Are There Two Creation Accounts In Genesis?

Summary

This video script explores the debate over the unity of the creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2. It challenges the Documentary Hypothesis, which suggests these accounts are from separate sources combined by a redactor. The script argues for a unified narrative, highlighting literary and thematic coherence, parallels in ancient Near Eastern texts, and the possibility that the accounts complement each other rather than contradict. It also discusses the potential influence of a later redactor on the text and questions the preservation of original sources, concluding that Genesis 1-11 likely functions as a cohesive narrative.

Takeaways

• 📜 The script discusses the debate over whether the creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2 are contradictory or complementary, challenging the Documentary Hypothesis that suggests they are from separate sources.
• 🔍 It highlights that some scholars argue for a unified narrative, suggesting that the two accounts were intentionally written to complement each other rather than contradict.
• 🌐 The script points out that the style change between Genesis 1 and 2 is not necessarily indicative of different sources, drawing parallels to other ancient texts that also change style.
• 🎭 It mentions ancient Near Eastern accounts that contain doublets of creation, suggesting that Genesis 1 and 2 might follow a similar pattern of general and specific creation narratives.
• 🌳 The argument is made that Genesis 2 is not a second creation account but a continuation that focuses on the specifics of human life and relationship with God in the context of the garden of Eden.
• 📖 The script discusses the possibility that the supposed distinctions between the J and P sources in Genesis might be illusory, with both sources showing close ideological ties.
• 👥 It suggests that the anthropomorphic language attributed to the J source is also present in P, and the use of divine names like Elohim and Yahweh may signify different narrative focuses rather than separate sources.
• 🕋 The script draws parallels between the Garden of Eden and the Tabernacle, suggesting that the garden functions as an archetypal sanctuary and that Adam's role aligns with that of a priest.
• 📚 It also notes the structural and thematic coherence in the broader context of Genesis 1-11, which might be disrupted if the text is forcibly divided into J and P sources.
• 🔗 The conclusion is that the text of Genesis 1-11 functions well as a unified narrative, with the first part covering general aspects and the second part detailing specifics, challenging the need to separate it into contradictory accounts.

Q & A

What is the Documentary Hypothesis and how does it relate to the creation accounts in Genesis?

The Documentary Hypothesis is the idea that the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the Bible, was originally composed of four separate sources, which were later combined into one text. It suggests that the creation accounts in Genesis 1 and 2 are two distinct accounts from different ancient Israelite sources, which were allegedly combined by a redactor into the present form of the Pentateuch.

How do some scholars argue that Genesis 1 and 2 were meant to function as a unified narrative?

Some scholars argue that Genesis 1 and 2 were written to complement each other, with Genesis 1 covering the creation of the world and humanity in general terms, and Genesis 2 focusing on the specifics of mankind's creation and relationship with God in the context of the Garden of Eden. This approach sees the two accounts as a doublet nature of a unified text, similar to other ancient Near Eastern texts.

What evidence is there to suggest that the two creation accounts in Genesis are not contradictory but complementary?

Evidence includes the literary structure of Genesis, where Genesis 1 sets the stage for the cosmos and humanity, and Genesis 2 provides a detailed sequel focusing on the specifics of human creation and life in the Garden of Eden. Additionally, the presence of similar themes and motifs in both accounts, such as the establishment of light and the creation of humans in the image of God, suggests a coherent narrative flow.

How do ancient Near Eastern texts provide a parallel to the doublet nature of the creation accounts in Genesis?

Ancient Near Eastern texts, such as the Atrahasis, contain doublets of creation stories, where one account covers general terms and another provides specific details. This parallels the structure of Genesis, where the first account is more general and the second more specific, suggesting a similar narrative technique.

What is the significance of the 'toledoth' formula in Genesis 2:4 and how does it relate to the narrative flow of Genesis 1 and 2?

The 'toledoth' formula in Genesis 2:4 is used to introduce the chapter and suggests a continuation from the events of Genesis 1. It implies that the events of Genesis 2 occurred after the seven days of creation described in Genesis 1, indicating a narrative flow rather than a contradiction.

How does the concept of 'Imago Dei' (image of God) in Genesis 1 relate to the detailed accounts in Genesis 2 and 3?

