https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s
```
Please give me a brief summary and then detailed outline of this video. After that, list the comparisons of scriptural accounts, giving the passages compared, the differences cited, and the reasons given for the importance of the pairing.
```
Bart Ehrman argues that the single most significant discovery in biblical studies is realizing that “the Bible” is not one book but an anthology of many different writings, which must be read in their own historical and literary contexts rather than harmonized into a single, contradiction‑free narrative. He uses this point to show how contradictions, implausibilities, and differing emphases in scriptural accounts actually open up interpretation and reveal the distinct theological aims of each author.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Brief summary
- The lecture opens with tributes from colleagues, then Ehrman reflects on his teaching career at Rutgers and UNC, especially on teaching New Testament in the religiously conservative American South and why religious studies is such an effective vehicle for teaching critical thinking.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- He then surveys major “discoveries” in biblical studies (manuscript variants, archaeology, Dead Sea Scrolls) before arguing that the truly revolutionary discovery is that the Bible is a collection of diverse books, not a single unified work.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Through multiple case studies (Genesis creation accounts, Paul’s conversion, Jesus’ birth, death, and resurrection, and modern misuses of Scripture on issues like antisemitism and abortion), he shows how reading each text on its own terms rather than harmonizing them changes both scholarship and public use of the Bible.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Detailed outline of the lecture
## Tributes and introduction (0:00–24:28)
- Colleagues Mark Goodacre and Hugo Méndez recount Ehrman’s scholarly impact (textual criticism, early Christianity, popular books) and his teaching, mentoring, and charitable work.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Ehrman begins by thanking colleagues, comparing his teaching context at Rutgers (more Catholic/Jewish, less biblically invested) with UNC in the Bible Belt, where students have strong prior commitments about Scripture.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Reflections on teaching in the South
- At Rutgers, students were unfazed by contradictions but upset by issues like Jesus having brothers (conflicting with Catholic doctrine); at UNC, students are deeply invested in the authority and inerrancy of the Bible and are shocked by critical questions.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- He emphasizes that the aim of religious studies is not to convert or deconvert but to force students to think, give reasons for their views, and confront evidence.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Anecdotes: calls from parents, including the story of a mother whose daughter failed his New Testament class until he recalculated the grade and discovered a TA’s arithmetic error.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Survey of “big discoveries” in biblical studies
## 1. Flawed manuscripts and textual variants
- Original New Testament writings are lost; earliest complete copies of books like Matthew appear centuries later, after many cycles of copying (“copies of the copies of the copies”).[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- John Mill (1707) compared ~100 Greek manuscripts and identified some 30,000 textual variants; modern scholarship, with ~5,800 manuscripts, estimates around 500,000 differences—though most are trivial spelling issues, some significantly affect meaning and theology.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Ehrman stresses that this is important but not, in his view, the single most important discovery.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## 2. Archaeology and the historicity of biblical narratives
- Early “biblical archaeologists” sought material confirmation of stories like the Exodus, wilderness wanderings, conquest of Canaan, Jericho’s fall, and United Monarchy under David and Solomon.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- More rigorous archaeology has found no material evidence for an Exodus of 2–3 million people, no chariots at the bottom of the Red Sea, no wilderness camp remains, and suggests Jericho may not have been walled or even inhabited as described at the purported time.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- This undermines straightforwardly historical readings of these narratives but still is not Ehrman’s “most significant discovery.”[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## 3. The Dead Sea Scrolls
- Discovered beginning in 1947 near Qumran, the scrolls include biblical manuscripts (every Hebrew Bible book except Esther), commentaries, community rules, psalms, and apocalyptic war texts, dramatically enriching knowledge of Second Temple Judaism.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- The Isaiah scroll is about 1,000 years older than previously known complete Hebrew copies, showing textual transmission over centuries.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- The scrolls illuminate an apocalyptic worldview very similar to Jesus’ message of an imminent divine judgment and kingdom, situating him within broader Jewish expectations.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Again, hugely important but still not his “most significant discovery.”[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Ehrman’s “most significant discovery”: the Bible as anthology
- Claim: the key discovery is that the Bible is not a single unified book but a **collection** (canon) of 66 books (in the Protestant arrangement), written by different authors, at different times, to different audiences, with different theologies and sometimes contradictory claims.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Because these books are bound between two covers, readers instinctively expect internal consistency and harmonize differences; that expectation prevents them from seeing contradictions and distinct perspectives.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Once treated like any other anthology, each book can be heard in its own voice, and contradictions/implausibilities become interpretive clues rather than problems to be erased.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Case studies: comparing scriptural accounts
Below are the main textual pairings Ehrman compares, with the differences he cites and why he says the differences matter.
