RE: The puzzle of Adam

George wrote in replies to Peter Ruest: (My comments below)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>Peter:
In contrast, the text of Gen.2:5-25 never uses "bara'" and is clearly
restricted to a region and time which do not fit with what we know about
the origin of the first humans. The "puzzle of Adam", therefore, cannot
be solved while believing Gen.2 to be a creation story.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>George:
    {Gen.2:4a-25 is not a "bara story" or a story of cosmic origins. But
this does not mean that it is not a "creation story" in the sense of an
account of the origins of humanity and elements of the world important to
humanity. Plenty of accounts that we call "creation stories" in other
cultures are limited in this way. It is quite natural for people to seek
first some understanding of themselves and only gradually expand their view
to questions about the larger cosmic order.

    Gen.2:4a-25 is a story of the origin of the first human beings and of
other animals. There is simply no suggestion that there are any other
humans or humans /in posse/ outside the boundaries of Eden when the events
described here takes place. Furthermore, the fact that the origins of both
Adam and Eve are described in ways very different from the normal way in
which human beings come into the world argues against the idea that at the
same time there are already other creatures who are the same biologically as
this man & woman and are reproducing in the ordinary manner.

    It seems to me that the "severe conflict" that you are trying to avoid
by your argument is a result of your thinking that the historical &
geographical details in early Genesis require those texts to be "historical
accounts" in some approximation to the modern sense of the term. As I said
above, this is just not necessary.

    & lest there be confusion, I should add that by speaking of these texts
as "stories" and referring to their cultural conditioning &c, I am
definitely not denying that they are authoritative theological texts.}

DON P:
Perhaps a quote will help - Genesis 2 KJV

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it
he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were
created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb
of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon
the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

If as you say, Genesis 2 is about the creation of MAN (adam) and the
animals, then lets take a closer look and feel free to explain your view.

Genesis 2:1 says the heavens and earth finished already. But doesn't say
anything about humans. OK no conflict with George's statements.

Genesis 2:2 now mentions day 7 after ALL creation including that which was
done on day 6 has "ended". Let's see wasn't man created on day 6? Looks
like a conflict of George's statement.

Genesis 2:3-5 Again we have mention of day 7. Conflicting? Part may appear
to side with George's view of a creation story, but let's examine another
more "literal" view.
Genesis 2:3 refers to God's blessing of the seventh day. Most literalist
take this as being the seventh day of an actual week. While others are
undecided. I have and will continue to have the view that this refers not
to a specific day but rather an age, the one in which we live now. Day
seven began when creation was completed and will end only when the "end
times" come, and then we'll start day eight.
Genesis 2:4 refers to this specfically. When it says these (this) are the
generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created (past
perfect), in the day that the LORD God made (past perfect) the earth and the
heavens. Thus we have an opening to our Genesis 2 story. That which came
after ALL creation was done. What generations existed prior to the
creation, to include man? None. Yet something is missing. What is it?
Genesis 2:5 Now we see what was missing. No mention of plants in general or
herbs in general or even of man in general, but of plants and herbs of the
field and a MAN to till the ground of the fields. What does this mean?
This is the beginning of the AGE of agriculture.

All after this begins to give details of events relating to this "first man"
of the fields and of the new era. This of course implies that Adam may have
been the first to have a structured language and therefore God brought forth
animals he had created (and would continue to create) so that they could be
given names. It may also imply that there was no agriculture prior to this.
As for Eden, or the garden, imagine a man who has been given a new special
ability and a covenant with a God about whom others were not fully aware.
God wants to keep his newly created (re-created) man separate from all
others. He does this by placing him in a special place were adam (man)
would be able to flourish. He of course needs a mate as do we all. But no
suitable woman was found. Genesis 2 does not state there were NO women,
just none that could help him. Perhaps due to lack of intelligence, or
maybe God wanted Adam to be with a woman that would have the same special
bond/covenant as Adam. He therefore takes a rib (dna, sperm, or whatever
this metaphor implies) and creates a woman specially for Adam.

Conclusion: Genesis 2 in no way implies any unique creative act (bara), but
is rather a detailing of the creation of a specific man at a time when man
had already migrated out of Africa and into the middle east and (perhaps due
to the terrain) was given unique abilities to survive and begin an era were
man would be connected with God
Received on Sat Nov 27 02:24:29 2004