The concept of 'Imago Dei' in Genesis 1 is expanded upon in Genesis 2 and 3, where the specific roles and relationships of the first humans, Adam and Eve, are explored within the context of the Garden of Eden. These chapters provide commentary on what it means to be created in the image of God, including the unique relationship between male and female, the search for knowledge, and the exercise of free will.

What is the significance of the geographical focus in Genesis 2, and how does it differ from the cosmic focus of Genesis 1?

Genesis 2 focuses on a specific geographical region, the land of Eden, where God creates a garden and places the first humans. This is a departure from the cosmic focus of Genesis 1, where the creation is universal. The shift to a specific location allows for a detailed exploration of human life, work, and relationship with God in a sacred space.

How do the themes of Genesis 1-4 relate to the structure and symbolism of the Tabernacle as described in the Priestly texts?

The themes of Genesis 1-4, including the creation, the establishment of humanity in a sacred space, and the fall from grace, parallel the structure and symbolism of the Tabernacle as described in the Priestly texts. This includes the consecration of space, the duties of priests, and the importance of sacrifice, suggesting a unified narrative that aligns with the cultic practices of the time.

What challenges are there to the Documentary Hypothesis regarding the preservation of sources in the text of Genesis?

Challenges to the Documentary Hypothesis include the difficulty in separating the sources without disrupting the literary unity of the text, the presence of motifs and themes assigned to one source throughout the other, and the observation that ancient scribes rarely preserved their sources intact but rather used them to create new texts.

How does the structure of Genesis 1-11 support the argument for a unified narrative rather than a combination of separate sources?

The structure of Genesis 1-11, with its parallel accounts of creation and recreation, the fall of humanity and civilization, and the inclusion of genealogies, suggests a coherent narrative flow that would be disrupted by separating the text into different sources. This structure supports the argument that the text was written as a unified narrative.

Outlines

00:00

📜 The Documentary Hypothesis and Genesis Interpretation

This paragraph introduces the concept of the Documentary Hypothesis, which suggests that the first two chapters of Genesis present two distinct creation accounts that were later combined. It discusses the differences between the accounts, such as the order of creation and the inclusion of the Sabbath. Scholars have assigned these accounts to different sources within the Pentateuch, known as the J and P sources. However, critics argue that these chapters may have been intended to complement each other, with Genesis 1 providing a general overview and Genesis 2 focusing on specifics. The paragraph also mentions examples from ancient Near Eastern literature where similar narrative techniques are used, suggesting that the Genesis accounts could be part of a unified narrative rather than separate sources.

05:03

🌳 Literary Structure and Unity in Genesis 1-2

The second paragraph delves into the literary structure of Genesis 1 and 2, challenging the notion that they represent contradictory accounts. It discusses the chiastic structure of Genesis 2:4, suggesting that the chapters were intended to be unified. The paragraph also explores the use of the toledoth formula, which is typically used to introduce the descendants or what comes after a person, implying a sequential rather than contradictory relationship between the chapters. Furthermore, it examines the focus of Genesis 2 on a specific geographical region, Eden, and how it complements the broader creation narrative of Genesis 1. The argument is made that Genesis 2 is a sequel to Genesis 1, providing details on the creation of humanity in a specific context, rather than a separate creation account.

10:05

🛡️ Sanctuary Symbolism and Priestly Themes in Genesis

The third paragraph explores the presence of sanctuary symbolism and priestly themes throughout the Eden narrative in Genesis 2 and 3. It draws parallels between the Garden of Eden and the Tabernacle, noting similarities in layout, symbolism, and function. The paragraph discusses how the garden's entrance, the presence of precious stones, and the central location of the Tree of Life mirror the design of the Tabernacle. It also examines the role of Adam as a priestly figure within the sacred space, performing duties akin to those of the Levites. The narrative's focus on the establishment of humanity's role and relationship with God in the context of sacred space is emphasized, suggesting a coherent and intentional literary design rather than a compilation of disparate sources.

