Is the Account of Adam’s Creation in Genesis 2:4-25 Merely a More Detailed Account of the Sixth Day Creation in Genesis 1:24-31?
Steve, Hope you don’t mind , I would like to ask a question. Is the account of Adam’s creation (i.e., formation) in Genesis 2:4-25 simply a more detailed account of the sixth day creation in Genesis 1:24-31? Thanks, K.J.
Steve’s Answer:
Hi KJ,
Thanks so much for your question. Essentially, you’re asking “Did all humans come from Adam and Eve?” The answer is no. Genesis 2:4-25 is not a more detailed account of the sixth day of creation in Genesis 1-24-31.
As you’re about to see, they’re two different and quite separate accounts of two different “creation” events, taking place at two very different times.
If Genesis 2:4-25 were merely a more detailed description of our heavenly Father’s sixth day creation in Genesis chapter 1, it would indeed mean that all races on the earth today must have descended from Adam and Eve alone.
But that, of course, is impossible. You can’t squeeze a genetically Chinese baby out of genetically Caucasian parents. Nor can you end up with a genetically Black baby from genetically Hispanic parents.
If humans of one genetic background could produce babies of any other genetic background (i.e., race), then it would be happening all of the time. But it doesn’t. And that’s because, short of miscegenation (racial intermingling), it simply can’t happen.
Likewise, such a thing would have been commonplace, and noted in the historical records, in both Old Testament times as well as New Testament times. You’d have had, for example, Bible verses saying “And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos, the first black man from Adam’s lineage.” But no such verse exists in the Bible. And that’s because it simply didn’t happen that way.
In short, there’s not a word in the Bible, nor in the historical records, of any couple from one genetic race giving birth to babies of other genetic races, short of some form of miscegenation (racial intermingling) having first taken place.
These things are just not possible. A genetically black couple will produce genetically black children. A genetically white couple will produce genetically white children. A genetically Chinese couple will produce genetically Chinese children. Etc.
So, with that in mind, if a person still chooses to believe the old church tradition that all humans are descended from Adam and Eve, then that person would have to believe in some form of evolution, because the various races would have had to evolve from the Adamic race in order to become their own distinctly different races.
A Cosmopolitan Gene Pool?
Of course, we know evolution is nonsense. But some Christians, eager to keep Adam and Eve listed as the “parents of all mankind,” claim that all of the races could easily have come from Adam and Eve, because “the gene pool was much bigger back then.”
Aha! Adam and Eve had a gene pool that encompassed all races, all genetic populations. That’s quite a lovely solution to the problem, isn’t it? But where is that stated, in the Bible? And where, in science, is it physically demonstrated to be true? Nowhere. All you can find is rank speculation.
Even the so-called “scientific studies” claiming to demonstrate an Adamic gene pool so diverse that all races could have sprung from it are full of weasel words and other escape clauses like “it could be postulated,” or “it might be stated” or “it has been asserted that,” or “if this were to be proven true,” etc.
In other words, like modern churchianity, science gives us little more than rank speculation on the subject. But science disguises the speculation with big, forty-dollar science terms, whereas organized religion uses big forty-dollar theological terms.
What’s more, no one in religion or science can demonstrate how this alleged all-encompassing cosmopolitan gene pool of Adam and Eve’s suddenly disappeared, leaving people of all races, today, to have children only of their own precise genetic racial composition, and nothing more.
In other words, why doesn’t my Irish and German ancestral lineage produce Hispanic children…or Chinese children…or Black children? Quite odd, isn’t it?
As Brandon Ward at World Events and the Bible quite aptly put it some time back, “[Some might say] Adam and Eve had genes that supported multiple ‘skin tones’ and this is how the races were created. Christians are led to believe Adam and Eve were capable of producing two African children who then went on to create the African race. Somehow, this new race of people was only capable of producing a single race, despite the fact they would have possessed multiple ‘skin tone genes’ as well.”
In short, it’s just biologically impossible for all races to have descended from Adam and Eve. Indeed, it flies in the face of science, and of common sense. So let’s take a look at the two accounts, side-by-side, and see what we might discover, on our own, without the encumbrances of mad science and empty church tradition:
Now, if these two accounts are supposed to be accounts of the same act of creation, then the details would, by necessity, be the same.
But as you’re about to see when we compare the details, one account to another, they’re not the same at all. In fact, the details differ quite widely. Let’s take a look at just a few of the important and distinctive differences in the two accounts:
A Difference Worth Noting: Who Came First?
You’ll note in the account of the sixth day creation in Genesis 1:24-31, that God created the animals first (Genesis 1:24-25). Only afterwards did He create mankind, which is to say, the various races except for the Adamic race (Genesis 1:26-28). As it’s written:
Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Clearly, in this narrative of the sixth day creation, the cattle and the beasts of the earth were brought forth first, by God, and only afterwards is mankind brought into being.
