[mfblume]

It seems we disagree on so much, and my response here is not a disappointment to that note. lol. But I respect your views.

Originally Posted by Joelel

The difference between creation in the first chapter and formation in the second chapter.The creation of God In Gen.1:1-6.So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.(It don't say how many he created. I believe he created male and female of each race)

There are differences that do not indicate two different creations. I will explain as we continue.

2:7-25 God formed Adam(formed means to take something already created and form it. This is why it says he formed Adam, it don't say he created him. So It is very clear this is two different events.)

Part of Adam was formed, part was not. Because his body was made from earth, he was formed as per his body. But Adam was still created.

Psalm 104 lists the days of creation in precisely the same order as Genesis 1 and refers to LIFE as being "created", but the earth "renewed".

Psa 104:30 KJV Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

That shows the difference between what is formed and created.

We find here ,the creation of man could eat everything but forming. Adam could not.So again we find this is two different events)

I cannot follow your statement here. "could eat everything but forming"? Please clarify.

1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.


2:16-17 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it

This does not prove Adam was not the man created in Genesis 1. We do not read that animals had the sort of comprisal that would allow them to KNOW GOOD AND EVIL, anyway. Adam did. Animals cannot be affected by anything that affects knowledge since they have not that capacity to begin with.

1:24-25.God created the beasts before the man and in 2;19 he formed the beasts after he formed Adam.(So here again we find these are two different events)

Incorrect. Since the emphasis of Genesis 1 is the actual creation, and the emphasis of chapter 2 is Adam and a stage being set for the downfall of mankind, we are going to read events out of chronology in Genesis 2. Gen 2 is a manner of writing that refers to creation of animals just as a sort of way of saying, "And Adam named the animals, which by the way were created from the dust of the ground." It is not saying God created them after Adam but rather explains as a side note their creation when mentioning them. This is done because the whole point of Adam naming them was to FIND A HELP METE. And the SOURCE and ORIGIN of the animals was vastly different than the woman. That explains the difference between how Eve was acceptable and the animals were not. That is why their creation form the ground was mentioned. It was not to show WHEN they were created, but FROM WHAT ORIGIN they were created. The animals came from the ground but Eve came FROM ADAM'S BODY.

This is proved by understanding the manner in which early Semitic writers wrote. I will now prove to you that Genesis 2 was not saying the animals were created AFTER Adam, but rather in the sixth day of Genesis 1 using the style of writing that these early writers used that is proved by other examples of early Semitic writing.

1Ki 7:13 KJV And king Solomon sent and fetched Hiram out of Tyre.

This above verse is mentioned in the context where the previous chapter 6 says the temple was FINISHED.

1Ki 6:9 KJV So he built the house, and finished it; and covered the house with beams and boards of cedar.

1Ki 6:14 KJV So Solomon built the house, and finished it.

1Ki 6:37-38 KJV In the fourth year was the foundation of the house of the LORD laid, in the month Zif: (38) And in the eleventh year, in the month Bul, which is the eighth month, was the house finished throughout all the parts thereof, and according to all the fashion of it. So was he seven years in building it.

We even read of the Palace of Solomon too 13 years to build. And after we read of the temple being COMPLETED, we read, "And king Solomon sent and fetched Hiram from Tyre...and he came to king Solomon, and did all his work; and made the two pillars." If we read that in a chronological manner, we would have to conclude that Solomon did not even get the men expert to build the temple to come to work UNTIL AFTER THE TEMPLE OF WAS BUILT! But it is not saying that. But that is how you read Genesis 2. It is actually the equivalent of our style of writing, "Hiram, whom Solomon fetched from Tyre, made the vessels..."

This is exactly the same case in the same Bible with Genesis 1 and Genesis 2.

(So again we find these are not the same events)In 2;4-5 the man didn't till the ground and 3:19 and2:15 then when he formed Adam, he did till the ground.

It just says there was no man to till the ground in 2:4-5. That did not mean man was created to do so. It shows and stresses that GOD DID THE WORK and not man. And after sin, man had to work.

6:2 The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.(So here we see two different groups of people,the sons of man and the Sons of God.This is where Cain got his wife from ,the sons of man.)

Another error in reading. The sons of God were Seth's descendants. They were servants of God. Since the MEN choose to marry women, and not women making the initial step to choose to marry men, and since godly men are not to marry ungodly women, we read that the SONS OF GOD (males from Seth's line) married "daughters of men" (sinner women from Cain's line).