Genesis 2:7 and 2:19 appear to have man formed before the animals, while Genesis 1:24-26 has the animals created before man -- two incompatible creation orders within the same book.

Engage the Hebrew directly: the verb in Gen 2:19, wayyitzer, is a wayyiqtol form, ordinarily rendered as simple sequential past ('and he formed'), but Hebrew's wayyiqtol does not exclusively mark strict chronological sequence -- it can carry a pluperfect sense ('had formed') in recapitulatory narrative contexts, a real and defensible grammatical possibility (discussed in Hebrew syntax works such as Waltke-O'Connor's Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax), which is why the NIV, the 2011 ESV revision, and the LSV render it 'had formed.' This is a genuine grammatical option, not merely a dogmatic patch. At the same time, honesty requires conceding that many, probably most, critical Hebrew scholars read Genesis 1 (structured around the seven-day sabbath week) and Genesis 2-3 (an intimate, anthropocentric garden narrative) as originally distinct creation traditions with differing chronological and theological interests, later joined by an editor. Even on that reading, Genesis 2 functions as a thematic close-up on day six's human-centered events -- explaining humanity's need for a companion via the naming of animals -- rather than a rival cosmological timeline competing with Genesis 1's sequence.

Read together, Genesis 1 supplies the cosmic, liturgical framework culminating in humanity as creation's crown, while Genesis 2 supplies an intimate focus on humanity's formation and vocation -- a recapitulation technique attested elsewhere in Scripture (e.g., the two Sinai covenant-giving accounts) and in ancient Near Eastern narrative generally, yielding a coherent theological whole whether read as a single composition or as complementary traditions united by an inspired final author/editor.