RE: Gen 1

From: Jim Eisele (
Date: Sun May 12 2002 - 06:01:00 EDT

  • Next message: Graham Morbey: "Re: What does a liberal think?"

    Peter writes

    >Hi Jim,

    Hello. And thanks again for all of your work. And your daily
    availability. I think it is important for Christian leaders in
    this area to be accessible. And, for others like myself to come
    along and support the historical view (allowing for "poetry") of
    Gen 1. I doubt this issue can be resolved in one e-mail. So,
    I'll just take a "stab" at it.

    Gen.1:28-29 belongs to 1:26-27 which describes the creation of humans
    ['adam] generically in God's image (in "day 6", long before Adam),

    Thanks for the Hebrew. I remember Jan de Koning mentioning one
    time the value of reading the original language. For now, I'll
    just have to accumulate the Gen 1,2,5 Hebrew from this list. For
    now, I'll only say that seems like it could also mean "humans in
    Adam's line" - I don't see a lot of other history in the Bible.

    >whereas Gen.2:7 deals with the call and gifting of one of their
    >descendents, the individual Adam [ha'adam, "the Adam"] (in "day 7").

    Thanks again for the Hebrew. 'adam sounds very similar to ha'adam,

    >God's blessing the first humans (1:28), after creating in their
    >precursors the new (spiritual) dimension, parallels God's blessing the
    >aquatic and the flying animals ("living souls", 1:21-22), after creating
    >in their precursors the new (sentient / psychological) dimension. The
    >Hebrew formulations in v.22a and v.28a, regarding the blessing and the
    >invitation to multiply and fill their respective habitats, are virtually

    OK, but Adam and Eve also were blessed.

    Generally speaking, the NT clearly distinguishes between Sons of God
    (genuine Christians) and other folk. I still don't see why the OT
    wouldn't do the same. Obviously, then folks weren't Christians, but
    the Jewish people were the chosen people.

    I think in your paper you consider Gen 1-2 a continuous narrative
    (rather than "two stories"). I'm open to that idea, although skeptical
    at the moment to be perfectly honest. Gen 2 describes God differently.

    >I'm sure you don't mind if I also send this to the ASA list.

    I'm not sure that Gen 1-2 would generate much interest ;).


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 12 2002 - 14:11:29 EDT