## 1. Genesis 1 vs Genesis 2 (creation narratives)
- **Passages compared:**
- Genesis 1:1–2:3 (seven‑day creation)
- Genesis 2:4–25 (Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve)
- **Differences cited:**
- Order of creation:
- Genesis 1 has a structured sequence over six days: light, firmament, separation of waters, dry land and plants, celestial bodies (sun, moon, stars), animals, then humans (male and female) created last.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Genesis 2 has humans (Adam) created before plants and animals; God then forms plants and animals and brings animals to Adam, with woman formed last from Adam.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Internal tensions in Genesis 1 itself:
- Evenings and mornings occur before creation of the sun on day four, raising questions about literal days and the source of light.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Plants appear before the sun, which conflicts with modern scientific notions like photosynthesis.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- **Reasons for importance of the pairing:**
- The two chapters are best read as two different creation stories from different sources, stitched together; harmonizing them makes them say something neither actually says and obscures their distinct theological and literary aims.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Recognizing the contradictions helps readers see these as stories conveying meaning (about God, humanity, order, etc.), not as scientific accounts of historical events.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## 2. Paul’s conversion: Acts vs Galatians
- **Passages compared:**
- Acts 9, 22, 26 (three accounts of Paul’s conversion)
- Galatians 1:11–24 (Paul’s own autobiographical account)
- **Differences cited:**
- In Acts 9, after his Damascus road experience and initial instruction, Paul goes directly to Jerusalem to meet the apostles.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- In Galatians 1, Paul insists he did **not** consult “flesh and blood” or go to Jerusalem to confer with the apostles immediately; instead he emphasizes that he did not see the Jerusalem apostles for three years and swears this is true because his opponents claim he received his gospel from them.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- **Reasons for importance of the pairing:**
- Acts portrays Paul as theologically in line and in contact with the Jerusalem apostles, stressing unity.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Paul stresses independence, claiming direct revelation from Christ to defend the authority of his distinct message.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Harmonizing the accounts erases both Luke’s theological agenda and Paul’s self‑understanding; the contradiction forces readers to treat Acts and Paul as separate voices.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## 3. Birth of Jesus: Matthew vs Luke
- **Passages compared:**
- Matthew 1–2
- Luke 1–2
- **Differences cited:**
- Shared elements: Mary, Joseph, Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem, and a virginal conception.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Distinct elements:
- Matthew: wise men (magi), star, Herod’s plot, slaughter of the innocents, Joseph’s dream, flight to Egypt, return only after Herod’s death, and relocation to Nazareth because Archelaus rules Judea.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Luke: census under Caesar Augustus, Joseph and Mary traveling from Nazareth to Bethlehem to register, birth in Bethlehem during the census, shepherds, temple presentation at 40 days, and then an immediate return to Nazareth with no Egypt episode.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Hometown issue:
- Matthew implies Bethlehem is their original home and Nazareth is a later relocation; Luke portrays Nazareth as their home prior to a temporary stay in Bethlehem for the census.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Timeline tension:
- If Matthew’s extended sojourn in Egypt and delay until Herod’s death are taken literally, Luke’s tight 40‑day timeline from birth to temple rites to returning to Nazareth is incompatible.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- **Reasons for importance of the pairing:**
- Matthew shapes the story so that Jesus goes down to and comes out of Egypt to fulfill Hosea 11:1 (“Out of Egypt have I called my son”), re‑reading Israel’s Exodus motif Christologically.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Luke shapes the story around Roman imperial history (census under Augustus), stressing continuity between Jesus and Israel’s institutions (temple rituals) and their Galilean home.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Treating both as literal history and harmonizing them (e.g., inventing multiple trips) obscures the distinctive theological constructions each evangelist makes.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## 4. Day of Jesus’ death: Mark vs John
- **Passages compared:**
- Mark 14–15
- John 18–19, especially John 19:14
- **Differences cited:**
- In Mark, Jesus’ Last Supper is explicitly a Passover meal; he and the disciples “prepare the Passover,” eat it, and Jesus is crucified the next morning, which is therefore **after** the Passover meal has been eaten.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- In John, the crucifixion occurs on “the day of preparation” for the Passover, explicitly **before** the Passover meal is eaten; Jesus dies at about the time the Passover lambs are being slaughtered in the temple.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- **Reasons for importance of the pairing:**
- John uniquely identifies Jesus as “the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” and aligns the timing of his death with the slaughter of Passover lambs to express a theological claim that Jesus is the true Passover lamb.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Reconciling the chronology (e.g., by re‑defining “Passover” or arguing for multiple calendars) removes John’s symbolic alignment and Mark’s narrative structure, dulling both accounts.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## 5. Resurrection narratives: differences within and among the Gospels
- **Passages compared:**
- Mark 16:1–8
- Matthew 28
- Luke 24 (with Acts 1)
- John 20–21 (briefly alluded to)
- **Differences cited:**
- Who goes to the tomb and how many women: varies from Mary Magdalene alone (John) to Mary plus others, with different names, depending on the Gospel.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- What they see: a young man, two men, or an angel; stone already rolled away or not—details differ.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- What they are told:
- In Mark, the young man tells them to inform the disciples that Jesus will meet them in Galilee.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- In Luke, the focus is on recalling Jesus’ prior predictions; and the narrative keeps them in or near Jerusalem.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Do they obey?