But in the account of Adam’s “creation” in Genesis 2, the man is created first, and only afterwards are the animals brought into being by God. Let’s take a quick look to verify this.
Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
Gen 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Gen 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
As you can clearly see, in the account of the sixth day creation (Genesis 1:24-27), the animals were created first (i.e., verses 24-25) and mankind was created afterwards (i.e., verses 26-27). You can’t get around that.
But in the account of God’s “creation” of Adam in Genesis 2:4-25, it’s only after Adam was brought into being by God that the animals were finally created.
Indeed, Adam was brought into being first, in Genesis 2:7, then, the animals were brought into being in Genesis 2:19, some 12 verses later, and were paraded in front of Adam by God Himself, so Adam could name them.
So in that example, alone, we can see that there are two completely different acts of creation being described in Genesis chapters 1 and 2.
In the first account, the animals were created before mankind was ever brought into being (Genesis 1:24-27). And in the second account, a solitary man named Adam is brought into being before the animals (of the garden) were ever created (Genesis 2:7-20).
The two accounts must, therefore, on the strength of the above observations alone, and with no further observation being necessary, be accounts of two different creations. They cannot possibly be the same account.
Another Difference
But let’s take this a little bit further: In the first account, the various races of the sixth day are “created” (Gen. 1:27) by God. But in the second account, the man is “formed” (Gen. 2:7-8) by God. Let’s look at both accounts, one at a time. As it’s written:
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
God created the sixth day mankind. And just so you don’t miss that fact, the word “created” is repeated three times in the same verse.
It’s important to understand that the word translated “created” in the above verse is the Hebrew word bara (i.e., Strong’s H-1254), which literally means “to create,” but in the sense of building something out (such as a family, a house, etc.). It refers, essentially, to a building project.
But in the second account, the man, Adam, is not described as being “created,” at all. Instead, Adam was formed from the dust of the ground (verse 7). As it’s written:
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
The word translated “formed” in that verse is the Hebrew word yatsar (i.e., Strong’s H-3335), which means “to squeeze into shape” or “to mould into form, especially as a potter.”
So, the account of the sixth day creation in Genesis 1:24-31 portrays the introduction of the various races of mankind onto this earth as a massive building project of God’s — lots of races being created and then told to spread throughout the earth (“and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth”).
And the account in Genesis 2:4-25 tells of the formation of a very specific, solitary man, Adam, as a pottery project of God’s. He was placed into a very specific area of the earth (i.e., the Garden of Eden); and thousands of years later his descendants would still be found praying the following prayer, “O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.” (Isaiah 64:8)
Again, we’re looking at two different “creation” accounts, not two accounts of the same creation:
You have one account (Genesis chapter 1) in which the various races of mankind were created and told to “have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth”.
And you have quite a different account (Genesis chapter 2) in which Adamic man is formed out of the clay of the earth, placed into a garden, and told “to dress it and to keep it” (Genesis 2:15).
In other words, in the first account the various races of mankind were originally created to be the earth’s fishermen, wild game hunters, fowlers and foragers — people who depended upon wild game and wild edible plants for food.
They were the so-called “hunter gatherers” who hunted game, fished, or foraged for wild edible plants, long before organized farming was brought into being by Adamic man and later adopted in various forms by most races.
But in the second account, the man Adam is formed specifically to be the gardener, or farmer — making him to this very day the progenitor of the people of this earth who are largely known for their dependence upon and expertise in farming for their sustenance and their livings.
Detail-wise, you can’t fit the details of the first account into the second one. Nor can you fit the details of the second account into the first. Based solely on the details, they’re clearly separate accounts of two different acts of creation by our heavenly Father, taking place at two different time-frames.
And if you don’t know the difference between the one, and the other, then you’re left with the erroneous and quite silly notion that Adam and Eve fathered all races of this earth because they ostensibly had a far more “diverse gene pool” than humans do today, or have ever had since.
Ridiculous, I think you’ll agree.
Another Difference
Let’s look at another interesting difference.
In the first account, mankind is created “male and female,” simultaneously. But as you’re about to see, in the second account, Adam had to wait quite some time after he’s formed by God to enjoy the company of a wife.
Let’s take a quick look at snippets from both accounts:
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
That’s from the account of the sixth day creation (Genesis 1:24-31) in which God created mankind in His own image, and created them “male and female” so they could procreate and obey His command to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish (re-populate) the earth.”
Let’s now take a quick look at the second account in which Adamic man is “formed…of the dust of the ground…”:
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Skip down to verse 19 for the sake of time:
Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Gen 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
Gen 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
As you can see, during the sixth day creation the various races of mankind were created male and female, so they could procreate and “replenish the earth” as God commanded them.
But in the account of Adam’s creation (Genesis 2:7-9), Adam was created alone.
Only after being placed into the garden of Eden…only after God grew the trees in that garden and instructed Adam about them…only after the garden’s animal population was created and brought to Adam so he could name them…only then was Eve made, by God, out of Adam’s “rib.” And rather than being told to “replenish the earth” they were told to… “dress and keep the garden” (Genesis 2:15).