15:06

📜 The Coherence of J and P Sources in Genesis 1-4

This paragraph continues the examination of the literary unity of Genesis 1-4, challenging the Documentary Hypothesis's division of the text into J and P sources. It points out the presence of priestly language and themes in sections typically attributed to the J source, suggesting a more complex interweaving of sources than previously thought. The paragraph also discusses the narrative flow and thematic connections between the creation, the fall, and the subsequent chapters, arguing that they form a coherent sequence rather than a disjointed compilation. The argument is made that the text, as it stands, functions well as a unified narrative, with each part contributing to the overall message and structure, rather than being a patchwork of separate sources.

20:06

🌟 The Unified Narrative of Genesis 1-11

The final paragraph broadens the scope to Genesis 1-11, arguing for the text's unity and coherence as a single narrative. It discusses the structural and thematic parallels between the creation and recreation accounts, the fall of humanity and civilization, and the inclusion of genealogies. The paragraph also addresses the challenges to the Documentary Hypothesis posed by the consistent narrative flow and the difficulty in separating the sources without disrupting the text's literary unity. It concludes by suggesting that Genesis was written as a unified narrative, with the potential use of sources that have been integrated into a singular, cohesive story that resonates within its cultural and religious context.

Keywords

💡Documentary Hypothesis

The Documentary Hypothesis is a theory in biblical criticism that suggests the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, were compiled from four distinct sources, known as J, E, P, and D. In the script, this hypothesis is discussed in relation to the two creation accounts in Genesis, with scholars suggesting that these accounts are from different sources that were later combined.

💡Pentateuch

The Pentateuch refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Torah in Jewish tradition. These books are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The script discusses the Documentary Hypothesis' view of these books, proposing that they were not originally a single, unified text but were compiled from various sources.

💡Redactor

A redactor, in biblical studies, is an editor who compiles and revises different sources into a coherent text. The script mentions the role of a redactor in combining the J and P sources, suggesting that this figure may have been responsible for the final form of the creation narrative in Genesis.

💡J Source

The J Source, or Yahwist Source, is one of the four hypothesized sources of the Pentateuch according to the Documentary Hypothesis. It is believed to be one of the earliest sources and is characterized by the use of the name Yahweh (or Jehovah) for God. The script discusses how the J Source might have contributed to the creation account in Genesis 2.

💡P Source

The P Source, or Priestly Source, is another of the four hypothesized sources of the Pentateuch. It is named for its focus on priestly concerns and rituals. The script suggests that the P Source might be responsible for the creation account in Genesis 1, which has a different style and order of creation compared to Genesis 2.

💡Sacred Space

Sacred Space, as discussed in the script, refers to a location that is set apart for religious or spiritual purposes, such as a temple or sanctuary. The concept is used to explain the significance of the Garden of Eden in Genesis 2-3, where it is presented as a place where God dwells and where humans are meant to worship.

💡Imago Dei

Imago Dei is a Latin term meaning 'image of God,' referring to the belief that humans are created in the likeness of God. The script discusses how the concept of Imago Dei is introduced in Genesis 1 and then further explored in the following chapters, particularly in relation to humanity's role and purpose in the world.

💡Cosmic Temple

The Cosmic Temple is a concept that views the universe as a temple or sacred space where God dwells. The script suggests that the creation account in Genesis 1 can be understood as the establishment of the cosmos as God's temple, with subsequent chapters detailing the roles and responsibilities of humans within this sacred framework.

💡Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human characteristics or behavior to a god, animal, or object. The script notes that while the P Source is often considered to present God in a more distant manner, there are also anthropomorphic elements within it, suggesting a more personal and intimate relationship between God and humans.

💡Cultic Sequence

A cultic sequence refers to a series of religious rituals or practices that are performed in a particular order. The script discusses how the narrative of Genesis 1-11 follows a cultic sequence, with the establishment of the cosmos, the fall of humanity, and the necessity of sacrifice to restore relationship with God.

Highlights

Genesis 1 and 2 appear to present two different creation accounts, leading to scholarly debates on their origins and relationship.

Source critical scholars suggest that the Pentateuch, including the creation accounts, was compiled from four distinct sources by a redactor.

Critics argue that the differences between the two creation narratives may indicate they were meant to complement each other rather than contradict.

Ancient Near Eastern literature often contains doublets or parallel accounts of events, suggesting a similar narrative technique in Genesis.

