Evidence for God from Science

Why do people say,
that Genesis 2 is some kind of "second creation report"?

1.) The word "bara = to create" does not occur once in Genesis 2:5ff.

2.) All 50 chapters of Genesis form a logical and chronological sequence.
Why not interpret Genesis 2 as the sequel of chapter one?

3.) Are there any two consecutive chapters in the whole Bible
that speak about the same subject (from two different perspectives)?
Especially in narrative texts ...


Greetings,

Armin

It's always a little dangerous to think of the chapter separations in Scripture as actually being part of the inspired text. Except in Psalms, where each psalm more or less forms it's own unit, (although some would argue even those are grouped according to a purpose) the chapter and verse divisions in Scripture were not in the originals. There are many places where the separations chosen have resulted in an artificial separation of material that may cause more confusion than clarity.

I believe it is predominantly because people do not pay attention to the differences of purpose in each, to instead focus upon historical criticism and the differences in words representing different authors (e.g., those who would subscribe to JPED). If you do not buy into this theory, then there is perhaps little reason to consider them a a separate re-telling of the same story.

Perhaps this will help:

http://www.tektonics.org/jedp/creationtwo.html

God bless!