Genesis contradictions?


In Genesis chapter 2 the order of creation seems to be different to that in chapter 1 with the animals being created (2:19) after Adam (2:7). Doesn’t the Bible contradict itself here?

Between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve, the KJV/AV Bible says (Genesis 2:19) ‘out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air’. On the surface, this seems to say that the land beasts and birds were created between Adam and Eve. However, Jewish scholars apparently did not recognize any such conflict with the account in chapter 1, where Adam and Eve were both created after the beasts and birds (Genesis 1:23-25). Why is this? Because in Hebrew the precise tense of a verb is determined by the context. It is clear from chapter 1 that the beasts and birds were created before Adam, so Jewish scholars would have understood the verb ‘formed’ in (Genesis 2:19 to mean ‘had formed’ or ‘having formed’. If we translate verse 19 as follows (as one widely used translation1 does), ‘Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field …’, the apparent disagreement with Genesis 1 disappears completely.

The question also stems from the wrong assumption that the second chapter of Genesis is just a different account of creation to that in chapter 1. It should be evident that chapter 2 is not just ‘another’ account of creation because chapter 2 says nothing about the creation of the heavens and the earth, the atmosphere, the seas, the land, the sun, the stars, the moon, the sea creatures, etc. Chapter 2 mentions only things directly relevant to the creation of Adam and Eve and their life in the garden God prepared specially for them. Chapter 1 may be understood as creation from God’s perspective; it is ‘the big picture’, an overview of the whole. Chapter 2 views the more important aspects from man’s perspective.

Genesis 2:4 says, ‘These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens’. This marks a break with chapter 1. This phraseology next occurs in Genesis 5:1, where it reads ‘This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man’.

‘Generations’ is a translation of the Hebrew word toledoth, which means ‘origin’ or ‘record of the origin’. It identifies an account or record of events. The phrase was apparently used at the end of each section in Genesis2 identifying the patriarch (Adam, Noah, the sons of Noah, Shem, etc.) to whom it primarily referred, and possibly who was responsible for the record. There are 10 such divisions in Genesis.


The differences in the toledoth statements of Genesis 2:4 and 5:1 affirm that chapter 1 is the overview, the record of the origin of the ‘heavens and earth’ (2:4)-whereas chapter 2 is concerned with Adam and Eve, the detailed account of Adam and Eve’s creation (5:1,2). The wording of 2:4 also suggests the shift in emphasis: in the first part of the verse it is ‘heavens and earth’ whereas in the end of the verse it is ‘earth and heavens’. Scholars think that the first part of the verse would have been on the end of a clay or stone tablet recording the origin of the universe and the latter part of the verse would have been on the beginning of a second tablet containing the account of events on earth pertaining particularly to Adam and Eve (Genesis 2:4b-5:1a).

Let us apply this understanding to another objection: some also see a problem with the plants and herbs in Genesis 2:5 and the trees in Genesis 2:9. We have already realized that Genesis 2 focuses on issues of direct import to Adam and Eve, not creation in general. Notice that the plants and herbs are described as ‘of the field’ in Genesis chapter 2 (compare 1:12) and they needed a man to tend them (2:5). These are clearly cultivated plants, not just plants in general. Also, the trees (2:9) are only the trees planted in the garden, not trees in general.

Genesis was written like many historical accounts with an overview or summary of events leading up to the events of most interest first, followed by a detailed account which often recaps relevant events in the overview in greater detail. Genesis 1, the ‘big picture’ is clearly concerned with the sequence of events. The events are in chronological sequence, with day 1, day 2, evening and morning, etc. The order of events is not the major concern of Genesis 2. In recapping events they are not necessarily mentioned in chronological order, but in the order which makes most sense to the focus of the account. For example, the animals are mentioned in verse 19, after Adam was created, because it was after Adam was created that he was shown the animals, not that they were created after Adam.

Genesis chapters 1 and 2 are not therefore separate contradictory accounts of creation. Chapter 1 is the ‘big picture’ and Chapter 2 is a more detailed account of the creation…[](“”)

This is from a literal 7 day creationist’s website but that’s not why I posted it. I found it fascinating from a contextual an grammatical point of view that he seemed to synchronize the first two chapters of Genesis quite well. BTW The DRV seems to have gotten Gn 2:19 right:

Gen 2:19 And the Lord God ***having formed ***out of the ground.



Isn’t this just the Yahwhist/Elohist distinction? Not that there aren’t other ways to explain it, but that’s the most common way (but has a lingering odor of modernism).


You dont want to know the answer to this lol… it’s why we have groups of ‘chosen’ people till this day.

But the Hebrew and Rabbi’s will surely lead you down the wrong path. How do I know?

The Hebrew has God working the 7th day.

The LXX has God resting on the 7th day.

OUCH! Sign from God to let us know the real from the fake.


Yes, they are two different accounts of creation. In the first (Genesis 1), man is created last, while in the second (Genesis 2), man is created before the animals, etc.

I am not a seven-day creationist, so I have no trouble with the seeming “contradictions” since I accept that neither account is intended to be scientific or historical. I accept them as inspired scripture that teaches the truth, but in the exact same breath, I accept chapter 1 as a liturgical hymn belonging to the Priestly tradition, and chapter 2 in the genre of sacred myth in the Yahwist tradition (yes, the JEPD hypothesis is compelling, and I lean towards accepting it).

I therefore do not worry about trying to “reconcile” the two because the two accounts are of different literary genres. There is no need for me to reconcile historical fiction, for example with real history, or a movie version of historical events with the actual events. They teach the truth, and that’s enough for me.


Regardless of the genre of the first two chapters of Genesis you do believe they are, in the end, a narrative of real events don’t you?



The proper translation of the Hebrew text relevant to the question of differing creation orders (many of the animals before humans, and the land animals on the same day as humans, on Day 6 in Genesis 1, but animals after humans in Genesis 2) is the focus of the following:

I appreciate the wisdom of my Catholic colleagues in avoiding the error of attempting to force concordance between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 on this point.

Besides some excellent articles from Catholic Answers, here’s another:

The Knights of Columbus also make available some excellent resources at


Thanks for those links, they are very informative and will help with my studies.



DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit