What are the differences between the first and second creation accounts in Genesis?

There is really only one creation account which is written in two parts, according to well known ancient literary procedure The first part of the account deals with a general description of the totality of what God made. The intention is not to provide a detailed scientific list of everything, but to clearly indicate that God made everything that exists, as well as ordering the things He made The second part goes into more detail about the creation of man and man's role as well as the origin of woman and marriage. The other parts of the creation are not in focus in the second part as it is dealing particularly with man and thus the animals are only mentioned in relation to how they relate, or don't relate to man Answer The creation stories in Genesis 1:1-2:4a (the first sentence in verse 2:4) and Genesis 2:4b-2:25 are different because they had different authors.

The first creation story is attributed to the source now known as the Priestly source, and is believed to have originated in Mesopotamia. The second story is attributed to the Yahwist source and is much older in Judaism, and therefore more primitive Scholars say that the first creation story, with its emphasis on the pre-existing waters, came from a coastal or maritime culture. The second creation story, which does not mention the ocean but emphasises on the lack of rain, developed in an arid, inland environment One of the most frequently noted differences betwen the two accounts is the sequence of creation.In the first creation account, all the plants and animals are created before man, both male and female, who are created together.

In the second creation account, God creates a man, Adam, then plants a garden and creates the animals, then finally creates Eve Answer The first creation account in Genesis (it actually goes up to the first sentence of verse 2:4) is believed to have been written by the Priestly ('P') source during the sixth-century-BCE Babylonian Exile, based on Babylonian creation myths. It has been suggested that this account arose in a culture that was familiar with the oceans. The second creation account (from the second sentence of verse 2:4) is much older in Judaism and was written by the Yahwist ('J') source.

It has been suggested that this account originated in an arid environment - consistent with mountainous, landlocked Judah. The Genesis 1 account is more structured and defines the number of days that God took to create everything. The waters were pre-existing and the wind blew across the face of the waters.

There was already land under the waters, but God had to draw the waters together, to allow the land to appear. Man (and woman) were created last of all - not necessarily only one of each. The Genesis 2 account is more primitive in some ways.

There is no mention of creation of the firmament or the sun, moon and stars (lights). The land was pre-existing and plants would grow without divine creation, once God sent rain. God needed dust from which to create Adam, just as he needed a rib in order to create Eve.

Adam was the first creation of God, while Eve was the last creation Answer Modern archaeology has revealed that the literary usage of Genesis 1 and 2 was known and used in the ancient world. This is simply an account of a general nature followed by a second account which gives details about a certain aspect of the former Thus it is known among scholars that there is only one Genesis account of creation in two parts. The first part deals with the creation of the world and universe.

The second part dwells in detail with the creation of man and his place in the creation Further to this, the Ebla Creation tablet, which contains details similar to the Genesis 1 account is understood by scholars to totally refute the JEDP Theory which postulates a much later date as well as different sources. The Ebla Tablet dates much earlier than anything previously found and so supports the natural reading of Genesis as by one author who used the common literary usage of the day. The differences in the two 'accounts' (which are really two parts of the one account) thus relate simply to the subject matter.

The first account relates in a general sense to everything that was made, although it does refer to the creation of man. The second part of the account being more detail about the creation of man. One important difference is that the first part refers to the chronology and gives details about what was made each day.

The second part, in focusing on man, does not refer to chronology but to man and his place or staus as 'head' over the creation As stated above, the differences thus are to do entirely with differences in the subject matter by the author. They have nothing whatsoever to do with a theory of literary origins which is thoroughly refuted in every one of its main tenets by the facts of archaeology and also has no evidence whatsoever of any writing by the alleged different authors nor any knowledge of who they really were, despite the fact they wrote such important works. Thus when one realizes the differences in terms of the nature of the two different parts of the creation account then these differences are quite understandable.

They are differences in emphasis and not contradictory in terms of their detail Answer.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.