The Bible begins with a creation myth. In fact, it begins with two creation myths. Source criticism indicates that Genesis 1 - 3 is made up of two distinct texts: Genesis 1:1-2:3 and 2:4b-3:24. Genesis 2:4a is an editorial rubric that ties the two narratives together.

Note, for example, that the creation story is told in its completeness in each text. This is a characteristic doublet. Moreover, the account of creation is different in each text, and the process of creation is told in a different order (notice when the man and the woman are created in each story), and the theme of each text is different.

In summary, scholars have recognized two distinct stories, and that the second story (Gen 2:4b-3:24) is historically earlier. This story has been attributed to the Yahwist narrative, whereas the later story (Gen 1:1-2:3) has been attributed to the Priestly writer.

Despite the differences between the Yahwist and Priestly narratives of creation, they share the common feature of being creation myths. As creation myths, they are written using the common conventions for creation myths in order to communicate what is typical of creation myths.

What are creation myths all about? To begin, it is important to note what creation myths are not about. Creation myths are not about primitive science. They are not trying to explain the origin of the world, albeit even in primitive terms. Creation myths are not giving us the first events of history. They do not make a claim of historicity. Creation myths are not really about the origin of the world as we would understand it; they are not about what happened at the absolute beginning.

Like all myths, creation myths are symbolic narratives filled with metaphors. Through these metaphors, creation myths attempt to make an analogy between the beginning (as imagined by the people who created the myths) and what the people experience in the present world. In other words, creation myths are about the present world of the people. This world is then symbolically projected back onto the beginning.

Creation myths have at their core questions and concerns about the present world. They provide answers to these types of fundamental questions:

Why is our society organized into different classes of people, and into different professions?
What is the purpose of our society, or what is our purpose in society as individuals?
What is the role of men? Of women?
Why do we hold certain values and not others?
Why do we live according to certain social customs?

Creation myths give meaning, value, and purpose to people's lives here and now. Creation myths focus on relating our present experiences - the ordinary world around us - to what is ultimate. Creation myths proclaim: "This is the way the world really is!"

The modern understanding of creation is therefore quite different from the ancient understanding of creation. In fact, what we (moderns) mean by "creation" has little to do with the content of creation myths in the Bible. To make this clear, it is helpful to distinguish between the ancient Near Eastern understanding of creation (of which the Israelites shared) and a modern understanding of creation. There are four significant differences: 

1. Process of Creation: Moderns see creation as the impersonal interaction of physical forces over eons of time, and is primarily concerned with "Nature." The ancients imagined creation as a conflict of wills in which one party was victorious, or as the process of growth either human or agricultural. They did not make the modern dichotomous distinction between nature and human beings. 

2. Product of Creation: For moderns, creation produces a physical world fixed in the solar system. Community and culture are not considered. For the ancients, what emerged from creation was human society organized in a particular place. Ancient creation myths were primarily interested in the emergence of a particular society, organized with patron gods and worship systems, a divinely appointed king or leader, and kinship systems. 

3. Description of Creation: Moderns describe creation in all its details. We form scientific hypotheses to try to account for all the data. One feature of creation is set in the context of other features. In the ancient world, attention is given only to one or a few features - those features which are important to the audience. 

4. Criterion for truth: For moderns, the hypotheses should explain all the data and be somewhat verifyable. For the ancients, the criterion for truth is dramatic; it is the plausibility of the story which is crucial: Does it fit the way we presently understand the world?