The style change between Genesis 1 and 2 might not indicate different sources but could be a literary device similar to other ancient texts.

The ' Documentary Hypothesis' is challenged by evidence suggesting that Genesis 1 and 2 were intended as a unified narrative.

The use of the toledoth formula in Genesis 2:4 suggests a continuation from the general to the specific, rather than a new creation account.

The focus of Genesis 2 is on a specific geographical region, Eden, rather than a repetition of the creation of the entire world.

The lack of cultivated crops in Genesis 2:5 is not a contradiction but a detail specifying the agricultural state of the region of Eden.

The creation of animals in Genesis 2 is for the purpose of being named by man, not for inhabiting the Earth, indicating a specific event within Eden.

The narrative of Genesis 2 explains how humans function in sacred space, in contrast to Genesis 1 which addresses the cosmos.

The presence of both J and P elements throughout Genesis suggests a more complex relationship between the sources than a simple combination.

The structure of Genesis 1-11 shows a parallel flow that would be disrupted if J and P sources were separated, indicating a unified narrative.

The number of divine designations in Genesis is evenly distributed between the creation and post-creation narratives, suggesting a deliberate literary structure.

The concept of the 'Imago Dei' (image of God) in Genesis 1 is further elaborated in Genesis 2-3, reinforcing the idea of a unified narrative.

The parallels between the Garden of Eden and the Tabernacle, including sanctuary symbolism and priestly functions, challenge the distinction between J and P sources.

The narrative flow and thematic consistency in Genesis suggest that it was written as a cohesive text rather than a compilation of separate sources.

Transcripts

if you pick up your Bible and start at

the very beginning you can read the

Genesis creation account in chapter 1.

