bill-i am fully aware you do not accept the bibles record of origins but bearded bruce appeared to believe the hebrew text supported aeons of time.

penny-i believe i explained-albeit briefly-why "had" was seen as a valid translation.you have done your homework and cited others who translated otherwise.i have to confess to consulting less sources but the NJB and NKJV allow your view while ESV and new bible commentary do not.it seems that the heb constuction allows either but of course the choice of translation determines whether a contradiction is percieved or not
as to the vegetation mentioned in ch 2;the context is of a garden planted and requiring tending-rather than the general creation of plant life on day 3 of ch 1.

at least you ,don firth and i are agreed on "the good samaritan"!