in the history of interpretation. Numerous arguments can and should be raised against it, not least of which is that Paul would not have denied that Adam was also deceived (Genesis is clear enough)—he is only making a point of who was deceived first. All of us are therefore susceptible to deception—that vulnerability is not ontological to only one gender. The third option, that Paul is using Adam and Eve as illustrations for the Ephesians, suits the passage well and accomplishes Paul’s aims.
In summarizing the New Testament use of Adam and Eve, we find the humans used for a wide variety of affirmations. For now, the most important observation to make is that archetypal is among those options (both in Rom 5 and in 1 Cor 15). Consequently, we see that treating Adam and Eve as archetypal in Genesis does not run against the grain of larger canonical, theological and literary usage. Archetypal use is supported in the context of Genesis, in the cultural context of the ancient Near East and in the canonical context of Scripture. At the same time, it is not the forming accounts that are treated archetypally in the New Testament. Rather, it is the accounts of the fall. The one exception is in 1 Corinthians 15:47-48, where Paul makes the same point made in Genesis 3 and Psalm 103, that all of us are formed from dust just as Adam was formed from dust. Overall, however, it should also be noted that the New Testament gives little attention to the question of human origins one way or another. We will return to that point in chapters eighteen and nineteen.
Proposition 12
Adam Is Assigned as Priest in Sacred Space, with Eve to Help
The garden into which Adam was placed would be a familiar setting for sacred space in the ancient world. The image of fertile waters flowing from the sacred space of God’s presence is one of the most common in the iconography of the ancient Near East (more on this in the next chapter). Given this background, we can see that the Garden of Eden is not simply beautiful green space (though it is) to provide people with food (which it does). Far more than anything else, it is sacred space that reflects the fact that God is dwelling there (notice that Ezek 28:13 refers to Eden as the “garden of God”; cf. Ezek 31:8). We learned in Genesis 1 that God was coming to dwell in the cosmos, thus making it sacred space. 1 But we were not told where the center of sacred space would be. In Genesis 2, that is clarified. Since the seven days of Genesis 1 have been associated with temple inauguration, it would be logical to assume that the terrestrial location of the center of sacred space, the temple concept inherent in the garden, takes place in close time proximity to Genesis 1. Despite the continuity that this concept has with the ancient world, there are also some sharp contrasts. For example, rather than the produce of the garden providing food for the resident god, this garden was planted by God to provide food for people.
When we understand the garden as sacred space and see that the presence of God (and all that he has to offer) is the main point, we can begin to comprehend that the account in Genesis 2 is not essentially about material human origins. God reveals to Adam that he (Adam) is mortal, but then sets up sacred space (the garden) where relationship to God can bring the remedy, life. God puts Adam into this sacred space, commissioned to serve there.
I have proposed that the terms “serve” and “keep” convey priestly tasks rather than landscaping and agrarian responsibilities. 2 In Genesis 2:15, God places Adam in the garden and commissions him “to work it and take care of it.”
Important information can be derived from semantic study of these words. The verbs ʿ bd and šmr ( NIV : “work” and “take care of”) are terms most frequently encountered in discussions of human service to God rather than descriptions of agricultural tasks. The verb ʿ bd certainly can refer to farming
In summarizing the New Testament use of Adam and Eve, we find the humans used for a wide variety of affirmations. For now, the most important observation to make is that archetypal is among those options (both in Rom 5 and in 1 Cor 15). Consequently, we see that treating Adam and Eve as archetypal in Genesis does not run against the grain of larger canonical, theological and literary usage. Archetypal use is supported in the context of Genesis, in the cultural context of the ancient Near East and in the canonical context of Scripture. At the same time, it is not the forming accounts that are treated archetypally in the New Testament. Rather, it is the accounts of the fall. The one exception is in 1 Corinthians 15:47-48, where Paul makes the same point made in Genesis 3 and Psalm 103, that all of us are formed from dust just as Adam was formed from dust. Overall, however, it should also be noted that the New Testament gives little attention to the question of human origins one way or another. We will return to that point in chapters eighteen and nineteen.
Proposition 12
Adam Is Assigned as Priest in Sacred Space, with Eve to Help
The garden into which Adam was placed would be a familiar setting for sacred space in the ancient world. The image of fertile waters flowing from the sacred space of God’s presence is one of the most common in the iconography of the ancient Near East (more on this in the next chapter). Given this background, we can see that the Garden of Eden is not simply beautiful green space (though it is) to provide people with food (which it does). Far more than anything else, it is sacred space that reflects the fact that God is dwelling there (notice that Ezek 28:13 refers to Eden as the “garden of God”; cf. Ezek 31:8). We learned in Genesis 1 that God was coming to dwell in the cosmos, thus making it sacred space. 1 But we were not told where the center of sacred space would be. In Genesis 2, that is clarified. Since the seven days of Genesis 1 have been associated with temple inauguration, it would be logical to assume that the terrestrial location of the center of sacred space, the temple concept inherent in the garden, takes place in close time proximity to Genesis 1. Despite the continuity that this concept has with the ancient world, there are also some sharp contrasts. For example, rather than the produce of the garden providing food for the resident god, this garden was planted by God to provide food for people.
When we understand the garden as sacred space and see that the presence of God (and all that he has to offer) is the main point, we can begin to comprehend that the account in Genesis 2 is not essentially about material human origins. God reveals to Adam that he (Adam) is mortal, but then sets up sacred space (the garden) where relationship to God can bring the remedy, life. God puts Adam into this sacred space, commissioned to serve there.
I have proposed that the terms “serve” and “keep” convey priestly tasks rather than landscaping and agrarian responsibilities. 2 In Genesis 2:15, God places Adam in the garden and commissions him “to work it and take care of it.”
Important information can be derived from semantic study of these words. The verbs ʿ bd and šmr ( NIV : “work” and “take care of”) are terms most frequently encountered in discussions of human service to God rather than descriptions of agricultural tasks. The verb ʿ bd certainly can refer to farming
Similar Books
