just on Gen 2:4-6 for now.

And I would appreciate it if no one makes any dogmatic statements about the age of the earth etc. I am not trying to convince anybody of my view. I just want to have a nice discussion about what the scriptures actually say.

Thanks!
-------------------------

Genesis 2:4-6 This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, before any plant of the field was in the earth and before any herb of the field had grown. For the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground; but a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground.


_________________
Todd

 2016/4/25 10:51Profile
dolfan
Member



Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1632
Alabama

 Re: Genesis 1 and 2

I always read Gen. 2 as simply an expansion of detail about God's creation of Adam and Eve that was summarized in chapter 1, day 6. Some look for a harmonization, but I cannot find the conflict to harmonize.

I also don't think Gen. 2 is purely chronological. By that I mean that the sequence of things mentioned is not necessarily in strict time order. For example, Moses calls the rivers flowing from Eden by name, but that in no way implies God named them or did so during the creation week --necessarily. Moses names Assyria, but Assyria did not exist until way later, as Asshur was the son of Shem.

So, references and descriptions in Genesis 2 cannot be read in strict chronology as if they all occur after chapter 1. Gen 2:4 purports to begin a description of the "generations of the heavens of the earth when they were created". I always read that as, "ok, that is what happened, now here is WHO happened" and off we go.


_________________
Tim

 2016/4/25 12:31Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5478
NC, USA

 Re:

Thanks Tim.

My first question is whether you believe Adam and Eve were created on the same day per Genesis 1:27-28 or do you think only Adam was created day 6 and passage does not require that Eve was also created day 6. The answer to that question affects the ability to harmonize Gen 1 and 2, at least in my eyes.


_________________
Todd

 2016/4/25 13:56Profile
dolfan
Member



Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1632
Alabama

 Re:

Oh, ok.

I think they were both created on day 6. The reference in 1:27 seems to be in context with the day 6 activity, and the creation would not have been finished for God to "rest" from had she been created later. That is why I see Gen 2 as expanded version of day 6 in ch. 1.


_________________
Tim

 2016/4/25 14:29Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5478
NC, USA

 Re:

I agree that it appears she was created the same day.


Therefore, these are the events I see on day 6 in Gen 2, if Gen 1 & 2 can be harmonized:

-no vegetation because God had not yet caused it to rain and no man to till the ground
-a mist went up from the earth
(these 2 points must be between day 2 and 3 or all on day 3)
-God formed Adam
-God planted a garden
-God put Adam there (alone)
-God made everything grow (again this seems counter to the order described for day 3 and day 5 in Gen 1)
-Adam warned not to eat of tree of KOGE
-God notices Adam is alone
-God formed the animals and birds (again it seems in Gen 1 that animals were formed first, then man)
-God brought beasts and birds to Adam for naming
-Adam named the animals
-Adam noticed there were no women
-God put Adam to sleep and took out a rib
-God creates Eve out of the rib
-Eve presented to Adam


_________________
Todd

 2016/4/25 15:37Profile
dolfan
Member



Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1632
Alabama

 Re:

Do you think, Todd, that everything described as having happened inside the text of Gen. 2 must have happened on day 6? I don't.

For example, 2:8 "The LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed." It may be that God planted the garden on day 3, but its significance to Adam etc. lies in that part of the events specified in Ch. 2. 2:8 doesn't read in English as if God planted the garden after He made Adam (nor does it read like He planted it necessarily before Adam, to be fair). Wish I knew Hebrew! :)

Another reason I say so is because the sprouting up of trees in 2:9 may very easily be part of 1:11-13. It is also possible, I think, that not everything in 1:11-13 happened right then. (CAVEAT TO ALL: I did not say this means old earth. K? It is possible that the initiation of growth in 1:11-13 day 3 could have quickly grown to maturity wherever God said for it to do so so that by day 6 at 2:9 ff. when Adam and Eve are created there is a garden with trees of life and knowledge in them).

By the same token, Gen. 2:19 would not be after the creation of Adam and Eve, but is simply a statement of what He had already done (compare 1:20-25) in order to set the more detailed stage in 2:20-25 for the naming and the fascinating rationale and revelation of God's nature in creating Eve.

That is how I have always understood it. I have never been curious enough about reading Gen. 1 and 2 as conflicting creation narratives to follow through on why people may not feel comfortable with them or see a tension in them. I just never saw a reason to think there was one. Do you think there is a real tension between the two chapters?

And can we all agree that it is okay if anyone does? We can have real questions.


_________________
Tim

 2016/4/25 17:58Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5478
NC, USA

 Re:

I sort of see a tension because it states that Eve was created after Adam named the animals. It reads like God brought the animals to Adam to find a suitable helper, but even the animals in their perfect state didn't cut the mustard, so God made Eve.

It just seems like a lot happened on day 6 per chapter 2. Remember all the animals AND Adam and Eve were created on the same day.

Some folks go so far as to say that Ch 2 tells a different creation story.

I tend to agree with you that Ch 2 is more of a footnote to Ch 1. Just not sure how it lines up exactly. Some day we will find out.


_________________
Todd

 2016/4/25 18:15Profile









 Re:

Before the fall it was male and female Adam. Adam named female Adam Eve after the fall.

This is important but not relavent to this thread so I will leave it at that.

marcmc

 2016/4/25 18:46
JHerndon
Member



Joined: 2010/8/1
Posts: 92
Bonifay,Fl

 Re:

I have always felt that ch2 was a more detailed account of chapter 1.. On a side note and not to drift too far from the intentions of the original post. I attend a church where a lot of people hold to the gap theory meaning there is an unknown amount of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. Anyone here know more about this theory? The only person I've come across that teaches this is dake and I'm not a big fan. I'm curios to hear more about it genuinely. I don't want this to turn into the creation side of the millennial discussions lol just trying to understand a point of view different than mine


_________________
Joshua Herndon

 2016/4/27 21:46Profile
dolfan
Member



Joined: 2011/8/23
Posts: 1632
Alabama

 Re:

I don't think the gap theory works, and I disagree with it. BUT....honest people who truly love Jesus and seriously believe and study the bible can certainly believe it. To that extent, visit Chuck Missler's website. If you are gonna listen to someone explain it who does a fair job of it and believes it, he does it well IMO.


_________________
Tim

 2016/4/27 21:56Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy