In a message dated 6/13/98 2:08:42 PM, email@example.com wrote, referring
to your account of the creation of Adam in your book:
<<Yes it is different from Genesis 1:26-27. But remember I believe that the
events in Genesis 1 are billions of years prior to Genesis 2. The council
was taken before the beginning of the universe. God didn't act
'opportunistically' because the Bible clearly states that Jesus was the
lamb slain from the foundation of the world. If He planned for Jesus, then
He also planned for man!>>
So we can agree that God did not act opportunistically in creating the first
human being, but deliberately with a grand plan in mind. Let me suggest this:
If you include in God's plan to create human beings the plan to resuscitate a
genetical flawed hominid, that would take it out of the realm of opportunism
and include it as part of the divine plan.
Can we also agree that the resuscitated being so created by God was not the
Adam of Gen. 2, but rather the "adam", the first hominid in the long lineage
You also wrote, "You need to know that brain size means nothing for
intelligence. As I have cited here many times but you must have forgotten,
there are numerous examples of normally intelligent people with practically no
I agree. It's not the size of the brain as much as its *organization*. I
wrote, "The ability to use language is probably dependent on the formation of
the Broca and Wernicke areas of the brain (p. 13, _AA and A_) which appeared
in the human
lineage a long way downstream from the resuscitated Adam you described on p.
185. I don't see how a such an Adam qualifies as the Adam of the Bible."
The first resuscitated hominid of your account did not have the necessary
organization of the Broca and Wernicke and associated areas of the brain to
act the way the Adam of Gen. 2 acted. This Adam named animals that God
brought to him. He took care of the Garden. These activities require a much
higher level of organization of the brain than what was available in the brain
of the resuscitated hominid. So my conclusion is that the first hominid could
not have been the Adam of Gen. 2.