quote:
no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth [c] and there was no man to work the ground.
It seemed quite obvious.
It's quite obvious that the focus is on the plants - the plants require man, thus man is created. To take it the way you want it, it should focus on man, and man's need for the plants. Which it doesn't.
quote:
Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the groundtrees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food.
it is strongly implied that He made the garden to take care of the man.
No, it is implied weakly at best - and overridden by the far clearer and stronger implication that man was created to look after the garden.
No, it isn't. Anybody capable of reading English should see that.