So they cannot be the same account. The details are just too profoundly different. It’s as simple as that.
Another Interesting Difference
If you’ll check, you’ll see that during the creation account of Genesis chapter one, God brought forth the fruit trees, grasses and herbs (vegetables) on the third day of creation, three days before He created mankind.
But in the account in Genesis chapter 2, the man, Adam, is formed first, and only afterwards is the garden planted with all of its trees, and the man is put into the garden to dress and keep it.
Let’s first take a quick look at the third day of creation, to verify that this is when God planted the trees, herbs and other plants :
Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
In other words, long before the various races of mankind was created on the sixth day, the trees and food plants had already been brought into being by God.
But…in the account of Adam’s formation in Genesis chapter 2, the man, Adam, is formed first, and afterwards the garden is planted and the man is put into the garden. Let’s look:
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
So, in this account, Father first “formed man (i.e., Adam) of the dust of the ground.” Only after forming Adam did He “plant a garden” and immediately “put the man whom he had formed” into that garden, and caused to grow “every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food.”
This is quite the opposite of the account of the sixth day creation in which the trees and food plants were grown 3,000 years (or three days, if you must) before mankind was ever created.
The point being, that…
In Genesis chapter 1 the trees and food crops came first, then the various races of mankind were brought onto the scene.
But in Genesis chapter 2, man was formed first, and only afterwards were the trees planted and grown.
Finally, please note that in the Genesis 1 account, there’s no mention whatsoever of a “tree of life” nor of a “tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” Only in the Genesis 2 account of Adam and Eve are these two “trees” mentioned.
Again, two different accounts. Two separate and different acts of “creation” by God. And they’re in two quite different places, the first being the entire earth (i.e., “replenish the earth”), and the second being a very specific area of the earth known as the Garden of Eden.
One More Interesting Difference
In the account of the sixth day creation, the various races of mankind were told that they could eat from the fruit of the trees, as well as “every herb bearing seed,” meaning the grains and vegetables of this earth:
Gen 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.
But in the account of Adam, only the fruit trees are mentioned for food. As it’s written:
Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
And again, as it’s written:
Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
In the account of Adam and Eve, there’s no mention of the grains and vegetables that were made available by God to the people of the sixth day creation. Interesting, isn’t it?
In Conclusion
If you’ll examine the two accounts closely, you’ll see there are many more differences — some huge, and some quite subtle.
For example, in Genesis 1:24-25, God “made” (i.e., asah; Strong’s H-6213) the beasts of the earth, the cattle and “every thing that creepeth upon the earth” en masse. But in Genesis 2:19 God individually “formed” (i.e., yatsar; Strong’s 3355) “every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air” and brought them before Adam to see what he’d name them.
This is why many thinking Christians believe that the beasts and other creatures “made” in the Genesis 1 account were the wild animals of this earth (i.e., lions, tigers, bears, oxen, snakes, lizards, sparrows, hawks, eagles, etc.), whereas the beasts and fowl described in the Genesis 2 account were the domestic farm animals, i.e., cows, sheep, chickens, turkeys, etc.
The bottom line is that the two accounts differ quite dramatically when you examine the details. Some of the details are so egregiously different you simply can’t logically, or Biblically, fit the two accounts together into one, even if you try.
Mankind (i.e., the various races) was created on the sixth day. And Adamic man was not formed by God until the eighth day, directly after God “rested from his labors” on the seventh day. That’s why, in Genesis, the account of Adam’s formation appears immediately after the account of God’s day of rest.
So the account of the creation of mankind in Genesis 1 is quite different than the account of the formation of Adam in Genesis 2.
They’re not two different versions of the same account. They’re two different accounts of two different acts of creation, during two different time-frames, and for two different purposes.
In the first account (Genesis chapter 1), mankind, meaning the various races, are created en masse, male and female, and told to “replenish the earth.” That was their job. Re-populate the planet.
But in the second account (Genesis chapter 2), Adamic man was formed alone, placed into the garden, and God eventually makes a wife for him, from his own body.
What’s more, the couple was not told to replenish the earth, like the people of the sixth day creation were. Instead, Adam is told to farm. That is, to “till the ground” (Genesis 2:5). To “dress and keep” the garden (Genesis 2:15).
So the various races created on the sixth day were originally created by God to re-populate the earth and to become the earth’s fishermen, wild game hunters, fowlers and wild fruit and vegetable foragers.
And Adamic man was originally formed by God to be the farming people of the earth.
It’s really that simple. The Bible makes it that simple. But man and his empty religious and scientific traditions always try to confound the simplicity of God’s Word.
Regards in Christ,
Steve Barwick
Sign up here to receive notifications of Steve’s News & Current Events Commentaries, as well as notifications when new in-depth Bible studies are posted. You’ll also receive a free copy of Steve’ in-depth Bible study, The Four Parts of God’s Plan, when you sign up.