Paul Seely wrote:
>Gen 1:26 says, "Then God said, 'Let us make man ("adam") in our image, in
our
>likeness, and let THEM rule over the fish of the sea, etc." What THEM? The
>only antecedent is "adam"--- which can mean "humankind" as in Ex 13:13 and
15
>"first-born of adam."
Let's start with Exod 13:1-2: "And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Sanctify
unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of
Israel,
both of man and of beast: it is mine." Who is the message for, humankind or
the
children of Israel?
Also, another rule of Hebrew grammar comes in to play. When it is "man and
beast," man is always 'adam. This applies in Exod 13:15: "... firstborn of
man,
and
the firstborn of beast ..." Again, 'adam is the word for man simply
because it
is in
conjunction with beast. In this case it has no bearing on line of ancestry.
>Since 1:27 says God created not simply "adam", but "THE adam" and since an
>article is not used before a name, the meaning of "adam" in 1:27 is not the
>one man Adam, but humankind.
Or Adam's kind. I would prefer the word "Adamite," but the KJV translators
avoided it.
>Since the "them" in 1:27 are blessed in verse
>28 and told to rule over the fish, etc, the same task given to the "them" in
>1:26, the "them" in both verses refers to the same entity, namely
>humankind-both female and male. As it says in Gen 5:2 "male and female
>created he_them_, and blessed _them_, and called THEIR name "Adam"…"
I agree. All of Adam's kind bear his name. They are in the line of Adam.
You
can see this in Ezekiel where he is called "bene 'adam" repeatedly although
the
translators copped out and called him "son of man."
>Similarly, Gen 9:6 says not simply that "adam" was made in the image of God,
>but "for in the image of God he made "THE man" that is, humankind.
This is Gen 9:6: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed:
for in the image of God made he man." I see it this way: "You are a chosen
race,
you are in the line of Adam and were intended to represent me. If you slay
another
of your own kind, you will be slain in return."
If you substitute "humankind" in this verse then what was Joshua doing
knuckling
the heads of his neighbors at God's urging?
>In addition, the covenant that God made after the flood (Gen 9;12-17) was
not
>made simply with "God's chosen" as you said, but with "all living creatures
>of every kind." That is, as 9:15 says, "with all life on earth." That
would
>certainly include all human beings.
Here is Gen. 9:12: "And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I
make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for
perpetual
generations ..." The covenant was for the animals and the offspring of those
animals that had to suffer seasickness for a year riding with Noah. That
would
include no human beings other than Noah, his wife, his sons and their wives,
and
their future generations.
Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 06 2000 - 23:45:56 EST