- Mark (ending at 16:8): the women flee, say nothing to anyone because they are afraid.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Matthew: they go and tell the disciples, who then go to Galilee and see Jesus.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Galilee vs Jerusalem:
- Matthew: resurrection appearances to the disciples occur in Galilee; Jesus gives the Great Commission there.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Luke–Acts: all post‑resurrection events (Emmaus, appearance to the disciples, ascension) are tied to Jerusalem and nearby; the disciples are instructed not to leave Jerusalem until the Spirit comes, and Acts explicitly keeps them there through Pentecost.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- **Reasons for importance of the pairing:**
- Mark’s ending (women silent, disciples never see the risen Jesus) fits his larger theme that the disciples consistently misunderstand and never fully “get” Jesus.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Matthew wants to bring the narrative climax to Galilee, emphasizing mission to “all nations” from there.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Luke emphasizes Jerusalem as theological center, continuity with temple and Jewish history, and the Spirit’s descent there, so he keeps all resurrection and commissioning scenes in or around Jerusalem.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Combining details from all four to create a “seven last words”-style composite resurrection story effectively writes a fifth, non‑canonical gospel and erases the distinctive theology of each evangelist.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## 6. Crucifixion scenes: Mark vs Luke
- **Passages compared:**
- Mark 15
- Luke 23
- **Differences cited:**
- Mark:
- Jesus speaks only once on the cross, crying out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”, expressing agony and abandonment.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- He is silent otherwise, appears in shock, and both criminals mock him.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Luke:
- On the way to the cross Jesus speaks to the women of Jerusalem; on the cross he asks, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- One criminal mocks him, the other defends him and asks to be remembered; Jesus promises, “Today you will be with me in Paradise.”[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Instead of a cry of abandonment, Jesus’ last words are, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit,” indicating trust and composure.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- **Reasons for importance of the pairing:**
- Mark portrays a deeply suffering, seemingly abandoned Jesus, intensifying the pathos and raising theological questions about suffering and divine presence.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Luke portrays a calm, forgiving, in‑control Jesus who knows what is happening and reassures others; his death is a model of faithful trust.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Merging these into a unified “seven last words” removes both Mark’s tragic intensity and Luke’s serene confidence, flattening the theology of the passion.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Modern misreadings and misuse of Scripture
- Ehrman argues that misreading and harmonizing Scripture has real‑world consequences when politicians and religious leaders cite the Bible for policy positions.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
Examples:
- A US congresswoman cited “the Bible” to claim that Herod handed Jesus over to “the Jews” to be crucified, using this to resist anti‑antisemitism measures; in fact, in the Gospel narratives Herod appears only in Luke, finds no guilt in Jesus, and sends him back to Pilate, while Pilate’s Roman soldiers carry out the crucifixion.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Debates on abortion often cite Jeremiah 1:5 (“before I formed you in the womb I knew you”) as evidence of fetal personhood; Ehrman notes that taken literally the verse implies a pre‑existent soul known by God even before conception, which many of these interpreters do not actually believe.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Exodus 21:22–25 distinguishes between the death of a pregnant woman (punished by death) and the loss of the fetus (punished by a fine as property damage), suggesting the law does not treat the fetus as a full person with equal legal status.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Leviticus 18:22 is used to oppose same‑sex behavior, while the same interpreters often ignore Leviticus 19’s command to treat resident foreigners as native citizens, revealing selective appropriation.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Instructions about women’s silence and authority in 1 Timothy are enforced in some churches (e.g., restricting women preachers), while 1 Corinthians 11’s instruction about women’s head coverings in worship is dismissed as cultural.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
## Final reflections: why this matters
- Treating the Bible as an anthology forces readers to distinguish truth from falsity, good from bad arguments, and to ground claims in actual texts rather than in harmonized or imagined “biblical” positions.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- Ehrman links this to the broader crisis of the humanities: at precisely the time when societies most need citizens trained in critical reading, argument, and evaluation of evidence, universities are cutting humanities programs, including religious studies.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
- For him, contradictions and differences in Scripture are not defects but invitations to deeper interpretation and critical thought, which is why he sees the recognition of the Bible’s multi‑voiced character as the most important discovery in biblical studies.[youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
1. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
-----
```
Generate a table comparing two passages: Genesis 1:1-2:3 and Genesis 2:4-45, using the NIV translation. Break-down each verse, describe the order of events in creation in each passage, and list the similarities and differences between the two. If there are significant variant source, list them. If there are controversies about the original words or language, list those.
