It is now common if not almost mandated to claim that Genesis chapter one and Genesis chapter two are “two creation stories.” It has long been my view that this is not the case. The book of Genesis as well as several other books of the Old Testament are written in a form that resembles what one might see in a modern homiletics class. If for example we were preparing a sermon to preach, there is a prescribed method for the forming and shaping of that sermon. First we have a general introduction written in broad terms that tells the audience in general what we are going to speak about today. That is in fact, chapter one of the book of Genesis. After we give our introduction, we then come back and delve into the specifics of our introduction. That is the purpose of Genesis chapter two and the following narrative about creation. Thus, it is my claim that the book of Genesis is written in a homiletic format and we do not have two different creation stories in the first two chapters. Point of fact, I think that if we read chapter two without knowing chapter one we have an exegetical problem prone to misinterpretations.

A. It was explained in the former chapter that the Sabbath is rooted in the order of creation.

(1) In Deuteronomy 12:9, the writer calls the promised land of Canaan the place of God’s rest.

(2) In Psalms 95: 9-11, we once again find that the disobedient wandered in the wilderness for 40 years and were not allowed to enter God’s rest. Thus, the rest here is the promised land of Canaan or stated another way, the rest and the promised land are the same. In the New Testament, the rest are those “In Christ.”

(3) Then once again we find the same passages quoted in Hebrews chapter 3. This time in the context of a warning. The Hebrew writer affirms that the “Rest” of the Old Testament is now the kingdom of God in the New Testament (See Hebrews 12:18-29) which is in heaven.

I. Notice that different names are used for God in chapter two.

A. Chapter One uses “Elohim” or God (master over all).

B. Chapter two uses “YHWH” or “Lord.”

C. Young’s literal translation (updated) has the names correct. It actually reads, “Lord God.”

III. The Emphasis of creation is different in chapter two, as compared to chapter one.

A. In the first chapter the emphasis is put on creation brought about by the “Word of God.” In the second chapter the emphasis is on the physical act, “God planted a garden.”

B. The emphasis of the order is different reinforcing God giving “man dominion” over the earth. In chapter one the story progresses from vegetation to animals and finally to humans, while in the second chapter the story begins with humankind (only male, though), then comes to vegetation (in the form of the garden of Eden), and finally, comes to the animal kingdom.

C. In the first chapter we have the broad statement that “God created male and female” (1:26). But in the second chapter we see that male was created first and then woman second.

IV. A Review of VS. 4-8.

A. The section begins with the gift of the land (ha-ares) before man is created.

B. The “plants and shrubs” were not the plants and shrubs of the original creation. They were the “plants and shrubs” meant for the Garden of Eden (see v.8).

C. It was these plants (those in the Garden of Eden) that required rain and cultivation, not the original plants of creation.

D. Man is formed from the dust of the ground (ground is adamah) and man is (adam). i.e. Adam was made from adam-ah?

E. It is now that the Lord God “breathes” into his nostrils and gives him the breath of life.

F. In chapter one v.30 we have the same Hebrew expression that claims God gave the animal kingdom the “breath of life.” Thus, it is not the breathing of the “breath of life” that makes man different than animals but- “man is made in the image of God.”

Now the Lord planted a garden in Eden, at the east, and He set (put) there the man whom He had formed;9and YHWH God caused to sprout from the ground every tree desirable for appearance, and good for food, and the tree of life in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.10And a river is going out from Eden to water the garden, and from thence it is parted, and hath become four chief [rivers];11the name of the one [is] Pison, it [is] that which is surrounding the whole land of the Havilah where the gold [is],12and the gold of that land [is] good, there [is] the bdolach and the shoham stone;13and the name of the second river [is] Gibon, it [is] that which is surrounding the whole land of Cush;14and the name of the third river [is] Hiddekel, it [is] that which is going east of Asshur; and the fourth river is Phrat. (Young’s Literal Translation)

V. The Garden of Eden VS. 8-14

A. First, we are told that the Lord “put” man there. Later in the same narrative we will notice a difference.

B. That the Garden was “planted in the east” is striking.

1. The east usually associated with God’s judgment or separation from God (3:24; 11:2; 13:11).

C. The Cherubim will later be placed on the “east” side.

D. The appropriate translation is “the Garden in Eden” and not "the Garden of Eden.”

VII. The Contents of the Garden

A. “Tree of Life” and “Tree of Knowledge (v.9).

B. A River that divided into ‘four’ headwaters (V.10).

C. Rich in Jewels and Gold (V.12).

1. Did later Prophets associate the Garden in Eden with Canaan?

(a) Ezek. 36:35; Joel 2:3; Isa. 51:3.

(b) Not including the obvious references in the NT (See Rev.22:1-2).

2. The Garden in Eden was a beautiful place.

VIII. So, Where is the Garden in Eden?

A. The River Euphrates or perat (v.14).

B. The River Tigris or hiddeqeul (v.14).

C. Pishon and Hihon (vs-11-13). These cannot be identified for certain.

D. On the other hand, it ought not be overlooked at the similarity between the Garden and the Temple (Ex.25-27). Also see Haggai 2:7-8).

15And YHWH God took the man, and caused him to rest in the garden of Eden, to serve it, and to keep it. 16And YHWH God laid a charge on the man, saying, `Of every tree of the garden eating thou dost eat; 17and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die.'

18And YHWH God saith, `Not good for the man to be alone, I do make to him an helper -- as his counterpart.' 19And YHWH God formed from the ground every beast of the field, and every fowl of the heavens, and bring them unto the man, to see what he calls it; and whatever the man called a living creature, that [is] its name.

20And the man called names to all the cattle, and to fowl of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; and to man hath not been found an helper -- as his counterpart.21And YHWH God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept, and He took one of his ribs, and closed up flesh in its stead. 22And YHWH God built up the rib which He had taken out of the man into a woman, and brought her in unto the man; 23and the man saith, `This [is] the [proper] step! bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh' for this it is called Woman, for from a man has this been taken 24therefore does a man leave his father and his mother, and hath cleaved unto his wife, and they have become one flesh.25And they are both of them naked, the man and his wife, and they are not ashamed of themselves.

Genesis Chapter 2: 15-24

I. Some General Observations about 2:15-24

A. Already noted, God “put” man in the Garden in v.8.

1. But in v.15, we find not the word “put” but the word “rest” instead of put.

2. The obvious point is once again, that the Garden is the “rest.”

B. Another translation problems is found in v.15. Why did God "rest" man in the Garden.

1. It was not to “work” and “keep” but to “worship” and obey.”

2. Thus, in the very next verse God gives man a ‘command.’

C. The obvious inference found in verse 16-17 is that God and God alone knows what is good.

1. Thus, we have the statement as to what is not good.

2. Then, we have the statement as to what is good.

D. But woman was created to be a “helper.”

1. A literal translation ought to read “a sustainer besides him." Help is too weak because it suggests merely an auxiliary function and that cannot be justified with the use of the original word.

2. It may also be noticed that God did not “shape” the woman but “built” the woman. Even the word “fashioned” is more appropriate.

E. As noted above, the theological perspective of Genesis 2 is that God created woman for the pleasure of man.

1. Since Eve was formed from one of Adam’s ribs, they became one flesh.

2. Here we have the foundation of the married life and the above idea stresses the closeness of marriage.

3. Originally what had been “one flesh” of Adam must now come together once more to be “one flesh” in husband and wife.