Genesis 2

2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

  • The heavens are never “finished.” New stars are born all the time in gaseous stellar nurseries, and old stars either explode or collapse.

2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

  • Since when does God need rest?! Would it not jeopardize the omnipotence of God if he requires “rest” from his activities?
  • Something curious: It took God almost three full days to create the earth (a single planet) and everything on it, but then it took him less than one day to create millions of galaxies, each containing billions of stars, with many stars having planetary systems of their own! Why is there such an obscene disparity in the efficiency of God’s work? Why was God so meticulous in creating this one planet, but then so casual in creating everything else?

2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
2:4 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,

  • A new author has obviously taken over at this point. A glaring example is that the word “LORD” is never used in Chapter 1, and yet it’s used everywhere in this chapter. The writing style also becomes different. (Young’s Literal Translation uses “God” in Chapter 1, but switches to “Jehovah God” in subsequent chapters, and Darby’s Translation uses “God” in Chapter 1, but switches to “Jehovah Elohim” in subsequent chapters)
  • The need to write the word “LORD” in all-caps still eludes me. Perhaps it’s similar to the Jewish requirement to write “God” as “G-d,” thus omitting the “o” and minimizing the mortal sin of saying God’s name aloud.

2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

  • All right, it appears that this new author wants to restate the story of creation. Let’s have a listen:

2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

  • It appears that we’ve discovered evaporation. What happened to the firmament mentioned in the first chapter?
  • So this creation story is saying that God created plants by watering the earth with a mist, not by just asking the earth to “bring forth” the plants?

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.

  • But this is not the way it “really” happened. Chapter 1, Verse 26 clearly states that God(s) created Man after all the plants and animals. However, in this creation story, it seems that the LORD created Man first. Which Biblical day are we in at this point? And, for that matter, which creation story are we supposed to believe?
  • This verse states that man was made out of “dust.” Now, even a simple visual examination of the human body would prove otherwise. Furthermore, we have also found that the body is made up of tiny individual organisms (cells), each “alive” in their own way. Why doesn’t the Bible talk about any of this?
  • Incidentally, the nostrils lead to the lungs, which are indeed essential for life, but certainly not for a “soul.” The LORD should try accessing the man’s brain.

2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
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 this author claims that even plants were created after man. And what Biblical day is this, again?

2:10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.
2:11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
2:12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

  • Who cares about “gold” if no one is living there to collect it and trade it for goods and services? There’s only one man in existence right now!

2:13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.
2:14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.

  • Fascinating, but irrelevant. Did the LORD assign all these names? Or was it the people who were already living there before God began his creation?

2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

  • Why would the garden need to be “kept” if it is supposedly in a perfect state?

2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

  • If the LORD doesn’t want Adam to eat from a certain tree, then why create the tree?

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.

  • Why is it not good for the man to be alone? Couldn’t God create the man such that it would be good for the man to be alone? Also, by definition, how can God create something that is “not good”?

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.

  • So, according to this creation story, God created all the animals just to please Adam? Compare this to (1:20-25), which suggests that God created animals to please himself, and certainly before he created humans. Which story are we supposed to believe?
  • Which Biblical day is this?! It appears like this whole creation story is happening in a single day, instead of seven.
  • Here the LORD creates animals and fowls out of the ground, but in the first creation story the fowls were brought forth by water (1:20).
  • Exactly how long did it take for Adam to name every “kind” of animal? And how many total “kinds” were there?
  • Why did God have Adam name every animal if none of the original names are in use anymore?
  • Since Adam and his early descendants could not write, they had to pass down the names of all animals verbally. With roughly 50 billion total species (alive + extinct), wouldn’t it take a significant portion of their lives just to teach their children the names of the animals? Supposing that each child would start to learn names of animals at age 3, and stop at age 18, the child would have to memorize about 10 animal names every millisecond. If they couldn’t accomplish this, then wouldn’t the naming of all animals by Adam have been pretty pointless?

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.

  • Why in the world would God think that any animal would make a suitable companion for Adam?

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;
2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

  • The male body has very specific organs that are only useful for reproduction with a female. Did God create Adam complete with such organs before God even realized that He would later need to create a female for Adam? Wouldn’t an ideal Adam have been sexless? Or did the LORD “add on” the appropriate organs after the female was created?
  • Why couldn’t the LORD create the woman out of more dust? Why did he create the woman out of the man’s rib, thereby initiating a perpetual theme of sexism throughout the Bible?

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.

  • If the woman was created out of the man’s rib, then she would be virtually a genetic clone of the man (aside from some minor differences). For obvious reasons, this is not exactly the best genetic fodder for starting a new species.

2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

  • What is this talking about? Fathers and mothers don’t exist yet! So who does this apply to? Also, Adam and Eve didn’t have a “mother” of any kind.

2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

  • The only reason anyone would be “ashamed” to walk around naked is because our society has influenced us in that way. Clothing (apart from its survival purposes) probably became enforced when men started getting too horny at the sight of a beautiful woman. The more covered she is, the better the men behave. Whatever the reasons, notice that Adam and Eve don’t have a society to influence them. So why should they be ashamed of being naked if there’s no one else there, and Eve is already Adam’s wife?

Final Thoughts on Chapter 2

As a creation story, this chapter is startlingly different from the first. The order of creation is completely changed, as well as the purpose of creation. The story in Chapter 1 was, more or less, complete, and needed no further storyline. The author of Chapter 2, however, apparently decides to retell the story with a totally different point of view, and introduces a whole new host of Biblical difficulties.