but in Chapter 2 we find what appears to

be another creation account

man has created before plants and

animals but woman is not created until

the very end

whereas in Genesis 1 plants come first

then animals and then both male and

female are created together in the image

of God

because of this many Source critical

Scholars suggest there were two distinct

creation accounts they were part of

different ancient Israelite sources

allegedly a redactor combined four

different sources from Israel's past

into the present form of the pentateuch

the five books of Moses

when this happened the two creation

accounts were put side by side in the

pentateuch even though they contradict

however this hypothesis is not without

its critics there is a lot of evidence

that suggests Genesis 1 and 2 Were Meant

to function as a unified narrative

thank you

the documentary hypothesis is the idea

the five books of Moses the pentateuch

was originally four separate sources

that were combined into one

Genesis 1 to 11 is a mix of the J and

the P source

Source critics will assign the creation

account of Genesis 1 to 2 4A to the

peace Source in Genesis 2 4B to 426 to J

the reason for this is because it

appears on the surface that the two

accounts contradict at the end of the

first account God has finished his work

of creating plants animals and humans

and then rests

but then in Genesis 2 it says there were

no plants in the land

then it appears man is created again

followed by plants animals and then

woman

so it is argued that the best

explanation for these alleged

differences is that there were two

separate creation accounts combined into

one

however it may not be that these two

accounts contradict it may have been

written as they were to complement each

other

first a change in style between Genesis

1 and 2 may not be an indication of

different sources James W Watts says

Egyptian myths Mortuary autobiographies

and Royal inscriptions often switched

between prose to himnic poetry and Back

Again

Joshua Berman notes the Kadesh

inscription preserves two accounts of

the same battle and they vary in style

and details of how the battle played out

merely having two different accounts

side by side is not necessarily evidence

that we have two sources stitched

together

second Isaac kikawada has argued there

are ancient near Eastern accounts that

contain doublets of the creation of

mankind

one in general terms in another and

specific terms

he draws attention to the atrocasus and

the story of enki and ninma

in the atrocasus the goddess mommy

finishes her work and then says she has

completed her tasks and the workload of

the Gods has been transferred to mankind

but then we read after this she goes on

to create seven pairs of humans marriage

and childbirth are instituted and then

the people begin laboring for the Gods

so could we conclude there are two

creations of humanity in the atrohasis

kikawata suggests the first section

covers General aspects regarding the

creation of mankind and how their fate

will be decreed then the second half

covers the creation in specific terms

part two is a sequel in specifics that

follow the general proclamations of the

first half

he says the technique of bringing two

independent Parts together into a

unified narrative is quite similar to

the way in which a bicolon and poetry is

composed namely by juxtaposition of two

similar materials according to the

principle of parallelism of the members

in Genesis the first account covers the

creation of the world and how God

controls the cosmos

humanity is only spoken of in general

terms

the second account hones it on Mankind

and how man is meant to live in his

world and his relationship to God

having two accounts side by side one

covering General aspects and another

covering details may not be an

indication of contradictory accounts

from different sources but represented

doublet nature of a unified text

like what we find in other texts from

the ancient near East

furthermore it can be challenged that

the two accounts were contradictory

instead they may complement one another

John Walton Catherine McDowell have

suggested Genesis 2 and 3 were meant to

be a sequel to Genesis 1.

Genesis 2 4 uses a toledoth formula to

introduce the chapter

First Source critics often break this

verse up stating the first part belongs

to P or Priestly redactor and the second

part is the opening of the J account

however the whole verse itself has an

internal chiastic structure with

infinitive construct forms of the Hebrew

verbs to create and to make found at the

center of the chiasm

this suggests the chapters Were Meant To

Be unified and cannot be divided as

Source critics suggest

Genesis 2 4 was meant to be understood

as the beginning of the account that

focuses on specifics while being

understood to flow seamlessly from

chapter one

second when this phrase appears at other

places in Genesis it always is used to

introduce the descendants of someone or

what comes after the person

given this logic when the phrase is used

in Genesis 2 the author is likely

suggesting that what follows happened

after the seven days of Genesis 1.

following the ancient near Eastern

parallels we discussed Genesis 1 can be

seen as referring to the cosmos in

humanity in general terms then Genesis 2

and 3 focus on the specifics about what

comes after the general proclamations

from the prior chapter

Humanity was elected to be the image of

God in Genesis 1. but what this means is

not specified

as McDowell suggests the following

chapters are meant to provide commentary

on what this means

moreover Genesis 2's focus is not on the

whole Cosmos as is the case in Genesis

1. but its focus is on a specific

geographical region that lacked

agriculture

the reference of there being no plants

in verse 5 and 6 seems qualified so as

to indicate that they refer to

cultivated crops rather than General

vegetation of Genesis 1 available to The

Gatherer

so it's not a reference to there being

no plants yet thereby contradicting

Genesis 1. but a reference to the lack

of cultivated crops

in other words the authors of Genesis 2

are noting there was no cultivation yet

in this uncultivated land

the text also refers to this region as

being watered by a Mist implying it is

referring to a specific location which

had this feature

then the text specifically notes the

events of Genesis 2 are taking place in

a region called Eden where God planted a

garden

it is there only in the garden that God

creates every tree that is Pleasant to

the site and good for food

this is not referring to a second

creation of plants over all the Earth

and this suggests everything that

happens in Genesis 2 occurs only in Eden

which does not include the whole planet

trickway manager admits what we have on

the surface level in Genesis 2 is a

garden planted for the maintenance of

humans and man's work here has the

primary function of providing food

Additionally the animals of Genesis 2

are not made to fill the Earth instead

within the garden the type of each

animal is made for the purpose of being

named by the man

this is not an account of making the

animals to inhabit the Earth but an

event when each animal was named

humans of Genesis 2 are not spoken of in

general terms the chapter refers to a

specific couple either called or made

for the specific purpose of working in

the garden

there is also no mention of light or day

and night being established no

luminaries created and no mention of sea

creatures

if this is another creation account it

seems to lack essential aspects and has

a different Focus

so Genesis 2's focus is different from

Genesis 1.