```
Genesis 1:1–2:3 (often called the **Priestly** account) and Genesis 2:4–25 (often called the **Yahwist** or “Garden” account) present overlapping but distinct portraits of creation in the NIV. The first is structured, cosmic, and liturgical; the second is earthy, focused on the man, his work, and his relationships. Scholarly source‑criticism typically assigns them to different traditions (P and J), and a few notable textual variants cluster around divine names and some key words.biblegateway+5
Below is a compact comparison table, followed by brief notes on order of events, similarities/differences, sources, and textual issues.
## Verse-by-verse comparison table
|Verse (NIV)|Genesis 1:1–2:3 – key content|Genesis 2:4–25 – key content|Order of events implied|Main similarities|Main differences / tensions|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|1:1|“In the beginning God [Elohim] created the heavens and the earth.”biblegateway+2|—|Creation of total cosmos (heavens and earth) first.|Both speak of “heavens and earth” as a created totality.biblegateway+1|Gen 1 opens with cosmic beginning; Gen 2 starts after creation “when…created.”biblegateway+1|
|1:2|Earth formless, empty, darkness over deep, Spirit of God hovering over waters.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV)|—|Primeval watery chaos precedes ordering.|Both presuppose pre‑formed earth that needs ordering/forming.biblegateway+1|Gen 2 never mentions watery chaos or Spirit hovering; instead speaks of no rain/ no shrubs.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV)|
|1:3–5|Day 1: God says, “Let there be light”; separates light/dark, names day/night; first evening and morning.biblegateway+1|—|Light created before sun; time marked by “day” from start.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV)|Both accounts assume alternation of day/night.|Gen 2 offers no day structure; no explicit creation of light.|
|1:6–8|Day 2: God makes expanse (vault/firmament) to separate waters above/below; names it “sky.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV)|2:6 mentions streams/mist rising to water ground.biblegateway+1|In Gen 1, vertical separation of waters precedes land/vegetation.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV)|Both speak of water as essential to earth’s condition.biblegateway+1|Gen 2:6 pictures water rising from ground, not separated seas and firmament.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV)|
|1:9–10|Day 3 (part 1): Waters gathered, dry ground appears; “land” and “seas” named.biblegateway+1|2:5–6: “No shrub…no plant…for the LORD God had not sent rain…no one to work the ground,” but streams water ground.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV)|Gen 1: land formed, then later plants; Gen 2: land present but unworked/unwatered at start.biblegateway+1|Both assume earth/ground that can be worked/planted.biblegateway+1|Gen 1 stresses divine naming of “land” and “seas”; Gen 2 stresses functional lack (no rain, no human).biblegateway+1|
|1:11–13|Day 3 (part 2): Vegetation appears—seed‑bearing plants and trees—“according to their kinds.”biblegateway+1|2:8–9: LORD God plants a garden in Eden and makes all kinds of trees grow, including tree of life and tree of knowledge.biblegateway+1|Gen 1: plants before sun, animals, humans; Gen 2: garden and trees appear after man in most NIV readings.biblegateway+1|Both stress God as source of all vegetation and trees.biblegateway+1|Sequence: plants precede humans (Gen 1) vs. man precedes garden/trees (plain reading of Gen 2:5–9).biblegateway+1|
|1:14–19|Day 4: Sun, moon, stars made to separate day/night, mark seasons, days, years, and give light on earth.biblegateway+1|—|In Gen 1, luminaries come after plants.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV)|Both assume functioning day/night cycles.|Gen 2 never explicitly creates sun/moon; they are presupposed.|
|1:20–23|Day 5: Sea creatures and birds created; commanded to be fruitful and multiply.biblegateway+1|2:19–20: LORD God forms “all the wild animals and all the birds” and brings them to man to name.biblegateway+1|Gen 1: sea life and birds precede land animals and humans; Gen 2: animals formed after man in many translations.biblegateway+1|Both give humans a relationship to animals (dominion/naming).biblegateway+1|Sequence and purpose differ: Gen 1—animals for filling earth; Gen 2—animals formed as potential helpers/companions.biblegateway+1|
