Genesis provides the reader with the story of the world. The creation of the world, twice over actually. There are two creation stories given to us in the book of Genesis. And although they tell a similar story, being in a book as widely criticized and worshiped as the TaNaK we can take a more speculative view of its contents and stories.
In the Seven Day Creation story, Genesis 1:1 to 2:4, God is an all powerful being. He can simply say something into being. He is way above the rest of the world figuratively and literally being that his breath can create something as stunning as the earth. “The Lord said let there be light” is pretty well known in and outside of religious circles. It has almost a magical or mystical feel to it. If the lord can speak and his words create he must be a pretty amazing God. But in Genesis 2:5 to 3:24, the Adam and Eve story we see a different God. The God of Adam and Eve is a very hands on God. Instead of breathing life into everything, he actually has to get out there and get his hands a little dirty - literally. God has to create by shaping and molding dirt into Adam. This change from awe inspiring, all powerful God, to a very anthropomorphic God who interacts with humans is a big change. God is quite the perfectionist in the first story also. If you compare the way God is portrayed, God doesn’t make any mistakes in the Seven Day story. But in the Adam and Eve version he isn’t sure of himself and even goes so far as to collaborate with Adam. This is a far cry from the God we just read about a few paragraphs before. God is also portrayed as a liar in the Adam and Eve story. He tells Eve that she’ll die if she its from the Tree of Conscious. But we find out that it’s not true instead they’ll become more like God. But if we look back to the Seven Day Creation story we are created in God’s image so wouldn’t he want that? But those aren’t the only discrepancies if you want to call them that.
In the Seven Day Creation story God makes animals first and then humans. But if you look right after in the Adam and Eve story animals were made for them. So as a curious reader one would only guess at which one is right, and if we’re to take this book literally I believe we have a conundrum on our hands. Not only that but in the Seven Day Creation story God made animals to be ruled and dominated by humans. In the Adam and Eve story animals are created to keep Adam company. God doesn’t want his only creation to be lonely. But when he sees this it is not fit, Eve is created. As a reader I’m not sure whether I should go hug a deer or shoot it. Either way there are differences in the two creations of man, and his relationship to animals.
The discrepancies don’t end there. God also seems to have two different plans in store for humans. In the Seven Day Creation story God wants humans to go “Multiply and fill the earth and subdue it.” After all we are made in the image of God and we should do as he would and be the conqueror of our realm. But alas we have conflict again as we look to the Adam and Even Story. In the Adam and Eve story God doesn’t want us to go forth and multiply or subdue the earth. Instead he has a place called Eden where humans are to live. And should we subdue Eden and multiply? Nope, instead we are to remain ignorant of good and evil and live in the garden with all the necessary supplies given to us by God. There will be no Subduing in Eden, unless of course it involves cultivating plants like the good gardeners God wants us to be.
God and man do have different relationships in the two stories. In the first creation story God is this untouchable creator in the sky that can breath life or death into us. He creates and then steps back and talks about what a good job he’s done. There is not communication between humans and God. In the second creation story God is anthropomorphic and has a relationship with humans. Rather than creating and standing back, God is involved hands on in the process. When he isn’t sure if he’s doing exactly the right thing he waits for the right response from Adam, it’ almost as if they collaborate. There’s much more of a dialogue between God and humans in the second creation story than the basically non-existent relationship portrayed in the first.
There are also differences in the writing styles. If you read the first creation story it’s almost boring. There isn’t a whole lot of detail. Rather you read about how God did this, and then that, then this, then something else…and so on, you get the point. God is God and he’s doing what he’s doing and we’re going to read about every step he takes in the order that it happens. It’s a very simple text with not much sophistication. However if you look the second creation story the Adam and Eve story we have a much more involved, intricate text. God is still creating but it’s not a humdrum list of the worlds evolution. Rather it’s very involved and shows God questioning himself, being very anthropomorphic. The language is also flowery for a lack of a better word. Instead of God making land and saying it’s good we have “nuggets of pure gold are found, also beautiful bdellium and even lapis lazuli.” The amount of detail far surpasses that of the first creation story. The first creation story contains a text book like manner compared to the romance novel that proceeds it.
In the Documentary Hypothesis the Priestly material is that which is very list like and non-detailed, giving laws and presenting order. It would be in effect what a direction manual is today. The first creation story as I’ve previously stated is very humdrum. It contains a list like approach to the creation of the earth. God created the earth like he was following directions then stopping to pause and make sure he was doing it right. And when he did, he patted himself on the back and said it was good. And if you don’t believe me try this tongue twisting, list like, excerpt from Genesis 1:27, “ So God made man like his Maker. Like God did God make man; Man and maid did he make them.” Well P source isn’t winning any poetry contests anytime soon, but it just goes to show you the type of writing that is involved in the first creation story. The second creation story is quite a bit different however. I know I compared it to a romance novel before but put side by side with the nice piece of prose work in the first creation story it very well could be. The J source or “Yahwehistic” source is one that is colorful, descriptive and more often than not theological unsophisticated portraying God as anthropomorphic. The second creation story is exactly that. God is anthropomorphic, he’s always using his hands to make humans or the earth. He interacts with Adam on a personal basis. God isn’t sitting on high, rather he’s right down in the muck and dirty he’s creating trying to figure out if he did it right. You end up with a God who’s not perfect and even lies even though that’s past the context of our reading. Regardless most people founding a religion are going to want an all powerful, all knowing god, not one who doubts himself and makes mistakes, unsophisticated, sure - why not.
Being that the two creation stories were written at different times we have to look to the type of writing to be able to determine the dates that they were roughly written. The Seven Day Creation story was probably written around 550 BCE after the exile. This would make since because the Priestly material is so list and law driven. Jews not having a temple during this time would want something to keep the order of their religion while the temple was destroyed. The second creation story or the Adam and Even story was probably written around 950 BCE during the United Kingdom of Solomon. It’s easy to remember because most equate Solomon with the poetic psalms so it would make since that this material has a more flowery feel to it even if that isn’t the reason.
These stories can portray accurate and reliable accounts of the creation of the world. Just like the Dinosaurs might have died from a comet or asteroid. I myself do not believe in these creation stories, but that is irrelevant. The point is yes, they could display accurate accounts. But historically speaking I doubt it. If most Jews/Christians/Muslims look at the history of religion its pretty easy to cast some doubt on these stories. You have to look at the evolution of religions before the current ones. I bet Neptune was quite the God at one time and if people doubted Neptune’s existence there would be some retribution. The same goes for the doubters of Christ today, it all has to be taken into a historical context and you must realize that the bible isn’t the word of God but rather the words of many men recounting times long ago in a different language. That in no way demeans the followers of the Judaic religions but most religions do have their own creation story and most are different. So we must ask as serious readers, do their stories hold any less importance than ours. And if so why, shouldn’t God have made them the same way as he made the rest of us, after all we are all decedents of Adam and Eve. Last but not least, who’s got the dinosaur’s back in all of this, where were they during the time of the earth’s creation?