One great architect said that “God is in the details,” and truly it is in the details that we find some telling differences in the three creation accounts. Perhaps the first most distinguishing difference in the three creation accounts of Genesis, Moses, and Abraham, is the difference in the voice. This is clearly seen in the beginnings of the three accounts:
“And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized…” (Abraham 4:1).
“in the beginning I created …” (Moses 2:1)
“IN the beginning God created…” (Genesis 1:1)
While it may be natural to dismiss these differences as “mere semantics”, the facts told are precious. The traditional Genesis account, with its singular, distant, mighty God is the account most of the world is most familiar with. Joseph Smith’s inspired translation of the verses, contained in the Moses account, makes it clear that God is not presenting these accounts as an anonymous global broadcast but is, in fact, speaking personally to Moses, even “face to face” (1:31), and is touchingly personal.
The Abraham account, also, speaks with voice that can provide valuable insight. It describes the creators as a counsel – or, more accurately, a family – of cooperating gods, led by the Father. From the voice of Genesis we can worship God, from Moses we can love Him, and from Abraham we can know of the family from whence we came and to which we desire to return.
A second most precious insight gained in the Joseph Smith translation found in Moses, neglected in both the Abraham and the Genesis accounts, is also found in the first verse of the creation account: “by mine Only Begotten I created these things…” (Moses 2:1). How many faiths of the world would better understand the Old Testament if they could clearly see that, from the first verse, it testifies of the Father’s Only Begotten, who was there from the beginning? These testimonies continue throughout the account (see Moses 2:26; 2:27, for instance), witnessing the love that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob has for His Son.
A third difference conspicuously absent from the Genesis account, yet made clear in both the Abraham and the Moses accounts (Moses 3:5; Abraham 5) is the reality of a spirit creation to precede the physical creation, disproving the idea of /ex nihilo /creation and demonstrating the premortal existence of Man and all things.
Fourth, and crucial to a proper understanding of man’s Divine Nature and the falsehood of Original Sin, is the fact that God, even in the commandment, made allowance for the partaking of the Forbidden Fruit, saying, “Nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee” (Moses 3:17). He explained the consequences, as well as His desire to see them live and not die, but gave them the choice, which they fulfilled in order to bring to pass His unqualified commandment to multiply and replenish the earth.
Although a dozen other enlightening differences could be highlighted in these revealed accounts, I will conclude with the fifth in which I see precious doctrinal importance. Throughout the book of Abraham, amidst the family-act of creation which has already been discussed, the judgment “it is good,” is always either accompanied by or replaced with a reference to the obedience of the elements. Understanding that the creation itself was an act not of compulsion but of participatory obedience, and that obedience to God is inherently the highest good, will prepare the mind for a proper understanding of the mechanics of the Gospel Law and will allow the faithful to access the power of their covenants.