|1:24–25|Day 6 (part 1): Land animals created—livestock, creatures that move, wild animals—“according to their kinds.”biblegateway+1|2:19–20 (same verses as above).|Gen 1: land animals precede humans; Gen 2 NIV: animals formed after man.biblegateway+1|Both divide animals into broad classes and stress divine forming.biblegateway+1|Different chronology; Gen 2 shows man naming animals, emphasizing human centrality.biblegateway+1|
|1:26–27|Day 6 (part 2): God says, “Let us make mankind in our image”; creates “male and female” together in God’s image.biblegateway+1|2:7: LORD God forms “a man” (adam) from dust, breathes life into him; 2:18–22: woman formed later from man’s rib.biblegateway+1|Gen 1: humanity (male and female) created together after all animals; Gen 2: one man first, then animals, then woman.biblegateway+1|Both affirm humans as uniquely related to God and central in creation.biblegateway+1|Different order and method: simultaneous male/female vs. sequential (man, then woman from man). Different divine name (Elohim vs. YHWH Elohim).biblegateway+2|
|1:28–30|Blessing: “Be fruitful…fill the earth and subdue it; rule…”; humans given plants for food; animals given green plants.biblegateway+1|2:15–17: Man placed in garden “to work it and take care of it”; may eat any tree except tree of knowledge.biblegateway+1|Gen 1: global mandate to fill/subdue earth; Gen 2: localized vocation of tilling/keeping Eden, with one prohibition.biblegateway+1|Both assign humans stewardship over earth’s resources and permission to eat vegetation.biblegateway+1|Gen 2 adds a specific test of obedience (forbidden tree), absent from Gen 1.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV)|
|1:31–2:3|God sees creation as “very good”; Day 6 evening/morning; Day 7: God finishes work, rests, blesses and sanctifies the seventh day.biblegateway+2|2:1–3 belong formally to Gen 1’s Priestly unit; 2:4 begins new section: “This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created…”biblegateway+1|Gen 1 climaxes in Sabbath; structured 7‑day frame.biblegateway+1|Both recognize completed heavens and earth.biblegateway+1|Only Gen 1 has Sabbath theology; Gen 2 shifts focus from cosmic rest to human story.|
|—|—|2:8–14: LORD God plants Eden in the east, places man there; describes specific trees and river with four branches (Pishon, Gihon, Tigris, Euphrates).biblegateway+1|—|—|Eden geography and sacred trees appear only in Gen 2, not Gen 1.|
|—|—|2:18–25: Not good for man to be alone; animals formed and named; woman formed from man’s rib; man recognizes her as “bone of my bones…flesh of my flesh”; marriage principle stated; both naked and unashamed.biblegateway+1|Human relational and social world (marriage, companionship) climaxes the narrative.[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV)|Both affirm goodness of human relationships and embodiment.biblegateway+1|Gen 2 uniquely explains origin of marriage and sexual union, with vivid anthropomorphic imagery of God forming, planting, building.biblegateway+1|
## Overall order of events
## Genesis 1:1–2:3 (NIV)
Simplified order:biblica+1
1. Heavens and earth created (undefined watery chaos).
2. Light; separation of day and night (Day 1).
3. Sky/firmament separating waters above/below (Day 2).
4. Dry land and seas; then vegetation (Day 3).
5. Sun, moon, stars (Day 4).
6. Sea creatures and birds (Day 5).
7. Land animals (Day 6a).
8. Humanity, male and female, in God’s image (Day 6b).
9. Universal food assignments and dominion.
10. God rests on the seventh day, blessing and sanctifying it (Day 7).
## Genesis 2:4–25 (NIV)
Simplified order in most modern translations:biblegateway+2
1. Heavens and earth already existing; no shrubs/plants yet, because no rain and no human to till.
2. Streams/mist rise to water ground.
3. LORD God forms the man from dust and breathes life into him.
4. LORD God plants a garden in Eden; makes trees grow, including tree of life and tree of knowledge.
5. Man placed in garden, charged to work and care for it; given command about forbidden tree.
6. Animals and birds formed from ground and brought to man to be named; no suitable helper found.
7. LORD God causes deep sleep; forms woman from man’s rib; brings her to man.
8. Man recognizes kinship; narrator states principle of man leaving parents to be united to wife; both are naked, without shame.