Genesis 1's focus is on the whole Cosmos

then God hones it on a specific area the

land of Eden to cover specifics that

happen after the seven days of Genesis

1.

which is meant to explain further what

it means to be the image of God

a couple is placed in the garden to work

it whereas in Genesis 1 humanity is

spoken of in general terms before God

planted a garden in Eden it had Adam and

Eve tend to it

John Walton says Genesis 2 explains how

humans function in Sacred Space and on

its behalf in contrast to Genesis 1

which addressed how Sacred Space

functioned for Humanity

thus in terms of narrative flow does not

appear the two accounts necessarily

contradict one is focusing on the cosmos

and Humanity in general terms the second

is a sequel which elaborates in specific

terms on what it means to be the image

of God which takes place in a specific

geographical region

does not refer to the whole Cosmos and

so it's not a recreation of everything

that happened in Genesis 1.

but the argument can be made that it was

a redactor that modified the accounts so

that Genesis 2 functioned as a sequel to

Genesis 1. originally they were

separated in J in the P Source but a

redactor reworked them so they

functioned as a cohesive text

this is possible but we have to ask if

this occurred how was the redactor able

to preserve its sources while reworking

them to fit together

additionally there are other factors

which may indicate the proposed

distinction between J and P and Genesis

1 and 3 is illusionary

Benjamin kilker notes we can find P

elements and motifs throughout the Eden

narrative

first we see Sanctuary symbolism

throughout Genesis 2 that aligns with

Priestly texts concerning the

arrangement of the Tabernacle

the garden's entrance was on the east

side which aligns with the entrance for

the Tabernacle being on the east side as

well

the garden was associated with golden

precious stones which were used in the

breastplate of the high priest

numerous exegetes have pointed out the

menorah of the Tabernacle symbolized the

Tree of Life

the Tree of Life along with tree of

knowledge of Good and Evil were in the

middle of the garden

similar to how the holy of holies of the

Tabernacle was at the center of it

the Torah was kept in the Ark of the

Covenant and merely touching it would

have brought death

similar to E's claim touching the tree

would have brought death

G.K Beale says the tree of life itself

is a good candidate to be considered as

the model for the lampstand placed

directly outside the holy of holies the

lamp stand in the Tabernacle and the

temple looked like a small flowering

tree with seven protruding branches from

a central trunk

three on one side and three on the other

side and one branch going straight up

from the trunk in the middle

Exodus 25 31-36 pictures to the

lampstand having a flowering and

fructifying appearance of a tree with

bulbs and flowers branches and almond

blossoms

not only does the Garden of Eden match

the Priestly description of Sacred Space

of the Tabernacle but we also see Adam

functions as a priest within the Sacred

Space

Genesis 2 15 has God take the man and

put him in the garden to work and keep

it

these two words are used in Priestly

text to summarize the duties of the

priests and Levites

the closest parallel was found in

numbers 1867 which reads and behold I

have taken your brothers the Levites

from among the people of Israel they are

a gift to you given to the Lord to do

the service of the tent of meeting and

you and your sons with you shall guard

your priesthood for all that concerns

The Altar and that is within the veil

and you shall serve I give your

priesthood as a gift and any Outsider

who comes near shall be put to death

Catherine McDowell also suggests Genesis

2-3 was meant to be understood as

commentary on how Humanity was given the

Imago day in Genesis 1. she says the

Imago de concept falters as a

comprehensive definition of man because

it fails to include certain human

aspirations which are vital to human

life including the unique relationship

between male and female the search for

knowledge including the knowledge of

Good and Evil and human capacity to

assert Free Will against the will of God

thus Genesis 2 redefines over and

against Genesis 1 26-27 what it means to

be human

in other words Genesis 2 was meant to be

understood as picking up where Genesis 1

left off and explaining what it means to

be the image of God and how this plays

out in the relationship between God and

humans

this connects the anthropology and

themes of Genesis 2 3 with the

presentation of the Imago day in Genesis

1.

Aaron and the priests also are not

allowed to enter the Tabernacle until

the Eighth Day

because it will take seven days for

their ordination to be complete

this is comparable to the combination of

Genesis 1 and 2 where God takes seven

days to inaugurate the cosmos as his

Temple after the Sabbath God then allows

a Priestly figure to enter into the

Sacred Space of a garden

PJ Kearney argued the six commands in

the instructions for building the

Tabernacle correspond to the six days of

creation

thus just as the ordination of a priest

happened on the Eighth Day implicit in

Genesis 1 and 2 the ordination of Adam's

priesthood happens on the eighth day as

well after the seven days of creation

kilker says as Moses and Aaron could

only enter the Ted of meeting after the

seven days of its consecration Adam may

enter the Garden of Eden only after the

seven day creation of Genesis 1.

