CRR writes:
Genesis 1 provides the big picture summary of creation week. So this is God's viewpoint.
Genesis 2 zooms in to day 6 when Adam was created. Now we see things from Adam's viewpoint, something not possible before he was created.
A good explanation is provided by Johnathon Sarfati in "The Genesis Account".
Is the God character in Genesis 1 entirely different than the God character in Genesis 2&3?
No, it is just focusing on different aspects of the one God. Genesis 1 looks at the the big picture, the God of all Creation. The name for God in the chapter, Elohim, reflects this. In Genesis 2 we move in to the view of God who has a personal relationship with mankind, and this is reflected in the use of Jahweh for God.
The different names for God has led to the Documentary Hypothesis, the JEDP view of authorship. This was popular when I studied the OT at university but has come under criticism in recent years. Instead as Sarfati argues in that it is the same God with different names reflecting different roles. This should come as no surprise since we recognise that people can fill different roles in life and be perceived differently in each. Johnathan Thurston is a different person in his role as captain of the Cowboys and as a family man.
Genesis 1 provides the big picture of God as the Creator of the universe. In this big picture view God said, Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,...", then quickly moves on to "so on the seventh day he rested from all his work." in Gen 2:2.
Then Gen 2 steps back to cover the creation of people in more detail.
Why does it start by saying "Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, ...".? These are a specific type of plants distinct from those made on day 3. These are siyach hassadeh, shrub of the field, and eseb hassadeh, plants of the field. These are the cultivated food plants. Similarly in Gen 2:19 some take this to indicate that animals and birds were created after man but the correct translation of the Hebrew
wayyitser is the pluperfect "had formed" which shows they had already been created before Adam.
God formed Adam from
aphar.
Aphar is generally translated as dust but can also mean damp soil. Then God breathed the breath of life into Adam. This does not refer to breathing air but refers to the breath of the spirit of life. Similarly in the New Testament Jesus breathed on his disciples and said to receive the Holy Spirit. Thus Man is in the world and of the world but also has a divine spirit within.
The naming of the animals then establishes Man's dominion and stewardship over the living world but also emphasises his difference to them. Some dispute that Adam would not have had time to name all the animals and birds in one day. However Adam only had to name the livestock (
behemah), birds (
oph hashamayim) and beasts of the field (
chayyat) and the created kinds would have been less than the derived species of today, so this could have been done in a few hours.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. ...Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The word for helper is
ezer and is also used to God being our helper, so it does not indicate that Eve is inferior to Adam. Instead she is
bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
So all of the events in Genesis 2 are consistent with Genesis 1. These are not two separate accounts but one unified account.
Edited by CRR, : No reason given.
Edited by CRR, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2