## Main similarities and differences
## Key similarities
- One creator God, who brings heavens and earth into being and is sovereign over all.mechon-mamre+3
- Creation of vegetation, animals, and humans; humans distinguished from animals and given special role.biblegateway+1
- Positive evaluation of creation (goodness, delight; though explicit “good/very good” formula appears only in Gen 1).[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV)
- Emphasis on human vocation over the earth (dominion in Gen 1; tilling/keeping in Gen 2).biblegateway+1
## Key differences
- **Style and divine name**:
- Gen 1: repetitive, liturgical structure (“And God said… And it was so… And God saw that it was good…”), using the name Elohim.mechon-mamre+1
- Gen 2: more narrative and anthropomorphic, using “the LORD God” (YHWH Elohim).mechon-mamre+1
- **Cosmic vs. local focus**:
- Gen 1: cosmic scope, seven‑day framework, climax in humanity and Sabbath.biblica+1
- Gen 2: localized garden, man’s work, companionship, and marriage; climax in formation of woman and the couple’s union.bible+1
- **Order of events** (as typically read):
- Gen 1: plants → animals → humanity (male and female together, after animals).biblica+1
- Gen 2: man → garden/trees → animals → woman.bible+1
- **Theological emphases**:
- Gen 1 underscores God’s transcendence, sovereignty, and intentional ordering; Sabbath sanctity is central.acton+2
- Gen 2 emphasizes intimacy (God forming, breathing, planting), human dependence, obedience, and relationality; it sets up the fall narrative in Gen 3.acton+1
## Source-critical notes (P vs J and “variant sources”)
- Many scholars attribute Gen 1:1–2:3 to the **Priestly (P)** source, noting its structured style, interest in order, blessing, and Sabbath, and use of “Elohim.”contradictionsinthebible+1
- Gen 2:4–3:24 is often attributed to the **Yahwist (J)** source, marked by narrative style, the divine name YHWH Elohim, and more anthropomorphic portrayal of God.catholic+2
- The juxtaposition of two distinct creation stories, with different orders and emphases, is a classic example in discussions of the Documentary Hypothesis, where an editor placed P and J side by side without harmonizing them.contradictionsinthebible+1
## Textual and lexical controversies
On the **Hebrew text** itself, Genesis 1–2 is relatively stable, but there are some notable points:wikipedia+2
- **Genesis 1:1 – “Elohim” and syntax**
- “Elohim” is morphologically plural but usually takes singular verbs here, yielding “God” in English, though debates continue about nuances of the term and the exact syntactic structure of 1:1 (independent sentence vs. temporal clause).biblehub+2
- **Genesis 1:7, 1:9 minor variants**
- Some Septuagint witnesses omit small phrases like “and it was so” in 1:7, and there are minor differences around the term rendered “place” vs. something like “gathering” or “pool” in 1:9 (Hebrew _makom_ vs. a variant _mikveh_ in one Qumran fragment).wikipedia+1
- These do not significantly affect the overall creation order.
- **Genesis 2:4 – heading and switch of divine name**
- 2:4 functions as a hinge: “This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.”mechon-mamre+1
- The shift from Elohim alone (Gen 1) to YHWH Elohim is central in source discussions and has generated debate about how early the combined name arose and how to translate it (“LORD God,” “Yahweh God,” etc.).bethmelekh+2
- **Genesis 2:7, 2:21–22 – anthropomorphic language**
- The verbs “formed” (yatsar), “breathed” (naphach), “built” (banah, for woman from rib) portray God in strongly anthropomorphic terms, which some theological traditions have wrestled with, occasionally “spiritualizing” the imagery.bethmelekh+1
- Textually, these verses are well attested; the controversy is interpretive rather than about variant wording.
- **Overall textual stability**
- Catalogues of Genesis variants (Hebrew manuscripts, Dead Sea Scrolls, Septuagint, Vulgate) show only small differences in Genesis 1–2, mostly in particles, word order, or short phrases.[wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_variants_in_the_Book_of_Genesis)
- There are no major variants that change the basic structure of either creation account (e.g., reversing the order of man, animals, woman in Gen 2, or altering the seven‑day sequence in Gen 1).
If you like, a next step would be a separate table just for the contested sequence in Gen 2 (2:5–9, 2:18–20) across different English translations and the underlying Hebrew, to show how some try to “smooth” the order.
1. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1-2&version=NIV)
2. [http://contradictionsinthebible.com/the-priestly-writers-reworking-of-the-yahwist-material-of-genesis-1-11/](http://contradictionsinthebible.com/the-priestly-writers-reworking-of-the-yahwist-material-of-genesis-1-11/)
3. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_variants_in_the_Book_of_Genesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_variants_in_the_Book_of_Genesis)
4. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV)
5. [https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0101.htm](https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0101.htm)
6. [https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0102.htm](https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0102.htm)
7. [https://www.biblica.com/bible/niv/gen./1/](https://www.biblica.com/bible/niv/gen./1/)
8. [https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.4-25.NIV](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.4-25.NIV)
9. [https://christiancourier.com/articles/critical-theory-attacks-genesis-1-and-2](https://christiancourier.com/articles/critical-theory-attacks-genesis-1-and-2)
10. [https://www.acton.org/public-policy/environmental-stewardship/theology-e/genesis-1-3-english-niv](https://www.acton.org/public-policy/environmental-stewardship/theology-e/genesis-1-3-english-niv)
11. [https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/are-there-contradictions-in-genesis-1-and-2](https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/are-there-contradictions-in-genesis-1-and-2)
12. [https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/1-1.htm](https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/1-1.htm)
13. [https://www.bethmelekh.com/genesis-148915121488151314971514/-genesis-chapter-2](https://www.bethmelekh.com/genesis-148915121488151314971514/-genesis-chapter-2)
14. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
15. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NIV)
16. [https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.1.NIV](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.1.NIV)
17. [https://bible.usccb.org/bible/genesis/1](https://bible.usccb.org/bible/genesis/1)
18. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV%3BNRSVUE](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A4-25&version=NIV%3BNRSVUE)
19. [https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8166/jewish/Chapter-2.htm](https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8166/jewish/Chapter-2.htm)
20. [https://www.esv.org/Genesis+1/](https://www.esv.org/Genesis+1/)
21. [https://biblehub.com/genesis/1-1.htm](https://biblehub.com/genesis/1-1.htm)
-----
```
Create a separate table just for the contested sequence in Gen 2 (2:5–9, 2:18–20) across different English translations and the underlying Hebrew, to show how some try to “smooth” the order.
