Why believe the bible?

[JairCrawford]

Again....

First account is what happens outside the garden... meaning chapter one is the order things took place outside the garden. meaning the animals were created first.

now chapter 2 states between day 3 and 4 The garden and everything in it was created meaning Adam was created then the animals. 

Note outside the garden man mentioned in chapter 1 was not Adam. again adam was created between day 3 and 4 inside the garden and given a soul. nothing like that happened for the man outside the garden.

Except that your explanation doesn't wash because the Hebrew in Genesis 1 explicitly says that God made "a-dam" in "Our image," thus ruling out the possibility that the man created in Genesis 1 was not possessed of a soul like unto the nature of God. If this is another of your "monkey man" theories, then it simply doesn't square with the text. The context as well as the Hebrew itself makes clear that both Genesis 1 and 2 are speaking of the same event. In addition, Genesis 2 states that, "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." Note that he is explicitly referring to "every" beast of the field and "every" bird of the sky (heavens), not just those in Eden. (Some bibles translate Genesis 2:19 with "had formed" instead of "formed," but this is nothing more than an illicit attempt to harmonize the two accounts, and is not supported by the Hebrew text [see Translating Genesis 2:19].)

@Drich He does make a significant point here. Please note that this does not mean that I do not believe that the scriptures are divinely inspired, as I do. But I would contend that it makes it extremely difficult, nigh impossible, to interpret it one hundred percent literally. Which is ok, because, as I use to debate with fundamental innerantists, the verse in the NT states that "All scripture is God breathed, and is useful for teaching..." It does NOT, however say, '...God breathed and literally dictated and you DARE not question lest ye burn'. In fact no such verse exists, so fundamentalists decided to try to take one of the verses in Revelation out of context and twist its meaning to this instead. But I digress.

It is an interesting theory, but the word adam is used in both.

Another interesting thing to note is that the word adam can be understood as mankind, or human. Because the word iysh is used for man/male/husband in the vast majority of the Hebrew text. So you could argue that genders were not distinguished until Hawah (Eve) was made from the rib of Adam (Human).