Critics sometimes assert that Genesis 1:1–2:3 and 2:4–25 present two separate creation accounts and that they contradict in relation to (a) the divine name and (b) the timing of the creation of plants, animals, and humans. Specifically, Genesis 1:1–2:3 refers to “God” and presents the creation of plants, then animals, then humans, whereas Genesis 2:4–25 refers to the “LORD God” and presents the creation of Adam, then plants, then animals, then Eve. However, both Jews and Christians have read Genesis 1–2 for millennia as presenting a unified narrative and not containing any true contradictions. Do Genesis 1–2 contain contradiction? If not, how are they reconciled? This article will analyze these questions, showing that these chapters are complementary, not contradictory.
To begin, Genesis 1:1–2:3 and 2:4–25 form one creation story, not two separate accounts. Genesis 1:1–2:3 gives a broad overview of the creation of the cosmos in six days, including a summary of the creation of humankind in verses 26–30. Genesis 2:4–25 gives an extended explanation of how the sixth day of creation transpired in relation to the experience of Adam and Eve specifically within the garden of Eden. In other words, Genesis 1:1–2:3 and 2:4–25 fundamentally differ in purpose. Hence, the variances that readers observe in these passages, whether with respect to God, plants, animals, or humans, result from differences in purpose and scope, not problems with contradiction.
God
Concerning the divine name, Genesis 1:1–2:3 refers to God (Elohim), whereas Genesis 2:4–25 refers to the LORD God (YHWH Elohim). Critics frequently cite this difference as evidence that a redactor subsequently stitched these two creation accounts together. However, the difference in names results from a difference in purpose. Genesis 1:1–2:3 refers simply to Elohim because it concerns cosmological origins broadly; Elohim is the supreme, transcendent God of creation. Genesis 2:4–25 refers to YHWH Elohim because it concerns anthropological origins specifically; YHWH Elohim is a personal God who forms relationships with human beings. Thus, these two passages do not contradict.
Plants
Concerning the creation of plants, Genesis 1 tells of the sprouting of vegetation (vv. 11–12) prior to the making of humankind (vv. 26–27), whereas Genesis 2 tells of the forming of Adam (v. 7) prior to the sprouting of vegetation (vv. 5, 8–9). Again, critics see a contradiction between these two passages. However, this difference is not a contradiction because Genesis 1 concerns the initial creation of vegetation on day three and Genesis 2 concerns a subsequent creation of vegetation on day six. In ordering the world, God created vegetation before creating humankind; then, having made Adam, God caused yet more vegetation to grow. That God caused more vegetation to grow should not strike readers as strange because He has continued to cause more vegetation to grow (Psalm 104:14).
More specifically, Genesis 1:11–12 refers to seed-bearing plants and seed-bearing fruit trees, whereas Genesis 2:5 refers to shrubs and plants of the field—not the same. Genesis 1:11–12 refers to seed-bearing fruit trees upon the earth, whereas Genesis 2:8–9 refers to trees that are pleasing to the sight and good for food in the garden—again, not the same. Additionally, Genesis 2 does not state God had not previously created any vegetation at all. Hence, the fact that God forms vegetation after His initial act of creation does not mean that accounts of subsequent creation contradict the original account. In a manner of speaking, God created and continues to create.
Animals
Concerning the creation of animals, Genesis 1 tells of the creation of animals (vv. 20–25) prior to the creation of humankind (vv. 26–27), whereas Genesis 2 tells of the creation of Adam (v. 7) prior to the formation of animals (v. 19). Again, critics assert inconsistency. At least two explanations may be given for reconciling these two passages. First, the ESV and NIV translations take the verbal tense of Genesis 2:19 as pluperfect, indicating that God had previously formed these animals prior to creating Adam, which would make Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 consistent in the ordering of animals and humans. According to this idea, this verbal tense normally translates as simple past (e.g., Genesis 1:21) but may also translate as pluperfect in certain cases, such as that in Genesis 2:19. However, most translations render this verb as simple past (“God formed,” not “God had formed”), which does not solve the problem.
A better explanation distinguishes the purpose and scope of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Genesis 1 explains God’s initial act of creating all animals upon the earth: animals of the water, the sky, and the land, including beasts, cattle, and creeping things. Genesis 2 explains God’s process of making a helper suitable for Adam in Eden, part of which included forming additional beasts and birds in the garden. Accordingly, these animals were on the earth beforehand, but they were not specifically in the garden at that time prior to God forming them there.
This interpretation is supported by Genesis 2:20, which explains that Adam named not only the beasts and the birds but also the cattle, the implication being they were already in the garden. If Genesis 2 were a second creation account, it would be strange to mention naming cattle without having previously mentioned creating them (v. 19). Additionally, as with the plants, Genesis 2 does not state God had not previously created any animals at all. Thus, just as God continues to grow the grass (Psalm 104:14), He also continues to make the animals (104:24–25), even after His initial act of creation.
Interestingly, Genesis 2 does not mention creeping things or water animals. Again, if it were a second creation account, this omission would seem strange. However, because it is a specific episode on day six, it is not strange at all. Consequently, creeping things and water animals are not mentioned because Adam’s naming them was not relevant to God’s process of making a suitable helper. Incidentally, creeping things were in the garden (or at least would be) because the serpent forms an integral part of the story told in Genesis 3.
Humankind
Finally, concerning the creation of humankind, Genesis 1 tells of the creation of male and female (v. 27), whereas Genesis 2 tells of the creation of Adam (v. 7) and then of Eve (vv. 21–22). Again, critics contend contradiction. However, these two passages are not incompatible even on their face. Genesis 1 simply states that God created human beings as male and female on day six; it does not say He created them at the same time. Genesis 1 explains that man and woman were created, whereas Genesis 2 explains how they were created; Genesis 1 gives a summary, whereas Genesis 2 gives a fuller narrative. Hence, Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 do not contradict in relation to their accounts of human creation.
Additionally, as with plants and animals, God continues to form human beings after His initial act of creating them (Psalm 139:13). Subsequent creation is inconsistent with prior creation, whether with plants, animals, or humans.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Genesis 1:1–2:3 and 2:4–25 do not contradict in relation to the divine name or the timing of the creation of plants, animals, and humans. These two passages use different names for God because they have different purposes and scopes. Concerning the creation of plants and animals, Genesis 1 refers to the initial act of creation upon the earth, whereas Genesis 2 refers to subsequent acts of creation within the garden. Finally, concerning humankind, Genesis 1 gives an overview, whereas Genesis 2 gives the specifics.
Recent Comments