```
Translators handle Genesis 2:5–9 and 2:18–20 differently, especially at 2:19, to either preserve a sequential reading (man → animals) or to smooth it toward Genesis 1 (animals already created). The underlying Hebrew supports a straightforward sequential narrative, which many modern translations subtly adjust with tense choices (“formed” vs “had formed”).mechon-mamre+9
## Contested sequence table (Gen 2:5–9, 18–20)
|Verse|Hebrew text / syntax (MT)|NIV (2011)|ESV (2016)|NRSVUE (2021)|NET (2nd ed.)|Smoothing strategy / notes|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|2:5|No shrub / plant yet; no rain; “and a man was not (’adam ’ein) to till the ground.”biblehub+2|“Now no shrub had yet appeared… and no plant had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain… and there was no one to work the ground.”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant… for the LORD God had not caused it to rain… and there was no man to work the ground.”[biblehub](https://biblehub.com/genesis/2-5.htm)|“In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant… and no herb… for the LORD God had not caused it to rain… and there was no one to till the ground.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not caused it to rain… and there was no man to cultivate the ground.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|All agree: at this point, no cultivated plants and no human farmer; presents pre‑human, pre‑agriculture state, setting up the need for the man.biblehub+1|
|2:6|_ve’ēd ya‘aleh_ (“but a stream/mist would go up from the earth and water the whole face of the ground”).sefaria+1|“but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“and a mist was going up from the land and was watering the whole face of the ground.”[biblehub](https://biblehub.com/genesis/2-5.htm)|“but a stream would rise from the earth, and water the whole face of the ground.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“Springs would well up from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|Minor lexical differences (“mist/stream/springs”) but same function: ground is watered prior to forming the man.chabad+2|
|2:7|Waw‑consecutive imperfect: “Then the LORD God formed (wayyitser) the man from dust…” sequential after 2:5–6.sefaria+2|“Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground…”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground…”[biblehub](https://biblehub.com/genesis/2-5.htm)|“then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground…”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“then the LORD God formed the man from the soil of the ground…”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|All keep simple past / narrative sequence: watering → man formed; no smoothing issue here.sefaria+2|
|2:8|“And the LORD God planted (wayyitta‘) a garden in Eden… and there he put the man whom he had formed.”sefaria+1|“Now the LORD God had planted a garden… and there he put the man he had formed.”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“And the LORD God planted a garden… and there he put the man whom he had formed.”|“And the LORD God planted a garden… and there he put the man whom he had formed.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“The LORD God planted an orchard… and there he placed the man he had formed.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|NIV’s “had planted” suggests the garden existed prior to v.7, subtly loosening the strict after‑man sequence; ESV/NRSV/NET retain simple past.biblegateway+2|
|2:9|“And the LORD God caused to sprout (wayyatzmach) from the ground every tree…” (sequential).mechon-mamre+2|“The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground…”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“And out of the ground the LORD God made to spring up every tree…”|“Out of the ground the LORD God made to grow every tree…”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“The LORD God made all kinds of trees grow from the soil…”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|All translate as narrative continuation: garden trees sprout after man’s formation, reinforcing the Gen 2 sequence man → trees (in Eden).mechon-mamre+2|
|2:18|LORD God says it is not good for the man to be alone; “I will make (’e‘eseh) a helper _kenegdo_.”sefaria+1|“I will make a helper suitable for him.”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“I will make him a helper fit for him.”|“I will make him a helper as his partner.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“I will make a helper _who is right for him_.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|All future; no tense smoothing here. Debate centers on _kenegdo_ (“corresponding to / equal to him”), not the sequence.margmowczko+1|
|2:19 (key contested verse)|Waw‑consecutive imperfect: “And (then) the LORD God formed (wayyitzer) from the ground every beast of the field and every bird of the sky and brought them to the man…”.biblehub+3|“**Now** the LORD God **had formed** out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky, and he brought them to the man…”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“**Now** out of the ground the LORD God **had formed** every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man…” (2011 ESV; earlier 2001 ESV: “formed”).[davidtlamb](https://davidtlamb.com/2013/10/genesis-219-in-the-esv/)|“So out of the ground the LORD God **formed** every animal of the field and every bird of the air and brought them to the man…”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“The LORD God **formed** out of the ground every wild animal and every bird of the sky, and he brought them to the man…”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|Hebrew wayyitzer normally signals “and then he formed,” i.e., animals after the decision in v.18 and, naturally, after the man in v.7.reddit+1 NIV and revised ESV insert pluperfect “had formed” to imply animals were already created earlier, aligning with Gen 1’s order and smoothing the tension with Gen 1’s animals‑before‑humans sequence.davidtlamb+2 NRSV and NET preserve the sequential sense.|
