I had a small debate with a guy and he argued that the Genesis account contradicted itself :smilewinkgrin: on numerous areas (I felt that only 1 of them was worth mention). I was not familiar with the argument nor did I have a fresh reading of the particular text he used so I didnt say much. I have been looking at it today and it seems as if his issue can be resolved rather easy, but I would like some more experienced imput from y'all to add. As you know the creation account has birds and sea creatures on day 5 and then on day six land animals are created before man is created. In Genesis chapter 2 it goes back to when God created everything and especially zooms in on day 6 when God created man. now here is what he argues 2:18 "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." 2:19 "Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name." He says that 2:19 shows that man was created before the animals where in chapter 1 man was created after. He says that in verse 19 that it is showing that God is creating the animals and bringing them to man. My simple argument was that verse 19 does not imply that land animals and birds were created at that moment, but that at this point Moses is only saying that these animals that were brought to man were created from the ground just like Adam. We know that birds were created on day 5 and land animals on day 6 then man shortly after the land animals. It is kind of obvious and silly to think that the very next chapter that describes the detail on day 6 would state that man was created first. How would you approach this discussion, namely the selected texts? AND how do you feel about this text? The guy claims to be a believer by the way, although I don't know him very well. He argues that the bible is still trustworthy even with his noted contradictions that I refuted. I am going to be talking to him again soon, so all the imput is helpful. I really want to try to stay on topic with his issues in Scripture more than anything rather than just give my theological argument on infallibility, inherency, and so forth.