roddy: although i do like your icon, you need to read this thread in it's entirety. they contradict themselves as single accounts, and they contradict eachother as dual accounts in contrast to one another. you can throw out the entire chronology and they are still full of holes.
@cptkick
Thank you. I like it too.
I read your first post that started the discussion and so I commented on that first. I'm sure there are those that will agree with you and even chime in with you and those that won't and say why not.
What you point out is what is already known: that the editor of the first couple of chapters of Genesis put together two different points of view and decided to put them side by side instead of attempting to iron out differences to make them a single smooth transition. Perhaps this was done on purpose which I'll touch on later.
Regarding contradictions.
I don't see the contradiction you seem to want to see. A contradiction is when you have two statements that are opposite when both are said in reference to the same thing applying at the same time. And that isn't the case here.
The writer of Genesis tells of Creation in chapter one by emphasizing the sequence of events. There is an orderliness to the description that is lacking in chapter two. Now, in chapter two, the writer is not concerned to tell you about the timing of the events which he has already told you that information in chapter one. Now, he wants to focus on the next important point: the origin of man and woman. Notice how much there is about the male-female relationship in chapter two that is totally missing from chapter one.
So, they don’t contradict one another because they are treating different aspects of the entire creation from different perspectives.