some may suggest this comparison does

not work since sacrifices to God were

not performed in Genesis 2.

but we should note that the altar is

outside of the tent of meeting

the sacrifice only allowed the priest to

enter the Tabernacle it was not part of

the duties within it where they would

meet with God likewise in the garden we

should not expect Adam to be performing

sacrifices yet due to the fact that the

fall has not yet occurred and he is

already within the Sacred Space of Eden

Gordon Wenham says the Garden of Eden is

not viewed by the author of Genesis

simply as a piece of Mesopotamian

Farmland but as an archetypal Sanctuary

that is a place where God dwells and

where man should worship Him

so far we can find close parallels to

the order of Leviticus A9 and Genesis 1

2. but we can see this even continues on

with how Leviticus 10 parallels Genesis

3.

Genesis 3 recounts the fall of Adam and

Eve in Leviticus 10 recounts the sin of

Aaron's sons

after they died Leviticus records they

were carried out in their coats the same

word used in Genesis 3 21 when Adam and

Eve are exiled from the garden with

garments of animal skin

Genesis 3 also notes after the sin of

eating from the tree they realized they

were naked and immediately took measures

to cover their nakedness

this reflects Priestly regulations

regarding the need to cover one's

nakedness in the presence of God

additionally after the death of Aaron's

sons Moses warns Aaron and his remaining

Sons to not go outside the entrance of

the tenant meeting lest they die

which is reminiscent of e-sphere she

will die if she eats of the fruit

they are even warned to not have strong

drink in the Ten of meeting lest they

die which eludes to Genesis 2 and 3 in

the forbidden fruit in the garden

the formulation of God Walking In The

Garden in Genesis 3 8 is used to

describe the divine presence in the

Tabernacle

Gordon Wenham says the same term is used

to describe the divine presence in the

later 10th Sanctuary Leviticus 12 16

Deuteronomy 23 15 2nd Samuel 7 6-7

Gigi Harper adds that there are lexical

parallels between Genesis 2 and 3 and

Leviticus 11 concerning dietary

regulations he says the implications of

this are spelled out via shared motif of

eating forbidden food that connects

Israel's story to Adams a connection

perhaps further indicated by the

possible structuring of Leviticus 11 15

on Genesis 3 14-19

when Adam and Eve are exiled the garden

is then guarded by a cherub with a

flaming sword

these cherubim are worked into the

curtains that make up the wall of the

Tabernacle

last we see in Genesis 4 that after the

fall the sons of Adam and Eve must offer

up sacrifices to meet with God

which is similar to the priests of

Leviticus offering a sacrifice to enter

the Sacred Space of the Tabernacle

Leviticus 10 mentions proper offerings

which include fat and grain offerings

this alludes to the offerings Kane and

Abel brought

Leviticus 10 15 also has the same word

used in reference table sacrifice which

God accepted

thus Gordon Wenham even go so far as to

say on this interpretation of Genesis 1

there is a very smooth transition to

Chapters two to three it is usually held

at Genesis 2 3 came from the yahwistic

source whereas one one to two three and

the sanctuary regulations in Exodus that

explain the symbolism came from the

Priestly source

whatever the stylistic differences

between the sources our interpretation

suggests that ideologically the J and P

sources are much closer to each other

than is usually held

thus an interesting pattern emerges in

Genesis 1 the glory of God fills the

cosmic Sanctuary over seven days which

parallels Priestly texts that speak of

seven-day consecration themes and shows

where God comes to dwell arrest

Genesis 2 picks up on the 8th day when

priests are appointed to serve God in

Sacred Space

in Genesis 3 due to Disobedience of a

dietary command Adam and Eve are

banished from the inner realm and they

can no longer be naked before God's

presence

Genesis 4 shows the importance of

sacrificing to meet with God and that

God accepted Abel's animal sacrifice but

not Keynes

thus we see a cultic sequence which has

strong Affinity to Priestly text and has

a coherent narrative flow

on the other side we can see aspects

associated with j in the Priestly

account of Genesis 1.

it has been argued Priestly texts speak

of God as distant from Humanity whereas

Jay texts anthropomorphize God

Catherine McDowell notes we can see

anthropomorphic language in p

while the deity is presented

anthropomorphically in Genesis 2 5 to

324 in Genesis 1 he speaks both to the

Heavenly hosts into the man and the

woman and he creates not only with para

but also with Asa as in Genesis 2.

