Genesis 1 & 2

Joshua Gelatt christiangrowth.mi at juno.com
Wed Dec 1 13:55:09 EST 1999


Gentlemen,

I am new to this forum so please excuse my comments if they have been
cited previously.

After studying these fist two chapters of Genesis, I find that it is
highly probable that these were two different, yet compatible creation
accounts.  However, this in no way applies a gap in time.  Nor is such a
gap possible to be concluded from the text.  Likewise, this situation
does not prove different authors (at the very least it might prove
different sources).  (I personally can not hold to the idea that chp.
2:4ff is not a creation account, I do not see that the text allows for
such an interpretation)

This account appears to be nothing more than a retelling of the original
account (assuming that the first is the original...but order hardly
matters) for the express purpose of expressing a new thought or
highlighting a certain event.  This is nothing new in the Torah, much
less all of Biblical literature.

Gen 36:1-8 is the account of Asau.  However, in 36:9ff this account is
repeated.  The two accounts parrallel each other, each highlighting a
different aspect.  The former is less formal, and highly narrative.  The
second is rather a technical chronology.  Yet if one could only read the
account starting in verse 9, the text seems to indicate Eliphaz (Esau's
son) was born in the hill country of Seir.  The former account indicated
he was born long before the move to Seir (or at least before).

Now, do these versions contradict each other?  Not at all.  Does this
even prove these accounts are from a different source.  Again, no it does
not  (although, the text itself can neither disprove this assuption
either).  In my opinion, this is the same case with the creation account.

As I see it, these are corrorlary accounts.  The order of creation can
hardly be a factor, as it was not the intent to give specific facts
concerning creation in the second account (or even in the first).  The
first account was of creation as it concerned the power of God,
culminating in the creation of man.  The second account was the account
of creation as it related to man in the garden, setting the stage for the
fall of the perfect world which God had established.  All three stories
(now including chapter 3ff) rely on each other to give us a complete
picture (in literary terms at least) of the account.

Anyway,  these are just some thoughts which I would love to discuss
further.

Respectfully,

Josh Gelatt



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list