Don’t you see the differences between those people in Genesis chapter 1, and chapter 2 ? If Genesis chapter 2 is supposed to be another account of Genesis chapter 1, why would there be so many things different? The reason I say “in plain English”, is because in plain English, without having to translate anything, it is easy for me to see that there was a difference.

(1) Did you notice in Gen 1:24 and 25 that the animals were CREATED before man? But, in Gen 2:19, animals were “FORMED” AFTER the man was “FORMED”.

(2) Notice in Gen 1:26 the word “`adam” and Gen 1:27, that the word `eth Ha’Adam, along with the word “them”, in both sentences, when conjugated correctly, means mankind. (meaning both male and female). Doesn’t this sound like God created them at the same time?
In Gen 2:7, just the man was “FORMED”, then later, in verse 22, He “MADE” (Hebrew “banah = a primitive root, to build”) a woman (Eve).

(3) Next, a very important difference. Notice that Gen 1:29, where the people were told they could eat of EVERY TREE.
Compare that to Gen 2:17, where Adam was told NOT to eat of the TREE of knowledge of good and evil.

(4) Then, in Gen 1:31, AFTER mankind was multiplying on the earth, and eating from every tree, notice that God saw ALL that He had made, and it was VERY GOOD. Notice that God did not curse the ground, which was something that He had made.
Compare to Gen 3:17, where God cursed the ground, after Adam and Eve sinned, even before they had any children. Would that not contradict Gen 1:31, if it is pertaining to Genesis chapters 1 and 2 giving the same account?

I do not deny that the `adam of Genesis chapter 1 was the first man. You are absolutely correct that “man = human” was created at the beginning of this flesh age, which is the 2nd earth age. I do not dispute with Jesus. The only thing you can see different here, is that I am saying that an earth age has already passed, before flesh man was created. And, of course, it would be a new beginning for flesh man, when he was first created at that time.

May I also ask you a question? Do you deny what Jesus said in John 10:34, when He was quoting Psalms 82:6? Hopefully you do not forbid to teach or believe it, or else that would be not teaching THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST. All other scriptures in the Bible HAVE TO AGREE with the doctrine of Christ. See what it says in 2John 1:9-11, for those who do not abide in the doctrine of Christ. In those scriptures alone, without all the many other places in the Bible, He lets us know that we are the `elohiym, without the article, meaning gods plural. Another no-no? If a dog has a pup, what do we call its offspring? A little dog. If a horse has a foal, what do we call its offspring? A little horse. Since God is our Father, and He is God, what would we call His children?
I could go on and on with many other places to debate, but if you wish to ignore certain scriptures in order to make them fit what you believe, that is your privilege. I have studied many years with prayer, and questioned many things, and changed my mind many times from what I was taught in my first 25 years. But, I will not ignore any part of God’s Holy Word, to make it fit what someone else tells me, or what I would like it to say.

The reason I bring up Gen 2:7 as “the specific man”, even though Gen 1:27 has it there also, is because of the conjugation of those 2 sentences, with the word them. It shows a creation of BOTH man and woman at that time. And remember, after the creation of mankind in Genesis chapter 1, God looked at every thing that He had made, and said it was very good. But in Gen 3:17-19 He did not say it was very good. He cursed the ground, and He told Adam that he would have to work to the sweat of his face for his bread. Then He let Adam know that he would return to the dust (die). Now all of this does not compare to God saying that it was very good in Gen 1:31.

Next, you say that the Hebrew word “host” in Gen 2:1 means “what goes forth”. That is not what the Hebrew word “tseba’ah” means, which was translated to “host” in Gen 2:1. Check it out in the original Hebrew. There in the original writings, it is “tsabaa’aam”. We have the main Hebrew word “tseba’ah”, and a small attached word “am”. The tiny Hebrew word “am” means; people, tribe, troops, flock, men, nation, and sometimes they. The main word, “tseba’ah”; means a mass of persons (or figuratively, things), especially organized for war (an army) by implication, a campaign, literally or figuratively (specifically, hardship, worship):
KJV -- appointed time, (+) army, (+) battle, company, host, service, soldiers, waiting upon, war (-fare).

You are right that on the 7th day God rested from ALL His work. He did not have to CREATE anything else. But, on the 8th day He FORMED “the man”, who was placed there all by himself in the garden, to dress and keep it.

In Heb 4:3, look up the meaning of the word “foundation”. It is the Greek word “katabole”, which means; a deposition, i.e. a founding; figuratively, conception. It comes from the Greek word “kataballo” meaning to throw down.
Notice the first meaning given is “deposition”. If we look up the meaning of the word “deposition”, in a Webster’s Dictionary, and read the 1st definition. It says; The removal of a person from a throne or high office. Wow, I wonder who was removed from a high office, or perhaps lost his job as the cherub that covereth? Next, we don’t have to look up the word founding, or conception. We know that they mean a starting point. So with the complete understanding of the Greek word “katabole”, we find it to mean; the fall of Lucifer (Satan, Tyrus, the devil, etc.), and a new starting point.
I could go on and on with this debate, but I feel like I would be throwing the anchor at you.
I still love you caf, because all the differences we have on this history does not change the fact that salvation is available to all true believers in Christ Jesus.

Louis