he also sees or perceives he names he

sets and on the seventh day he finishes

the work he has done in rests

some bring up the fact that Genesis 1

uses Elohim and Genesis 2 uses the

Divine name

which has been used to distinguish

between sources

but McDowell notes the distinction is

faulty because the Eden narrative refers

to God as Yahweh Elohim

the switch may also reflect a change in

the story when focusing on the cosmos

generally the term Elohim is used but

when the text speaks of God relating to

man and woman in more intimate ways the

Divine name is added to signify a more

personal closeness and represent God

entering into a covenantal relationship

so it seems we have a lot of Priestly

language and themes in Genesis 2 to 4.

and some themes assigned to J and the

Priestly account

which works against the idea these were

originally two sources a redactor

combined into one

now with the similarities we can find in

the text assigned to J were actually the

work of a later redactor who wove

Priestly themes into the text then we

have to ask how he was able to change so

much while at the same time preserving

so much of the original sources for

later Scholars to reconstruct

in other words if the text was altered

by a later redactor then how can we know

the sources are even preserved in the

text

as numerous Scholars have pointed out

ancient scribes rarely preserve their

sources in the texts but instead use

sources to make a completely new text

thus the Genesis narrative they simply

relied on sources but was a unified

unique text when it was produced

Benjamin kilker says we should read

Genesis 1 to 4 as an introduction to the

cosmic Temple symbolism of the

Tabernacle whereby Genesis 1 to 3

introduces the three levels of Holiness

holy of holies holy anti-chamber

Courtyard and Genesis 4 the place of

sacrifice at the entrance of the tent

I doubt that the so-called two creation

accounts have ever been written to be

read separated from each other

adding to this Kenneth Matthews notes

that between Genesis 1 and 4 there are

exactly 70 Divine designations with 35

occurring in the first part of God

establishing the cosmos as his Temple

and the other 35 in the second half

detailing man's relationship with God

the 70th mention results in the climax

of people calling on the name of the

Lord

which suggests the two sections Were

Meant to function as one single unified

narrative

looking out Beyond this section and at

the rest of Genesis 1 to 11 we see there

is a mere structure in the text

Genesis 8 9 parallels the structure of

Genesis 1 3.

Genesis 8 follows the same literary

sequence of Genesis 1. then in Genesis 9

Joshua John Van e notes the Covenant

given there is a restatement of what we

find in Genesis 1 27-30

Noah is then in a garden and is called a

man of the soil which parallels the

account of Adam in Genesis 2.

both are then corrupted by fruit naked

have their senses affected contain a

tempter in the story with both tempter's

Offspring being cursed and conclude with

both having their naked discovered

the overall structure of Genesis 1 to 11

also has a parallel flow in the

narrative structure

Genesis 1 is the creation account

whereas Genesis 8 is the recreation

account after the flood

then what follows in both is an account

of God's relationship with Humanity then

in both we see the fall of the man of

God

followed by the fall of the family then

the fall of civilization

with both having a break in the story to

include a section on genealogies

breaking the sequence up between J and P

ruins this mere structure

it is strange that on the documentary

hypothesis When J and P were combined

they created this unique and parallel

sequence

seems more likely that Genesis 1-11 was

written as a unified narrative without

preserving two sources of the text that

were stitched together

now this is not to say there were no

sources used in writing Genesis or that

there are no redactional layers

we are merely pointing out that the text

as it stands works well as a unified

narrative and it is not hopelessly

contradictory which can only be resolved

by positing two sources that were

stitched together

it is also unlikely the sources the

authors used are preserved in the text

and can be pulled out and separated

too much of the literary Unity is

destroyed and even if we attempt to do

this we still find motifs and themes

assigned to One Source throughout the

other

and given the asianaries from Context

the text can function as it is as a

unified narrative within their cultural

context

the first part covers the general

aspects and the second part covers the

specifics humanity is given the Imago

day but what this means is explained in

detail in the following chapters

therefore we have good evidence to

suggest that text is a unified narrative

not a combination of contradictory

accounts

foreign