|2:20|Man names all animals and birds; “but for the man no helper _kenegdo_ was found.”sefaria+1|“So the man gave names… But for Adam no suitable helper was found.”[bible](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)|“The man gave names… But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him.”|“The man gave names… but for the man there was not found a helper as his partner.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)|“So the man named… but for Adam no companion who corresponded to him was found.”[biblegateway](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)|All keep the logic: animals are formed and named before woman; translations differ mainly in how they render _kenegdo_ (“suitable/fit/partner/corresponding”), not in sequence.margmowczko+2|
## What this shows about “smoothing” the order
- The **Hebrew narrative sequence** (waw‑consecutive verbs in 2:7–9, 2:19) naturally reads: no plants / no man → watering → man formed → garden planted and trees caused to grow → realization that man is alone → animals formed and brought to him → naming → woman formed.biblehub+3
- **NIV and (revised) ESV** use English pluperfects (“had planted,” “had formed”) and temporal adverbs (“Now”) at 2:8 and especially 2:19 so the animals can be understood as already created earlier, thereby **reducing the explicit man‑before‑animals sequence** that clashes with Genesis 1.davidtlamb+2
- **NRSVUE and NET** stay closer to the Hebrew by keeping simple past “formed,” which keeps the internal Gen 2 sequence intact and highlights the tension with Genesis 1’s order.biblegateway+2
- The **Masoretic Hebrew and Dead Sea Scroll witnesses** for Genesis 2 do not show major variants that change the order in these verses; the smoothing is almost entirely a matter of translation strategy, not alternate Hebrew source texts.dssenglishbible+3
1. [https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0102.htm](https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0102.htm)
2. [https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/2-5.htm](https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/2-5.htm)
3. [https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.2](https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.2)
4. [https://biblehub.com/genesis/2-5.htm](https://biblehub.com/genesis/2-5.htm)
5. [https://davidtlamb.com/2013/10/genesis-219-in-the-esv/](https://davidtlamb.com/2013/10/genesis-219-in-the-esv/)
6. [https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV](https://www.bible.com/bible/111/GEN.2.5-9.NIV)
7. [https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/oczugm/genesis_219_god_formed_every_beast_or_god_had/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/oczugm/genesis_219_god_formed_every_beast_or_god_had/)
8. [https://www.hebrewoldtestament.com/B01C002.htm](https://www.hebrewoldtestament.com/B01C002.htm)
9. [https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/2-18.htm](https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/2-18.htm)
10. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NRSVUE)
11. [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=CEB%3BCEV%3BNET%3BNIV)
12. [https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8166/jewish/Chapter-2.htm](https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8166/jewish/Chapter-2.htm)
13. [https://margmowczko.com/kenegdo-equal-to-him/](https://margmowczko.com/kenegdo-equal-to-him/)
14. [https://markfrancois.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/%D7%A2%D6%B5%D7%96%D6%B6%D7%A8-%D7%9B%D6%B0%D6%BC%D7%A0%D6%B6%D7%92%D6%B0%D7%93%D6%B4%D6%BC%D7%95%D6%B9-ezer-kenegdo-in-genesis-218/](https://markfrancois.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/%D7%A2%D6%B5%D7%96%D6%B6%D7%A8-%D7%9B%D6%B0%D6%BC%D7%A0%D6%B6%D7%92%D6%B0%D7%93%D6%B4%D6%BC%D7%95%D6%B9-ezer-kenegdo-in-genesis-218/)
15. [https://dssenglishbible.com/genesis%202.htm](https://dssenglishbible.com/genesis%202.htm)
16. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_variants_in_the_Book_of_Genesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_variants_in_the_Book_of_Genesis)
17. [http://www.qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/genesis/2.html](http://www.qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/genesis/2.html)
18. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBlxhhS_Tf8&t=5135s)
19. [https://www.bethmelekh.com/genesis-148915121488151314971514/-genesis-chapter-2](https://www.bethmelekh.com/genesis-148915121488151314971514/-genesis-chapter-2)
20. [http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0259-94222016000400037](http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0259-94222016000400037)
21. [https://www.facebook.com/groups/21209666692/posts/10160668544971693/](https://www.facebook.com/groups/21209666692/posts/10160668544971693/)
-----