Which version of Creation is correct Genesis 1 v1-2 or Genesis 2 v4-25?
Consensus of Biblical scholars Some Bible scholars generally accept the notion that Genesis 1 (more than verses 1 & 2) give an "overview" of creation, while Genesis 2 gives more detail, focusing in on Adam, Eve, and the critters Another theory, not well accepted by the "young Earth" believers, is that there is a "gap" between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. See the Related Link "Wikipedia: Gap Creationism" for more information One of the many problems with the "gap" theory is that if GOD had created another Earth before this one, then it would show m to be imperfect and that what He created was flawed and thus rendering all of GOD's Word to be incorrect because we read in Genesis 1:31 "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good If there was a "gap" between 1 & 2, why would God destroy the "very good" creation and keep the flawed one? It is only after the fall in chapter 3 that the only creation mentioned in the Bible stopped being "very good Romans 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: So, since what Romans tells us is correct, it was because of the fall of man that death entered the world.
Man was created to live forever in fellowship with GOD and the fall separated man from GOD and it was Jesus who came and bridged the gap between sinful man and Holy GOD. So if there was a "gap" between chapters 1 & 2 in Genesis then death would have been before the fall of man and not after thus making the Holy Word of God untrue, but since we know that death is a real fact of life we also know that before the fall there was no "gap" and no death So, therefore, it is safe to say that the creation account recorded in Genesis: Shows the "general" overall record of creation and then zero's in on the details of that creation Another Answer Perhaps neither is correct. Perhaps we should look to science for an answer to the origin of the world The creation account in Genesis 1:1-2:4a is believed to have been written by the Priestly source during the Babylonian Exile, and is consistent with the then current beliefs of the Babylonians.
The creation account beginning in Genesis 2:4b is a much older account, believed to have been written by the J source. Because of the discrepancies between the two accounts, it is not possible to regard either one as a summary of the other.
A: The King James Version of the Bible has the verb 'was' twice in Genesis 1:2, with the second occurrence in italics. The KJV does use italics when the word is not a literal …translation of the original, or when the translators were not sure of the intended meaning. Genesis 1:1-2 (KJV): "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." Looking at a modern Jewish copy in English translation, Genesis 1:1-2 reads: "In the beginning of God's creation of the heavens and the earth.
Now the earth was astonishingly empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the water." In spite of the italics, the two version agree on the wording of 'darkness was on the face of the deep', and agree that the earth was empty or without form, but not on the fundamental meaning of the sentence. Since the early centuries of the Common Era, tradition has held that Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning God created heaven and earth."
As long ago as the eleventh century CE, the influential Jewish scholar, Rashi, said that this should read, "When God began to create" or "In the beginning of God's creation ..." In line with this, we see in the Jewish Bible, quoted above, that the earth was pre-existing but empty. Most English translations are inaccurate on the fundamental meaning, but accurate in using 'was' in verse 2. Additional Comments: This question has been discussed for nearly 2,000 years now and there are varying answers.
Perhaps a Hebrew scholar can shed more light on the proper translation of the term translated as 'was.' My understanding is that the word "was" in Genesis 1:2 is the Hebrew word "hayah," which means "to exist, that is, to become, come to pass." Hence, the earth already existed in Genesis 1:2, and it became without form, and void; and darkness covered the face of the deep. Many writings exist on the meaning of Genesis 1:2 with the Ante-Nicean Father, Origen (circa late 2nd to mid 3rd century AD), who wrote in his commentary, 'De Principiis' thought the Earth 'had been cast downwards' suggesting a previous time before the Creation of mankind.
Supplemental Information: When translating from one language into another language, the translator sometimes needs to understand 'CONTEXT', to determine which usage is appropriate. The Hebrew word in question in both Genesis 1:2 and 19:26, the same Hebrew word CAN be translated BOTH ways --- DEPENDING. Depending on understanding the context.
(A loose example might be if a foreigner saw the English word 'bear'.
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.
Related Questions
Whwt is the Comparison of genesis 1 and genesis 2?
Where are the 2 creation stories in Genesis?
What are the creation stories in Genesis?
How does the second Creation story in Genesis vary from the first account?
What are the differences between the first and second creation accounts in Genesis?
Does the Hubble photos match the Creation of Genesis?