Thank you for the exchange.
Hope things are well ...
It is very common for people to suggest a wide variety of inferences from the Eden narrative are readily available. Often times, as we exercise our imaginations concerning these texts, as is so frequently the case, the intentions are harmless, and at others, the outcome is as well. However, as long as these texts have been circulating, it seems as though they are not often understood within the context that they were written or, perhaps, intended.
Honestly, even translators themselves have historically taken to unsound liberties in translating the ancient Hebrew writings due to the great chasm between Old Hebrew and English. There is modern inductive linguistics research suggesting that the term 'Adam' refers to humanity in general, and so, this interpretation is diametrically opposed to the traditional accepted meaning of the term referencing a specific male individual at a specific place in time.
At this point, it should come as little surprise that a good portion of forum members here at EvC agree, while some obviously do not, that the Eden text is often blatantly misinterpreted in order to allow for the seemingly endless inferences that tend to be applied through the variety of doctrines and dogmas which are associated with the multitude of traditions attempting to take root in the Garden. Some fertile soil for story telling perhaps ...
On a basic level, one may note that the story was first delivered to an original audience and spoke to their culture and surroundings. Within
Message 161 of the thread entitled '
If the Bible is metaphorical then perhaps so is the God of the Bible', purpledawn shares that 'The plain text provides a simple story. Man obtains the knowledge of good and bad, which would have been consistent with the knowledge of the culture of the audience.'
Along those lines, later in that thread, it was stated that the authors of the narrative were describing, in poetic, proverbial, and metaphorical form, the creation of the human species that is fully endowed with the mental faculty of reason (the knowledge of good and bad), as well as the mental faculty of creative intellect (the imagination). These two mental faculties enable humans to manipulate their God-given natural environment.
Now, in doing so, human society becomes agrarian and urbanized - humans till the ground from which they were taken (Gen. 3:23), and the first 'tent-village' becomes the mother of all inhabitants (Gen. 3:20). These advancements in the civilization of mankind, however, come with a price. First, humans begin judging their Creator and the creations, thus causing them to believe they are separate from Him. Eventually they begin judging one another.
As a consequence of implementing the 'Knowledge of Good and Evil', the human species must begin exploring outside the Garden In Eden, at the risk of leaving behind almost all hope of reaching the 'Tree of the Life'; which the species has been told 'guards' the way back to it's Father's garden. Thus, mortal human existence begins spreading across the earth and eventually subdues it. A hint may begin to describe the way back to the Garden.
The 'cherubim' and the 'flame of the sword', which turns every way, both 'keep' as well as 'preserve' the way to the 'Tree of the Life'.
Of course, this is only one basic interpretation, but it may begin to suggest what types of information may, perhaps, be safely gathered from the Eden texts without over indulging ourselves. Yet, even this simple interpretation will be dissuaded by various orthodox traditionalists, as well as others, for employing a modern approach provided for by recent determinations in linguistics which identify 'Adam' as 'mankind' and 'Eve' as the first 'tent village.'
That said, perhaps we can explore some questions ...
1) Did Adam and Eve evolve or were they created?
Within ToRaH, the Hebrew word
bara' is translated as 'create' and, of course, it's most prolific use is first identified in Gen 1:1. In a theological sense, this verb is often taught to mean 'something brought out of nothing' or 'something brought into existence', which, assumedly, was not in existence previously. Now, you see, the thing is, this interpretation is based upon our familiar friend who, although not completely reliable, we have all come to know and love:
Stoneage human intellect.
Yet, quite frankly, the inference does not hold in all technicality, unless, that is, we suppose that all things did not spring forth from the Word of God which IS God. The idea that something or anything came from nothing may contradict the nature of the Father and most, if not all, laws of science (not theories). As such, the science o' religion has, for centuries, been faced with two bottom lines. Either something came from nothing, or something always was.
I go for the latter, however, for all intents and purposes, the scriptures are written to mankind and for mankind, and so, from the very first verse the Father called the heaven and earth, along with the materials for all things visible and invisible, into existence in the beginning. Another literal meaning of the word
bara' is to 'open up' or to 'bring into tangible existence' and, from our point of view, it seems the heavens and the earth had a beginning.
So, while this may seem to indicate that, a time once was, when there
were no Lovebirds to disrupt the Garden In Eden, does it necessarily mean that they were brought forth from nothing? Again, perhaps, from our point of view one may say yes. Yet, what were they before they were 'opened up'? Perhaps no one knows, but the creation came from One who always was. This isn't to imply that all things had spiritual existence before they had physical existence ...
More simply, I'm suggesting all things come from the Word of the Father which has always been.
lol - hope that helps!
One Love
™ Version 4.2