2 “And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done.” Why does God need to rest after doing anything? Isn’t he all-powerful? Resting is something a mortal creature would do, not the action of something that exists beyond the grasp of reality itself.
4 “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created.” We can infer that the rest of humanity descended from this one man given this passage. But how can we prove that this happened? What accounts and evidence other than this story can substantiate this supposed origin of humanity? This is written like a fantasy story quite honesty, which isn’t a bad thing at all. I love fantasy stories. The Lord of the Rings is amazing. But to state with absolute confidence that this particular story is true is a fantastic claim.
7 “then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” What? How could we possibly know this?
9 “And out of the ground the Lord God made… the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” I don’t understand the purpose of this. Why not just give this first man all the attributes and knowledge necessary for him to prosper without risk of corruption? Why even give him the chance to encounter such trees, especially if doing so would cause him to experience things that would do him harm?
God then tells the man that if he eats from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that he’ll die. Again, why even make such a tree? I’m kind of expecting to read a few pages later, “… and that, children, is why you should listen to your parents!” This reads very much like fiction. There’s no way that someone could successfully defend the claim that this story actually happened, and if it didn’t happen, then why use it as a way to explain the origins of the universe, and subsequently mankind? To say that this story is extraordinary thus far is a profound understatement.
18 “Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.’” Instead of making another person, why not eliminate the things that could spell certain doom for both of them? Either God isn’t very smart or he’s purposefully created this man and his descendants to suffer, considering he’s all-knowing. But what’s the justification for that? If God made heaven, then why not fill it with spirits, ghosts, or other beings that would worship him in exactly the ways that pleased him and be content with that? What’s the point of making mankind, cause them to suffer on earth, and include the chance that they would also suffer for eternity in a horrible place for simply not accepting him? That’s not very reasonable or caring.
20 “The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper fit for him.” Why didn’t God already know that the helper would be a woman? This just seems like a poetic way to explain the creation of the animal kingdom. Taking one of the first man’s ribs and making a woman out of it is again, poetic, but it doesn’t make all that much sense. Not unless God is romantic.
24 “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh.” I can’t shake the feeling that this sounds like something a human would explain to add weight to a mythology.