Q.
68
How do we reconcile the two different
“creation stories” presented in Genesis
chapters one and two?
José F. Morales Jr.
A.
If one thinks that Genesis 1—2 literally happened (i.e., is histori-
cal fact), then the two cannot be reconciled for they are starkly
different:- In Genesis 1, it takes seven days. In Genesis 2, we’re not given a
timeframe but it feels like everything up to the forming of Adam
happened in one day. - The order in which things are made (plants, humans, animals, etc.) is
different in each account. - The writing styles are different in each, including syntax, word choice,
and verb tenses. - The name for God is different in each: “Elohim” in the fi rst and “Yahweh
Elohim” in the second. - In Genesis 1, God is transcendent, in the “beyond” somewhere. There’s
only a voice. In Genesis 2, God is very “human,” walking in the garden,
getting dirt under her or his nails, and so on.
These stories were not intended to be a science textbook. They are myths.
Don’t be shocked! I don’t mean “myth” the way we commonly use it—“Oh,
that’s just a myth!”—but the way that anthropologists use it. A “myth” is a
story that makes sense of reality at its deepest level.
The creation myths serve to give theological meaning to existence, not
to give scientifi c explanations. To quote Marcus Borg’s The Heart of Christian-
ity, the creation stories are not literally true, but they are really true. Genesis 1
speaks of God’s mystery and grandeur, of the universe’s mystery and good-
ness, and of humanity’s divine essence. Genesis 2 reveals God’s intimacy and
closeness and the interconnectedness of all things, including how humanity
(adam) and the earth (adamah) with which we’re formed share a bond. That’s
why I don’t tell people to “go green” but instead to rediscover our inherent
greenness.
Let science tell us “how.” Let the creation myths tell us “why.”